Monday 14 March 2016

Superman Unmade #10: Superman: Destruction

Who wrote it?

Paul Attanasio. Oscar-nominated for Quiz Show and Donnie Brasco, creator of Homicide: Life on the Street, and credited on Disclosure and Sphere (ironically, one of the poorly-performing films alleged to have scared Warner off mega-budget blockbusters like Superman Lives.) Attanasio also had The Sum of All Fears in production at Paramount.

When was it written?
We don't know for sure that it was. If complete, it almost certainly wasn't dated April 2001, unless Attanasio had written it on-spec (highly unlikely for a professional screenwriter using someone else's IP) or the actual deal had been done much earlier. If the latter, why wasn't it announced at the time?

What's the context?
According to the Hollywood Reporter's April 19th, 2001 story ("Attanasio has words for two Warner films"), the writer would receive $3.4 million for two scripts; Superman, and an adaptation of Joseph Kanon's then-upcoming novel The Good German. It was not known which he would tackle first.
"Attanasio will sift through the three or four "Superman" scripts, but he will focus on his own, original take on material based on the death and rebirth of Superman."

If true, this seems to mark a sea-change in the studio's attitude to the project. Though still mired in the "death" storyline, Attanasio would be the first writer trusted to take them beyond the established paradigm in a full script for almost six years.

Variety, meanwhile, echoed the major points of the story but cautioned that the writer's Superman deal had not been closed.

What's the story?
No idea. None. Not the faintest inkling.

Why didn't it happen?
And then... silence.

Superman: Destruction (as the script was allegedly known) has never materialised online, and I've been able to find out almost nothing about it. 

Given how long WB had been trying to get a Superman film off the ground, it's not hard to imagine them prioritising a script for it over a relatively obscure (though expensively acquired) project like German (which wouldn't appear for another five years). But after April 2001, there's nothing. No word on how it was received, or even that it was received.

Five years later, The Wall Street Journal (June 23rd 2006 -  "Getting 'Superman' off the ground") would assert that Attanasio's deal was never actually done.
Glen Weldon's Superman: The Unauthorized Biography claims it was no more than a treatment.
Cashiers du Cinemart went as far as assigning the script a completion date (27th June 2001). They also floated one theory which conflates it with Keith Giffen's Superman/Lobo treatment from late 2000, and another in which it was an unconnected fifty page treatment.

I like the Attanasio-revising-Giffen theory for two reasons:
A) We know Giffen's treatment was deemed too expensive. Could Attanasio have been brought in to take it to script stage at a lower cost?
B) It might explain the not-very-Superman-but-very-Lobo title "Destruction", the origin of which is unclear. It isn't in either of the two trade stories, but it's a little detail that either lends credence to the script's existence, or was made up by someone for that very reason. It depends on your point of view.

Unfortunately, liking a theory doesn't make it right. There's no proof Attanasio revised Giffen.

Although David Hughes asserts that Joseph McGinty Nichol, AKA McG, was attached to Attanasio's script/treatment, I wasn't able to find any evidence of this. The Hollywood Reporter does note his attachment to J.J. Abrams' draft a year later.

And that's all she wrote. It's possible an Attanasio treatment exists, and that the deal to script it was never done. It may or may not have been based on Giffen's Lobo/Superman treatment. It's also possible a partial or complete script exists, either of Attanasio's sole devising or based on Giffen's treatment.
We have almost no facts about this one. Nothing of Attanasio's was included in the WB vs Siegel and Shuster deposition, which leads me to think it doesn't exist... but Giffen's treatment wasn't in the deposition either, and there's good evidence it's real.

Unless something surfaces which sheds new light on this, it looks Superman: Destruction will remain a myth. If anyone out there knows better... educate me.

Monday 7 March 2016

Superman Unmade #9: Untitled Superman vs Lobo project

Who wrote it?
Keith Giffen, co-creator of DC's "anti" anti-hero, Lobo.

When was it written?
It appears to have been turned in to Warner Bros. in or around September 2000.

What's the context?
Despite rumoured interest from Oliver Stone and reported talks with Ralph Zondag in the early months of 2000, nothing ever came of William Wisher's script.

In July 2000 Nicolas Cage made it plain to The Sunday Herald he'd given up on the project. "I was very excited about it for a while, but then I decided the time had come and gone."

Any heat generated by Wisher's script fizzled out. Superman did not live.

According to Superman vs Hollywood, Giffen (among other DC writers) was approached by Jenette Kahn, publisher of DC comics, on behalf of Lorenzo Di Bonaventura and Alan Horn. Giffen says WB was already keen on using Lobo from the get-go. He agreed to submit a treatment (a detailed summary laying out the story in prose form.)

WB and Joel Silver had been unsuccessfully trying to adapt Lobo for the big screen since the mid-'90s (read more about that here). Jerrold E. Brown's 1998 draft is out there on the web if you know where to look (as is a draft by Don Payne from 2009).

Prior to boarding the Superman project, Kevin Smith claims he'd encouraged WB to consult DC creatives; they'd demurred, citing the differences between comics and film, implying the DC guys didn't "get" movies. Apparently Meyer and Horn were trying to change that mindset; they were finally ready to listen to those who spent their days neck-deep in the mythologies.

For a while.

AICN broke news of the 17-page treatment's existence on October 18th, 2000. Harry Knowles, never knowingly less than hyperbolic, called it "the most ambitious and thrilling concept I've yet seen for a Superhero film."

Giffen confirmed its existence to Comics2film a week later, but added that contrary to Knowles' report, the project hadn't advanced to script stage yet. He declined to go into any more detail.

What's the story?
Intent on mining Earth of a mineral which induces an unparalleled high in select alien species, an intergalactic drug cartel hires Lobo to kill the planet's protector; Superman. Planet-hopping high-jinks ensue.

Why didn't it happen?
The official line? Cost. Despite being told to write without constraints, Giffen says his take was nixed because it was just too expensive. If Knowles' synopsis is accurate, it would have involved multiple planets, an asteroid, and at least one knock-down, drag-out fight on Earth. Those things don't come cheap, and it's odd that the studio (which had already scaled back the titanic battle with Doomsday in previous drafts of Superman Lives) thought it could substitute an equally physical antagonist and not pay through the nose for realising him on-screen.