Henry Cavill to be replaced as Superman amidst major DC shakeup

The DC film universe is undergoing a major shakeup, with new creative lead James Gunn and actor Henry Cavill confirming that the latter will not return as Superman.

The current iteration of the DC film universe launched in 2013 with Zack Snyder's Man of Steel, featuring Cavill as Clark Kent/Superman. Cavill went on to reprise the role as a key player in Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) and Justice League (2017), whilst also cameoing in Black Adam (2022).

However, the DC film universe has had a divisive critical reception and a highly variable box office take, generally trailing the rival Marvel Cinematic Universe. Several proposed total reboots of the series have apparently been proposed at Warner Brothers, but shot down each time due to the popularity of the actors involved, particularly Cavill, Jason Momoa as Aquaman, Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and Ben Affleck as an older version of Batman.

The appointment of James Gunn seems to have finally turned the corner on that argument, with it now looking likely that a totally fresh approach will be taken to the DC movie universe with new actors hired for all of the major roles. Plans for further films in the Aquaman and Wonder Woman series have also been cancelled and those roles are likely to be recast as well.

However, some of the existing actors may continue in the new version of the franchise in new roles. According to Gunn and some reports from within Warner Brothers (although Gunn has suggested these are unreliable), their new take on Superman will look for a younger actor to take on the role of a fresher-faced Clark Kent just starting his career at The Daily Planet. The new film will not be a total reboot or origin story for Superman, since most people are now familiar with that.

The news is particularly surprising as DC had re-committed to Cavill returning in the role just a couple of months ago, after a years-long fan campaign. Fans today seemed united in their annoyance at the news, with many asking DC and Gunn to reconsider the decision. Reportedly, Gunn and his team are looking at retaining Cavill in a new role in their new continuity.

The existence of a continuity-heavy DC film universe will reportedly not impact ongoing character-centric film series that exist in isolation of a wider continuity, with both the recent Robert Pattinson version of Batman and Joaquin Phoenix's Joker set to return in new films continuing their stories.

What this also means for Peacemaker, the highly popular TV series spun off from Gunn's own film The Suicide Squad and is set to return for a second season, remains to be seen.

As for Cavill, his next move is unknown. He quit The Witcher in October, reportedly to focus on his return as Superman, but other rumours suggested creative differences with the production team, who have deviated from the source material (of which Cavill is a noted fan) significantly in their TV adaptation. Cavill has been linked to the role of James Bond for some years, although there has been no official announcement and some reports that the producers of that franchise are also looking to cast younger (although, at 39, Cavill, could likely play the role for a decade or more going forwards).

Cavill may reprise his role as Sherlock Holmes in the popular Enola Holmes series of films for Netflix, and maybe in a spinoff centered on his character. Cavill was also reportedly connected to the upcoming resurgence of the Mass Effect franchise, of which he is also a noted fan, although whether this was a voice role for the Mass Effect 5 video game or an acting role in Amazon's in-development Mass Effect television series remains unclear.

James Gunn appointed head of DC films, animation and television

In a surprise move but one that also kinda makes sense, Warner Brothers have appointed director James Gunn as the head of DC films, animation and television. Gunn will have complete control over the direction of the DC universe on screen, effectively becoming the counterpart of his boss at Marvel, Kevin Feige. Gunn will work alongside producer Peter Safran, with whom he previously collaborated on the Peacemaker TV series.

Gunn will handle creative development of the DC screen universe moving forwards, whilst Safran will handle business and production. Gunn will also complete his existing commitments for Marvel, including The Guardians of the Galaxy Holiday Special (which launches on Disney+ next month) and post-production on Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 (which will hit cinemas on 5 May 2023).

Gunn established himself as a superhero player by directing Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) and Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 (2017) for Marvel. He also provided assistance and advice to the Russo Brothers on the use of the Guardians in Infinity War (2018) and Endgame (2019). He was then fired after Disney "discovered" seven-year-old inappropriate tweets, which Gunn had already discussed at length and apologised for in 2012. Marvel later reversed the decision after a public backlash. In the interim Gunn moved to DC to direct The Suicide Squad (2021), which was well-reviewed but a box office disappointment (due to opening during the COVID pandemic and being available on the same day on HBO Max). He then wrote all eight episodes of the first season of spin-off show Peacemaker and directed five of them, which were very well-received, before returning to Marvel to shoot Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 3.

Those expecting Gunn to completely blank slate the DC film universe and start afresh will likely be disappointed, with Henry Cavill confirming his return to the franchise as Superman just yesterday. It looks like Gunn will aim to "soft reboot" the franchise instead in the same manner as The Suicide Squad did to its predecessor, keeping those actors and characters who are popular and who worked but easing off on continuity references in favour of new stories.

The Great Marvel Rewatch: Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2

Some months after their triumph over the renegade Kree warlord Ronan, the Guardians of the Galaxy have been hired by the Sovereign to defend their homeworld from a ravaging interdimensional monster. Unfortunately, Rocket manages to offend the Sovereign, leading to a sequence of improbable events culminating in Peter Quill finally meeting his father. Meanwhile, the Ravager faction led by Yondu has been outcast by their fellows for Yondu's dishonourable actions and he seeks to regain his honour in their eyes...which means tracking down and defeating the Guardians.

Guardians of the Galaxy is one of the Marvel Cinematic Universe's more laidback and fun movies. Free of the weighty continuity built up by the Earth-bound movies, it felt fresh and inventive. With a top soundtrack, some excellent humour and some great performances, it emerged as perhaps not the most dramatically satisfying Marvel movie, but certainly the most fun.

The second movie sees returning director James Gunn attempt a tricky balancing act of giving the audience more of the same - comedy, action, space battles, quips - and also doing something new that keeps the freshness of the first movie going. It can't quite stretch to do all of these things well and it stumbles a little more than its forebear, but it's still a brave attempt to do something more interesting than a by-the-numbers sequel.

The movie is certainly funnier. Baby Groot gets some great moments but it's Drax and new character Mantis, by themselves and as an unlikely double-act, who emerge with the best material. Yondu's Ravagers also get a bit more definition and the "tough"-sounding name of one of their number becomes a recurring gag throughout the movie. Chris Pratt employs his considerable comic talents better as well, such as his ongoing attempts to explain the dubious premises of mid-1980s action TV shows to his baffled compatriots.

More importantly, the film explores character better than the first movie. We find out why Peter doesn't just go home to Earth, more of what makes Gamora and Nebula tick, and more of what drives Yondu, who emerges as a more complex figure in this movie than the previous one. The film doesn't break new ground - the idea that the Guardians are a family and that's why they hang out even when they argue is hardly revelatory - but it does offer more food for thought about these people in the calm breaks between explosions.

The film does have a fair few explosions, and if the movie does have a weakness it is the protracted climax. The first movie had a long final battle, but that battle was divided into several strands with the goals, plans and motivations of everyone involved clear. The second movie's climax goes on too long, gets a little silly in places and risks being lost in concussive CGI overload. It's nowhere near as bad as, say, a Michael Bay Transformers film, but it does risk losing the audience's interest. Fortunately the climactic moment of the battle may also be the film's funniest moment, and the movie's actual ending is actually quite decent, if perhaps drawing a bit too deep on sentiment.

Remarkably, Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 does roll back a little on the scale from the first film. There's no Thanos, no Infinity Stones (although both rate mentions) and far fewer tie-ins with the rest of the Marvel Cinematic Universe than the original movie. Instead, Vol. 2 is more interested in setting up the rest of the Marvel Cosmic Universe. The first movie teased it, but the second film opens up on the wider SF stylings of the setting, with more character cameos from obscure 1970s Marvel Comics then you can shake a stick at. One revelatory moment will have old-skool Marvel fans grinning from ear to ear, especially if it leads into the spin-off movie Marvel reportedly are very interested in making, whilst the apparent revelation of the villain for Vol. 3 will have fans nodding in approval.

Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 (****) is a worthy successor to the original film. In trying to do more of the same and be different it perhaps bites off a little more than it can chew and the prolonged climax is messier and less interesting than the first movie's, but it wins those points back with more interesting character work, better laughs, yet more quotable dialogue, some great performances and another solid soundtrack (and the well-judged decision to do something different with setting up Vol. 3's). Oh, and it has maybe the most amusing credits Marvel has ever done (I mean the actual credits, not the mandatory during and post-credits sequences, which this movie goes overboard on).

Note: I originally reviewed this film in 2017.

The Great Marvel Rewatch: Guardians of the Galaxy

In 1988, young Peter Quill is abducted by aliens and carried off into deep space to be raised as a mercenary. Twenty-six years later, Quill steals a valuable orb coveted by both the renegade Kree warlord Ronan and Quill's own former boss (and abductor) Yondu. The orb rapidly draws the attention of many factions and Quill is reluctantly forced to ally with Gamora (a former ally of Ronan's), Rocket (a genetically-engineered raccoon-like creature), Groot (an ambulatory tree) and Drax (an overly literal, vengeance-fuelled warrior) in order to recover the orb and save the galaxy.

On release, Guardians of the Galaxy was arguably Marvel's biggest gamble in the establishment of its own cinematic universe. Whilst previous movies focused on fairly well-known characters or groups who were at least passingly familiar to a general audience, the Guardians source material was relatively obscure. Guardians was a testbed of how far into its decades of source material Marvel could really reach before losing its audience. Its immense success meant that Marvel could be more confident about going forwards and bringing in more obscure characters from the comics and the audience would stay with them. In that sense, Guardians of the Galaxy is the most important film in the series, paving the way for Doctor Strange, Black Panther and Captain Marvel (not to mention, even further down the line, The Eternals).

Guardians is a fun but flawed movie. It's comfortably superior to any of the Iron Man or Thor flicks, but the (relatively) grounded realism of Captain America: The Winter Soldier worked much better. Guardians's pacing also suffers a little as it struggles to provide backstory and motivation for multiple heroes and villains as well as a cohesive storyline. In fact, the storyline suffers somewhat from fairly risible "the team learning the art of friendship" scenes fitted in amongst discussions of magical maguffins and action beats of varying competence. But the movie overcomes this with zippy pacing and a bright and breezy atmosphere which lifts the whole film and makes it much more rewatchable. The production value is also excellent, especially the 1970s spaceship designs which feel like a melding of Marvel Comics of that era with SF illustrators like Chris Foss and Peter Elson.

What also holds the picture together and makes it work is the offbeat script and direction from James Gunn, the excellent 1980s soundtrack and a formidable cast. Chris Pratt brings the requisite levels of arrogance and overconfidence to Quill, whilst Zoe Saldana is excellent as Gamora. The real revelations come from former wrestler Dave Bautista as Drax (who channels a surprising degree of pathos into his performance) and Karen Gillan as Nebula, who leaves her Doctor Who role of Amy Pond far behind in a vicious and at terms unnerving role. Lee Pace as Ronan is less successful, his camp villainy feeling redundant. A bigger disappointment is that the movie deploys actors and comedians of the calibre of Peter Serafinowicz, John C. Reilly, Glenn Close, Djimon Hounsou and Benicio del Toro and does very little with them. It is good to see Michael Rooker building on his Walking Dead success with a more meaty role as Yondu. His smile of delight when he realises he has been betrayed, thus justifying vengeance later on, is one of the film's more enjoyable, quiet moments.

The film is witty, with some great one-liners and narrative zingers flying around, and the actors are certainly up to the challenge. However, the film does struggle with its CGI. After several movies - most notably The Winter Soldier - where Marvel seemed to be dialling back the use of sensory overload CGI (where stuff happens so fast and blurred that you don't know what's going on), it returns with a vengeance in Guardians of the Galaxy. Some dogfights and battle sequences are almost impossible to follow and intercut so rapidly it makes it hard to appreciate the strong production design. Rewatching does improve this issue, however.

Another area where the film succeeds is in how it is bringing together the different narrative strands established in earlier films. The backstory of the Tesseract (Captain America: The First Avenger, The Avengers) and the Aether (Thor: The Dark World) is explored and we find out more about Thanos, the big bad behind the events of The Avengers. The Collector also returns from Thor: The Dark World. There's a growing sense of a masterplan which will extend through several more movies to come. Gunn even trolls the fans with a post-credit sequence that is nowhere as revelatory and momentous as previous ones, instead going for laughs.

Guardians of the Galaxy (****½) is loud, brash and almost ridiculously goofy, but it's also fun, funny and gains some surprising dramatic weight from its inclusion of larger Marvel Universe elements such as the Infinity Stones (which here get their origins explained). Some good laughs, an excellent cast and some much-needed tying together of the wider Marvel universe storyline overcome some confusing CGI and so-so villains to deliver a solid, undemanding blockbuster.

Note: my original review of the movie from 2014 can be found here.

Director James Gunn fired from GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY VOL. 3

In an unexpected move, Disney has fired James Gunn, the director of the first two Guardians of the Galaxy movies, over seven-year-old tweets.

Apologising for the remarks on Twitter, Gunn claimed he made the "provocative" tweets when he was interested in edgy and dark humour and no longer ascribes to such jokes.

The move has complicated the Disney schedule, as Gunn was beginning pre-production on Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 which was expected to be released in 2020. Disney will be looking for a director who can step in at short notice to take on the project. I strongly suspect they are putting some urgent calls in to Taika Waititi right now, whose Thor: Ragnarok aesthetic would make a good fit for the Guardians sub-franchise.

Although Gunn's tweets are clearly unacceptable and inappropriate for the director of a franchise which has a strong appeal to children, it is less clear why Disney have taken action only now, as the tweets have been widely reported on for years, during which time Gunn directed two movies for the company, as well as providing some assistance and advice on other Marvel Cinematic Universe projects.