Why Christopher Nolan & Superman Are Not A Marriage Made In Heaven

One of the biggest bits of news doing the rounds this week is Deadline Hollywood's report that Warner Bros have asked Christopher Nolan to perform a mentoring role on the new Superman reboot, apparently titled The Man Of Steel. Rather than rejoicing in the streets at the inclusion of the uber-talented director who rescued the Batman franchise shouldn't we be asking; is he really needed?

But first, a little history. If anyone was in any doubt about Batman Begins being a bona-fide game changer when it came out back in 2005 then shame on you; five years later the influence of Nolan's first caped-crusader starring epic is clear and the watchword for his revolution has been 'dark'. Both Begins and its successor, the all-conquering The Dark Knight, took the Batman source material much closer to Frank Miller's noir-like incarnation of the superhero, something which the original Batman had only hinted at and Joel Schumacher's efforts could only dream of.

The influence of that decision can be seen everywhere from the willingness of the same studio to stick to Watchmen's similarly dark roots to, again, Warner's brave decisions on the tone and style of the later Harry Potter's. It was clear: after Begins, 'dark' was in fashion.

But, recently, things have started to move from dark to, well... drab. Miller's own The Spirit was a critical and box office disaster, British production Dorian Gray a similarly afflicted tale of a superhuman protagonist with a dark secret. Granted sure, both examples came from already 'dark' stock but both also failed to display the lightness of touch or, to be frank, quality and skill, of Nolan's efforts.

As we move into a new decade the current watchword, and one that Nolan again finds himself at the forefront of is 'reboot'. Recently we've watched Star Trek make a successful comeback in a new guise, seen Spiderman announced for similar treatment, and now await the caped crusader's own, and second, reboot.

It's no secret that certain people weren't happy with Bryan Singer's Superman Returns when it emerged in 2006 but really, was it that bad that it needs a second re-imagining already? At the time, the UK's top film magazine Empire gave the film the coveted five-star treatment calling it, 'the finest popular entertainment since the Rings trilogy closed'. At the box office too it didn't exactly tank, taking $391 million and making a reported $100 plus million profit.

Don't get me wrong I'm not against Nolan's involvement, I just don't want to sit down to watch Batman Begins Mark 2: The Boy In Red And Blue. If studios keep forcing franchises into 'reboots' then we're never going to get into the meaty developments later source material allows, at least not without allowing a first hour origin story or first half-hour orientation course to get us used to the new actors, now apparently acceptable in their familiar costumes.

The decision too wades into the originality debate; is Hollywood that bereft of talent that it has to go back to a successful genre director to ensure the next megabucks film works? Jesus, if we're using that argument now then cast Bale as Clark and Holmes as Lois, only... just make sure to have her change half-way through in an metamorphosis-like plot development that sees her re-incarnated as Maggie Gyllenhaal.

The difference between Superman and Batman to me has always been that one is America's Hero and the other is The Dark Knight; one is meant to feature in big, uplifting, epics that hint at Hollywood's golden age and leave you wanting more sugar-coated popcorn, the other is meant to pull himself up from the gutter, taking you along for the ride. If Hollywood has what I can only describe as some 'real balls' then it wouldn't need to go back to Nolan because at the point he and his vision were signed on for Begins he was a risk and the positive results and implications of that decision haven't quite stopped appearing.