Not all superheroes wear capes -- some film them

I can't believe it took me so long to respond to your post decrying Darren Aronofsky's decision to direct a new Robocop movie because you brought up an excellent topic of conversation -- some real red meat for me to disagree with.

So in general, I will say I generally have the opposite reaction you. Well, OK, first I will put in a couple of caveats. First of all, this is a remake, which is a slightly different situation that most of the other films you brought up and after The Fountain, Aronofsky is no average director for you. So this is nonstandard case, but in general I could not disagree more on the topic of a quality director spending his time making a big-budget, action movie. I find making a good action movie -- especially a comic-book story that will bring memories of Daredevil and its ilk -- to be quite a difficult task and one that often works best when helmed by a true talent. Perhaps it is a fundamental difference in our movie preferences: I greatly enjoy a well-made action a compelling story, and (the most rare, in my opinion) and steady pace that keeps me drawn into the movie and entertained for a couple of hours, and of course the special effects that can dazzle in the way that only the visual medium of film can capture. Perhaps I'm just a philistine.

I will admit my eyebrow raised when I first heard Christopher Nolan was directing Batman Begins. Although I don't think it had the same effect as The Fountain had on you, Memento is one of my favorite movies and I did not quite see that as an audition for reopening the story of the caped crusader, especially after it was driven into the ground by Joel Schumacher. Going in I had the same feeling you have now but I was blown away by the movie which did make me rethink comic-book movies. Sure Tim Burton had created a dark Gotham City before, but Nolan took the story of Batman to craft a compelling story about the nature of fear -- as told through an action movie. Could Michael Bay have done this? I think not. Sure he could have spent his time doing something other than this and The Dark Knight, but he did do The Prestige, which I liked, in between. And if he hadn't done these movies and we had got Michael Bay, let's face it: they would have been crap. I enjoy a good good Batman movie and am glad he made the decision to get in bed with Warner Bros.

The same could be said of Stanley Kubrick, as you brought up. Yes he probably got paid well to make The Shining and Spartacus was a more conventional movie. But they were both great, memorable films and, as you pointed out, he used the opportunity of the former to make arguably the best horror movie of all time. So had he not agreed to do that, we would be without that contribution and I think that would be a detriment to cinema as a whole.

The difference in the examples of Barton Fink and William Faulkner that you brought up is that in both of these cases the character/person was not doing what he does well. Nolan and Aranofsky are master filmmakers and will do well in whatever "genre" they choose to explore. As you know I am loathe of using that concept to limit cinema and I think these two men seem to be among directors who have the same idea -- Nolan did not just take the paycheck and instead put himself wholly into creating a quality movie no matter what the setup. With the thematic and stylistic differences of The Fountain and The Wrestler, I can see the possibility of him being able to do the same thing. I would expect its possible these men will not approach these projects as chores either. I know a lot of people who wanted to be involved in filmmaking and there is a lot of overlap with comic book nerds and Star Wars fans and such; it's highly likely that the kind of guys who grow up to be quality directors first dreamed about making Raiders of the Lost Ark -- directed by Steven Speilberg who has created that and some other well-made big-budget action movies in addition to more quality dramatic fare like E.T. (OK, quality family fare in that respect), Schindler's List, and Munich (which I loved and still think is underrated because of its controversy).

Now I can't say that a remake of Robocop seems like a great idea, but I would have liked to have seen Aronofsky direct an episode of "Lost", as he intended to do until scheduling problems and fatherhood got in the way. I see one movie in pre-production on his IMDB page and three other than Robocop in development. Maybe it won't be The Fountain, but I don't think I would enjoy Robocop any less than any other project he might take up. After all, they might not be either.

P.S. Bonus points if you get the allusion I'm making in the title of this post.