Bryan Singer would love to return to X-Men, interested in Magneto prequel...

[GreenScar]

DIRECTOR Bryan Singer has said he would love to return to the X-Men franchise.

In a new interview, Singer admits wishing he'd stayed on to direct the the third X-Men movie.

He had left the franchise to make Superman Returns, and Brett Ratner stepped in to finish the X-Men trilogy with 2006's X-Men: The Last Stand, which had a mixed response from fans and critics.

Singer adds that he might well be interested in the proposed X-Men Origins: Magneto prequel. And he'd get a warm welcome - X-Men producer Lauren Shuler Donner has said she would love to see Singer back in the mutant movie franchise.

David Goyer had been attached to helm the Magneto film, and I reported just recently that James McTeigue was reportedly in talks, but there's been no official movement on this project at the moment.

Speaking to Total Film, Singer said: "I'm eternally intertwined with X-Men now. What takes an audience four hours to watch - the first two movies - took six years of my life. So, to not be part of it....It's a shame.

Asked whether he wished he had directed X-Men: The Last Stand, he admitted he had that feeling "before I was watching it, during watching it, after watching it."

Singer added:"It's weird for me to watch it, because I'm so close to the universe. And also Brett is a good friend of mine. But, of course, I would love to return to that universe."

And on the question of whether he might be interested in X-Men Origins: Magneto, he said: "Possibly. The only thing that concerns me about Magneto is that if the prequel were to follow the track I used in X-Men, which is Magneto's history in the concentration camp, then I've lived in that world.

"Apt Pupil, X-Men and now Valkyrie...I've lived in that Nazi universe for quite a while. I just might need to take a little break before I do something like that."

On any possible follow-up to Superman Returns, the responses were more vague and hesitant. After the mixed response and financial underperformance of Superman Returns, it's widely believed he is unlikely to direct any further Superman movies.

He said: "I don't know, I don't know. There are still issues...I just...I just don't know. I don't necessarily...I don't know. It's one of those things where...It's so weird talking about stuff unless I'm about to ramp up and shoot it."

[jadedeath]

Translation:

Interviewer: Mr. Singer, would you be interested in returning to the X-men franchise?

Singer: After the big steaming pile of crap that Superman Returns was I have to make amends to my fans somehow, and since committing sebuku isn't entirely an option I think I want to come back to X-men.

Logan

[Drewza89]

I would love to see him direct X-Men: First Class, Deadpool, or Gambit. Not really interested in a Magneto film.

I didn't think Superman Returns was a bad movie at all. It just needed a little more action. Bryan is one of the most talented directors currently working. I look forward to all of his projects. Valkyrie was phenomenal.

[STARSCREAM]

[Darkhawk9587]

Originally Posted by DVDave

I will never forgive him for leaving us with Ratner's travesty that was X3 and bequeathing Superman Returns.

Agreed. He never should have left. And if he didn't, then Ratner would never have totally screwed up the trilogy IMO.

Originally Posted by Drewza89

I would love to see him direct X-Men: First Class, Deadpool, or Gambit. Not really interested in a Magneto film.

Also agreed. I think of the three, he should work on First Class.

[connect42]

"financial under performance of Superman Returns"

Really? $391,081,192 is nowhere near an under performance.

[Drewza89]

Originally Posted by connect42

"financial under performance of Superman Returns"

Really? $391,081,192 is nowhere near an under performance.

It is when they had over 200 million tied up in it.

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by connect42

"financial under performance of Superman Returns"

Really? $391,081,192 is nowhere near an under performance.

Actually it is.

$270,000,000 budget and only pulling in $391,081,192 .

Generally a movie needs about 2.4x the budget in order to even break even. That means that they'd need about 6.48 million in order to break even.

Superman Returns was a financial failure.

Logan

[connect42]

Originally Posted by Drewza89

It is when they had over 200 million tied up in it.

The dealings of Warner Brothers doesn't reflect on the final product at all. WB had millions of dollars spent on failed deals, paid directors, paid actors, paid writers, etc. before Singer and company had anything to do with the film. Even starting out behind the eight ball like that the film still over $120 million, and that doesn't even count DVD and Blu-ray sales.
Good film or not - that is debatable. It is not debatable that the film was a success.

[bluskiff]

loved superman returns I would buy superman returns on blu over xmen. Wait a minute I did.

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by connect42

It is not debatable that the film was a success.

It's not debatable because it was a failure.

Logan

[connect42]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

It's not debatable because it was a failure.

Logan

Ok, because you said so you must be right.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

Actually it is.

$270,000,000 budget and only pulling in $391,081,192 .

Generally a movie needs about 2.4x the budget in order to even break even. That means that they'd need about 6.48 million in order to break even.

Superman Returns was a financial failure.

Logan

Yes but over $100 million of that was from prior films for supermans bieng developed but never making it to the silverscreen or even filmed. The actual budget for Superman Returns (not includiong the sunk costs of all the other times they tried to get it made), is actually closser to $170-$180 million. (Remember finance 101, sunk costs should be ignored for investement decisions).

Singer has said numerous times that he and the studio where more then happy with the films performance.

Though I am happy if he returns to Magneto, and if he does I may see it on the Silverscreen, if he doesn't I wont.

[CYMBOL]

X-Men 3 ruined the entire franchise for me. Let's just have Singer go ahead and direct "his" Phoenix Saga and we'll all just forget the Last Stand was ever made.

[GreenScar]

Look all the costs put into the movie before Singer signed on are still costs incurred by the mishandling of the franchise by WB. The 2.4X plus multiple still applies regardless of where the money was spent. If WB was happy with the movies success we would have gotten a direct sequel already (or it would be coming out very soon). Period.

[koontz1973]

Whatever the performance of Superman Returns, we will get a sequel or reboot as Supes is to big a character, not to have on the big screen for long. Look at the cost of the first Star Trek movie compared to takings. Now we have 11.

As for Singer returning to do a X-men film, whichever one it is, the good for him and the fans as X1 and 2 seem to be the ones everyone likes.

[Offender_Mullet]

Singer should stay faaaaar away from anymore comic book adaptations & should concentrate on topping his best non-comic film that was made.....over 14 years ago.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

Look all the costs put into the movie before Singer signed on are still costs incurred by the mishandling of the franchise by WB. The 2.4X plus multiple still applies regardless of where the money was spent. If WB was happy with the movies success we would have gotten a direct sequel already (or it would be coming out very soon). Period.

Not necessarilly, I think its more or less Warner Brothers don't know what to do with the franchise, and Singer has been busy with other projects. Also the mishandeling costs of trying to develop other films (albiet for the same character) should not be looked at when considering whether the film was a sucess (unless its assumed that those costs will be incurred again if a sequal is to be made). As for the 2.4x multiple, its a gross oversiplification that I wouldn't put much faith in, however your more then free to (its success is in all honesty a bit less then X-men 3 considring there budgets and box office takes).

Note: i'm not a fanboy of the Superman films (in fact they easily have two of the worst films made in them), and Superman Returns was average at best. I also wasn't a huge fan of the first two films either.

[mjbethancourt]

Superman is a money-pit, and a smart director should steer clear of it. Just look how much crap Singer got over the last one; it was a no-win situation, with too much baggage and too many interests to serve, and next time it will only be worse. Superman is more trouble than it's worth. I think Singer is very talented, but he would do better service to himself if he kept out of comic-book movies for a while... they haven't been his best work, so far.

[doctorD]

Originally Posted by DVDave

I will never forgive him for leaving us with Ratner's travesty that was X3 and bequeathing Superman Returns.

Actually, Matthew Vaughn was supposed to direct but left and Ratner took it over.

I think the real culprit is the writers, since they are the ones who present the script. I don't think Ratner's name is on that script. I'm not sure if there was any rewrite in the script when he was on board but if there was then maybe he was involved in that.

Anyways, I think Ratner is getting a bad rap for something he may not have been involved in. And yes, I don't think X3 is as bad as some may think it is...IMO.