Gavin Hood Talks Wolverine and Wolverine 2

Director of X-Men Origins: Wolverine gives further insight about the film, the sequel, and his feelings about District 9 director Neill Blomkamp.

Follow Whispers68:
By Whispers68 - 10/15/2009
Thanks to Rottentomatoes.com, an interview with Gavin Hood was conducted where he discussed "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" and his thoughts of Neill Blomkamp.

On whether he will be directing the sequel to "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," it appears Hood isn't too sure on the matter.

"I have no idea. All that's happened at the moment is that the studio has just commissioned the script for Wolverine 2 to be written. Whether that film will ever get made will depend on so many factors -- whether the studio likes the script, whether they find a director who responds to the script. Might that be me? Sure, I'd be extremely interested and thrilled if they were to send it to me," he said.

One of the biggest complaints of the film dealt with Hood linking Sabretooth and Wolverine as half brothers and he mentioned recently it made sense to in order to create a stronger emotional attachment. It seems in this interview, the half brothers position didn't exist from the beginning of the script.

"In the original script they were not half brothers. There was some resistance to that, because in the world of the comics there's only a small suggestion in one particular comic that Victor Creed and Wolverine may well be half brothers. I just gravitated to that. Just having one good guy versus bad guy, with no emotional connection just felt like "Whoa -- you'll have nothing but punching and kicking". That was a way to build up the emotional power of the film. I thought Liev Schreiber did a phenomenal job. I'm very pleased that on the Blu-ray disc there's a particular scene that I was attached to that didn't make it into the movie. I say that without saying "It should have!" I think it probably should have been in the movie, but I understood the argument against it, and at the time there was much to-ing and fro-ing about it. It's a great thing to be able to put that sort of scene on the Blu-ray and let people think of other themes and idea that were in my mind when we made that scene," he explained.

When asked about Neill Blomkamp, he seemed to possess a level of pride for the fellow director who is also from South Africa.

"We have spoken because I had to tell him what a phenomenal job he did. I sat there in the cinema -- and probably it was a great deal of patriotic pride -- but I thought, here was something so fresh and so out there, yet so emotionally powerful. It was just so fantastic to see the originality of the piece," said Hood.

On whether he felt "District 9" represented South Africa accurately.

"Yeah. Scarily so. I know those characters. Those [adopts a funny Afrikaans accent] very well meaning policemen, who think they are being very nice to you who, but are completely on the side of authority and they're patronizing you to death. Yeah. We grew up around those guys. Scary!"

DISCLAIMER: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and "safe harbor" provisions. CBM will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please contact us for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. You may also learn more about our copyright and trademark policies HERE.
2
LIKE!
50 Comments
1 2
LEEE777 - 10/15/2009, 6:34 AM
POWER SH!T Lmao @ GRIF!! ; D
BmanHall - 10/15/2009, 6:54 AM
Great... a sequel... lucky us...

WeaponX - 10/15/2009, 7:09 AM
I don't necessarily think that Hood is a bad director, I just think, as he has shown many times in interviews, that the character of Wolverine and the comic genre is just too [frick]ing beyond his comprehension. That ultimately it was just another shit choice made on that film. I really don't want this git near Wolverine 2 because if there is just the tiniest glimmer of improving on the film it'd be snuffed out by a guy who can't concede to his shortcomings and down right [frick]-ups. If he sits there pointing fingers and making excuses to justify the further bastardization of the character, he needs to [frick]in' pack it up. Dude really needs to start manning up and admitting he was out of his depth with it.

This movie has such massive potential to be something of a Batman Begins type of deal but turned into a Transformers (the first one) deal - an entertaining action film but for a film about the title character, pure donkey balls.


Wadey09 - 10/15/2009, 7:39 AM
i think hugh jackman should be like mel gbison and direct the sequel.
hugh has read every part of wolverine's early comic history and he seems downright giddy to do the japan story.
over the past ten years he has grown into the biggest wolverine fan and who can blame him? this is a gut who has been taking a larger part in his character development because he didn't want anyone else screwing it up.
i dont blame him for the mistakes of origins: wolverine and believe he has the potential to become a very passionate director.
Whispers68 - 10/15/2009, 7:57 AM
@weapon X

The effects and entertainment value wasn't nearly enough to save the overall faults of the film. At least the entertainment found in both Transformers left me feeling satisfied. I. Will not be purchasing the Blu-ray for Wolverine and no it wont affect sales but comic book or not, I won't support something for my Sony PS3 and surround sound at home, when it couldn't keep me motivated in a theater.

You definitely have a valid point as everyone else. Directors continue making excuses about remaining true to a character in order to make them more emotionally connected, so they complete this connection by their own warped perception, which creates a character we are not familiar with. Why not just make your own superhero and you can perceive all you want? You can make his powers come from his dad as opposed to a medical facility. You could say he had siblings instead of none. Get creative all you please. But the issue is, this isn't your character. It has existed for many years, why call it your own?
supermarioworldE - 10/15/2009, 8:53 AM
Because it made him comfortable with using the character in the first place. It was a stupid move. Wolverine isn't even rental worthy. I don't think i'll be watching any x-men films for a while. What's the point, to see Hugh take on a role that becomes duller, and duller through each passing film. To see directors mess up wolverine and destroy the story lines of every character around him. No thanks. Like @Whispers68 said: "At least the entertainment found in both Transformers left me feeling satisfied"
soforizo - 10/15/2009, 9:00 AM
I'm certainly glad i never get religious about my comics; you live long enough and they keep changing the characters or inventing new universes.

It could've been better, but I for one enjoyed the movie.
Whispers68 - 10/15/2009, 9:10 AM
@supermarioworld

I know we will receive a lot of flack stating Transformers was more entertaining, but it had to be said really. With the faults of Transformers, the lack of associating with characters; both human and robot, too much sidetracking with the humping dog or mother...or anything else others considered to be dreadfil, I left feeling my IMAX ticket price was well worth the entertainment. Not that best action film, but it wasn't the worst.

I hope wolverine 2 finds a middle ground where it adheres to comic book fans and non comic book fans
peterparker420 - 10/15/2009, 9:14 AM
EPIC FAIL!
dellamorte1872 - 10/15/2009, 9:15 AM
i think HOOD [frick]ed the whole thing up! with all his bull-shit ideas. get a new DIRECTOR please?
supermarioworldE - 10/15/2009, 9:22 AM
@Whispers68, Exactly dude, Transformers was fun, if anything. I went with my friends and we had a good time. Action was sufficient, and so was the comedy ( Although, I'll admit, it was a bit low brow). It had it's share of problems (Devastator being taken down by the army, and arcee getting killed), but was ultimately a fun movie, and a fair sequel. If anybody liked the first, i would think they would like the second.

But back on topic, Wolverine was a disappointment, and I don't intend on seeing a sequel. They already messed up gambit, and deadpool. Who's next, Bishop and Cable?
no thank you. The sequel will probably be called "X-Men Origins: Wolverine 2: The Search For More Money"
BmanHall - 10/15/2009, 9:33 AM
@ supermarioworldE: I know what you mean, dude. Deadpool and Gambit were the reasons I didn't like the movie. Especially the fight between Gambit and Wolverine. Just... ugh...
supermarioworldE - 10/15/2009, 9:38 AM
As my friends put it, "He was simply there to c*ckblock wolverine". btw, thanks for the heads up on star trek.
tocap - 10/15/2009, 10:32 AM
stop already with the "source materials" crap. A movie is an interpretation of the character and his story. i like it when directors have the balls to do something different and take guess. sometimes those liberties don't really work well but at least they tried something. Watchemen was so closed to the source materials it almost reflected panels after panels of the graphic novel. it left the audience that read it with absolutely no surprises. anyway that's my opinion.
LEEE777 - 10/15/2009, 10:44 AM
TOCAP @ Theres changing minor stuff and theres totally A$$-BENDING an ramming it up the backside HOLLYWOOD Style crap!! ; D

And WATCHMEN was a Masterpiece!!! And a one off!

Anyways they dont have to do complete SOURCE but the BASICS that made it to a great and big enough to make it to a MOVIE in the first place would be nice!!
BrotherStarkofMABMindz - 10/15/2009, 10:48 AM
Well we need someone to direct Wolverine 2 just not Singer, Hood or Ratner and a good writer GOOD now im not saying the X-Men movies sucked they just were not as good as I thought they'd be
TheGambitFreakIsBatmanOfCBM - 10/15/2009, 11:14 AM
this is when i kinda stopped reading comics some fag came out with a comic,or a novel about wolverine's origin, i was pissed cause that's wolverine's thing your not supposed to know bout his past. But i knew the movie was gonna suck cause it was made by FOX!!! Go DISNEY!!!!! just kidding it should be Go MARVEL STUDIO'S!!!! assfaces!
BmanHall - 10/15/2009, 11:45 AM
@ tocap: Dude, you say you want the "source material" crap to stop, yet you say the movie is an interpretation of the character and his story. Question, if the movie doesn't follow the source material, how does it use the character's story? The story IS the source material. Try not to contradict yourself. It makes you look stupid.
Whispers68 - 10/15/2009, 12:12 PM
@bmanhall

I was going to address the same thing. If as "tocap" mentioned, where one should forget the source material, why not remake Titanic where the ship didn't crash but made its way towards the announced destination. We all know the origin story of Titanic from historical documents. Since we are on the path of forgetting the origin of something, Hitler was responsible for the genocide of Jews historically, well, Spielberg is doing a movie but instead, he wants his vision of Adolf to be a pawn in a conspiracy because he not only saved jews, gypsies, etc, he was a hero in the eyes of the Jewish population. There's a film about Mike Tyson coming soon to a theater near you, where Jamie Foxx will portray "Iron Mike," in this version they decide to make Mike a rising MMA fighter as opposed to a boxer...simply because MMA has been the rave for several years now and the director just feels it's more suited for the time.

If comic book comes to mind, captain america in the new film has been altered for the present time to uplift the woman's movement, so Jessica Alba is now Captain America. Why stop there? Let's make give Justin Timberlake the lead for "Thor" and emphasize a british accent, just because I as a director love how words are pronounced with a British tone.
JoshWilding - 10/15/2009, 12:23 PM
Well, the brothers thing was a huge mistake and going by what he's saying up there he obviously knows very little about Wolverine and Sabertooths relationship! How hard is it for them to hire a director who actually cares about or knows anything about the characters!?! And as for Fox - what is wrong with them? WHY are they seemingly unable to make a good CBM?
Runefyst - 10/15/2009, 12:30 PM
I don't really like how he defends himself on that one. Apparently you can't have a strong emotional attachment unless you're related to someone? Who the hell did he marry? :P
BmanHall - 10/15/2009, 12:35 PM
@ Whispers68: Just... wow! I applaude you, sir. That post made too much sense.

@ Runefyst: Ahahaha!
TheLivingWeapon - 10/15/2009, 12:54 PM
dudes..there comics...not bibles

you lot acting like if they don stick to the source material 100% then is an 'EPIC FAIL' well the box office certainly didnt call it that...i love wolverine and you know what i liked the film to...i realy was nt expecting what i saw..buh i still enjoyed it..im glad they are re-booting deadpool cuz i love that character

now i know why you loved watchmen...its like watching a movie after sum1 told u scene by scene wat was going to happen...craaaaap!!...watchmen was just stupid and as waste of almost 3 hours!!

I have to listen to my grandma bitch and moan about everything in life...and i get the same fing here

just enjoy the bloody movies
TheLivingWeapon - 10/15/2009, 12:56 PM
and here comes my mutalation......w8 for it lol
BmanHall - 10/15/2009, 1:03 PM
@ TheLivingWeapon: You remind me of Supermike.
Shaman - 10/15/2009, 1:06 PM
TheLivingWeapon- Dude, i'm not gonna go enjoy peewee's funhouse like a sheep cause you're tired of people's opinions. Their opinion is that Wolverine sucked, though shit. Your opinion is that they bitch too much, tough shit.
TheLivingWeapon - 10/15/2009, 1:06 PM
@BmanHall

who the hell is that?

he sum kinda anti-fan boy?

cuz that ain me i love comics...im just dn expect the comic movies to b an exact represenation..cuz iz a movie...not a comic...comic inspired...still not a comic
BmanHall - 10/15/2009, 1:22 PM
@ TheLivingWeapon: Hahaha! Why do you type like you're texting? Dude, please keep posting. I'm in tears over here. XD
TheLivingWeapon - 10/15/2009, 1:30 PM
duz it matter how i type? lol see what i mean? bitch about everything
dancingmonkey08 - 10/15/2009, 1:39 PM
Well Im sorry but I have to partly agree with theLivingWeapon, look at Batman Begins and the Dark Knight for example, changes a lot from the comics i.e. Ra's Al Ghul did not train Batman, Two-Face did not get his face mutilated in an explosion, there was never a Rachel Dawes in the comics. Its alright to change details like that for the plot to work better but on the other hand, Shaman is also right, us fans did not like Wolverine because it sucked for badly developed characters, bad CGI, and a silly cliched plot. I still loved Hugh, Liev and Ryan Reynolds in it. They portrayed their characters perfectly (except for of course Barakapool but that was Fox's fault)
StephenStrange - 10/15/2009, 1:48 PM
AMEN Shaman!
Kyos - 10/15/2009, 1:49 PM
Well said! @ Whispers68

lol @ Runefyst ;)

@TheLivingWeapon

This has been discussed to death, but once again: very few people are against changes in general. An adaptation is an adaptation, comics and movies are different mediums, a 2 hour movie can't include every bit from decades of written material. Almost nobody questions that. We don't want some boring (and impossible) panel to screen adaptation.

But we want something good. We want to be able to recognize the characters we know, we want them to be treated with respect. We want a well written script, we want good effects, we want good acting, we want entertainment AND depth (if there is any in the comics). What we want is not necessarily a perfect adaptation - if such a thing even exists - but at least one that is well-thought-out and well executed.

Wolverine, I have to say it again, was shit. Why change lots of things if you don't improve anything with your changes? Why not hire a 12 year old to read your script so he can tell you that it's totally [frick]ed up?

Why can Neil Blomkamp make an awesome movie like District 9 with the budget he had and you can't even have claws that don't look totally like shit? In a movie about a guy with claws? After three films with the same guy with the same claws? Seriously?
Duhdaduh - 10/15/2009, 1:56 PM
hood wanted to add emotional appeal to it in order to make a deeper film. it wasnt his idea to put wolverine and sabretooth fighting a twilight zone Deadpool on top of a [frick]ing nuclear reactor.
BmanHall - 10/15/2009, 2:06 PM
@ TheLivingWeapon: I don't see what you mean at all. Who's bitching? I'm laughing.
WeaponX - 10/15/2009, 2:10 PM
@Whispers68 - My Transformers 1 comparison wasn't meant to be taken as if the two films stand shoulder to shoulder. What I was going for was that both have, from a non-fan perspective, is some entertainment value from an action stand point but offer piss little in doing the title character(s)any justice. From a production value Transformers is superior, I'll give that up no problem, but it's the idea of shirking the title characters that both of those movies mirror with one another and that's what I meant by the comparison of the two.

I didn't like XO:Wolverine. As a long time fan of the character, I was let down by it. However, if I put on the thickest set of horse blinders and ignore all the fan boy things I can honestly say that there does exists within the film a very small nugget entertainment. Namely at Liev's performance, Hugh's performance and a couple of good fight scenes. But like many, I too don't justify that enough to buy the Blu-Ray/DVD or support the film as a whole. It was a complete cock up.
Whispers68 - 10/15/2009, 2:13 PM
@Kyos

As you said, alterations on a minor scale aren't what bother fans. Even if you make a big change, if the film flows right, guess what, people who are familiar with what the material once was won't be up in arms. Why shouldn't someone spending money on your product be able to voice an opinion? Isn't that what viewing a movie is about? Being able to look at it, assess the material and then make your thoughts about the product? It isn't crying or whining...it's doing what it says, having and voicing your opinion. If the film is horrible, well, I won't say it deserves an Oscar and accept the faults just because. And if it's a wonderful movie, I won't say it was the worst film of the year.

"The Dark Knight" had many alterations but I can bet you won't hear a collection of people on this site saying it sucked. The movie was amazing, changes and all. Wolverine was just not enjoyable for many...that's the bottom line. Forget changes, the movie was just not well put together


That's one thing I've grown to accept pretty much on blogs and conversations in general, the moment you go left or disagree with someone, they state that you're crying, whining, etc. It's like my female friends who ask for male advice or whether something looks good on them or not. They are not really looking for you to voice your opinion, they solely want you to agree with what they have already instilled within their thoughts. so in essence, you're not really being asked to speak your stance on the matter you're simply regurgitating their own opinion. The moment you don't, guess what happens? They disagree, they'll argue or say forget the entire ordeal.
Whispers68 - 10/15/2009, 2:19 PM
@Weapon X

I didn't mean for my stance to come across in that matter so if it did, my apologies. i meant to say when I personally compare strictly entertainment value with 'Wolverine' and the original or second 'Transformers,' I left satisfied with 'Transformers.'

But we definitely agree that 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine' isn't a worthy Blu-ray purchase. That's my take on the matter and I know many others may disagree but I wouldn't spend my dollars on that movie after not enjoying the overall film in theaters. I do at times remove the "comic book" reader persona when watching comic book adapted films, to in a way hinder my inner thoughts. It helps at times but when I tried with Wolverine...to view it strictly as a non fan, I still didn't enjoy it overall. There were bits and pieces that were cool but overall...no
BmanHall - 10/15/2009, 2:44 PM
@ dancingmonkey08: The reason it works for Batman is because DC's characters don't have an in depth story line like Marvel's do. Yes, DC's characters have origin stories and specific events that happen here and there. But in Marvel's universe there are a very specific story line for each character that intertwines with every other character. When you mess up one of the stories, especially an origin story, you get the butterfly effect and mess up everything else that happens later.

Take Spider-Man for example. I think all of the movies are great. I even thought the 3rd movie was good. But they didn't follow the comic's story. So the butterfly effect starts.

Green Goblin and his son die = No dead Gwen Stacy = No Jackal = No Spider-Man cloning = No Ben Riley = No Scarlet Spider!

Doctor Octavius dies and Sandman is a misunderstood good guy = No Sinister Six!

Eddie Brock dies = No Venom = No Carnage = No Separation Anxiety!
TheGuillotine - 10/15/2009, 2:44 PM
Alright ... I am going to ask ...

In Wolverine Origins, Logan's dad in the movie, who we find out actually wasn't his biological father, looked exactly like logan as Wolverine. I mean Hugh Jackman played Logan's non-biological father. So can someone tell me how in the hell Logan could look like his non-biological father when he gets older? Did anyone else find this to be the single most stupid thing about the movie like I did?
TheGuillotine - 10/15/2009, 2:47 PM
Alright ... I am going to ask ...

In Wolverine Origins, Logan's dad in the movie, who we find out actually wasn't his biological father, looked exactly like logan as Wolverine. I mean Hugh Jackman played Logan's non-biological father. So can someone tell me how in the hell Logan could look like his non-biological father when he gets older? Did anyone else find this to be the single most stupid thing about the movie like I did?
1 2

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.