Confusing Directorial Choices...

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by Decado

The dude who directed 47 Ronin (and has subsequently been sacked).

Noam Murro directing the sequel to a film that grossed $450m world wide (300: Rise of an Empire). His credits? A crappy comedy from 2008. Seriously WB? Are you that keen on ****ing up this film franchise, too? The should have let Zack do it and pawn Superman off to some talentless hack (wouldn't make a difference for that dull franchise).

Studios do this, I suspect, so they have complete control. Of course it makes for shitty films, but they don't care as long as they make money. Short-sighted bastards.

That seems to be why they do it - as another member posted on this thread, film studios tend to hire no name directors for sequels/prequels or even reboots so they can pay them minimum wage and have complete control over the project. Directors have to do a certain amount on set, according to rules governed by the Directors' Guild, but directors with smaller projects under their belts obviously can't influence as much as big name ones.

For my money, 300: Rise of an Empire will be terrible anyway - does 300 even need a prequel? I've never watched it and thought "boy, this could really do with a film explaining what happened before this to make sense!"