Matthew Vaughn Wants to Direct The Avengers

Published 6 years ago by , Updated August 14th, 2013 at 4:46 pm,

Matthew Vaughn, director and producer of the upcoming rated-R comic book adaptation, Kick-Ass, really wants to helm Marvel Studio’s The Avengers movie.

Vaughn, if you remember, was director of X-Men: The Last Stand… for a short while anyway. After he took over for Bryan Singer, he quickly left which opened to door for Brett Ratner to direct the project which in my mind, is the absolute worst of the four X-Men movies.

Looking forward instead of back though, Vaughn now has directed three feature films: Layer Cake, Stardust and now Kick-Ass (which quickly earned itself an American distributor after premiering footage at San Diego Comic-Con.) Now, he wants to do another superhero flick…

In speaking with MTV, he revealed the following desires of his:

“[I'd] love to do ‘The Avengers,’ and Superman… I think it would be great to reinvent Superman.”

Vaughn was attached to direct the Thor solo movie before his contract expired and Branagh was hired to helm the project. The script he and partner Mark Protosevich had written was apparently loved by Marvel Studios but it demanded an insanely high budget that he needed to cut in half (apparently from $300 Million to $150 million).

As for Superman, the current rumor out there is that James McTeigue may direct with the Wachowski Bros. supporting as producers.

On that note, Vaughn also spoke about another Marvel project that he wanted to direct a few years back.

“I was desperate to do ‘Iron Man’ about 8 years ago, and everyone was like, ‘Iron Man, no one will go watch that,’… Cut to now, and it’s a huge hit.”

“I grew up watching superhero films, so I want to make superhero films,”

I admire his passion for the genre and I’m willing to give him control over one of the major Marvel feature films in development. At least that would give him his chance to finally direct the Thor character and hit on his dream of directing Iron Man.

Would you light Vaughn to direct the Superman reboot or The Avengers?

The Avengers is currently scheduled to open May 4, 2012.

Source: MTV

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. One of the biggest problems with a Justice league movie (other than that The Avengers are beeter) is that you can’t really have Batman in it. Having two different Batman films at the same time just wouldn’t really work, and having Bale’s Batman in it also wouldn’t work, as it would ruin the “real world” efforts of the last two Batman films.

  2. Tarantino should direct a Marvel Knight’s movie, Blade, Punisher and Ghost Rider. That would be right up his alley.

  3. And I also agree that a smaller/lesser character would better.

  4. You come back to the old problem of Marvel not owning the movie rights to many of its characters. Blade is New Line, which means Warner Brothers now have the rights; Ghost Rider is with Sony.

    Of course I don’t know if this new $4b takeover by Disney includes a hefty buyback of some of the characters though? Hard to see how when Sony are in pre production on a new Spider-man trilogy and Fox have started work on Wolverine II, Deadpool, young X-Men and Magneto.

    I still think it’s fine to have Wolverine in X-Men movies as a 12a (PG13) movie Character, but one of the advantages of making a stand alone Wolverine movie, has to be the same as writing stand alonne Wolverine comics. He can cut loose and be 100% badass, 100% beserker rage etc. A 15 / 18 (R) rated ~Wolverine could go much deeper into many aspects of Logan’s life and yes violence. Blade i another film that Tarantino could probably do a job on, especially getting a fuller perspective on the Vampire’s point of view. but Blade shouldn’t mix with the other Marvel Characters (except maybe Ghost Rider where again the rights are with two different companies) because it shatters the “it’s the real world except..” illusion that pretty much all of the other Marvel charater movies have built.

    Let’s just hope that Iron man II, Captain America and Thor all work because The Avengers can’t come quickly enough for me.

  5. Uwe boll must direct the movie based on the videogame based on this movie.

  6. UWE BOLL!!

    How could we forget the master?

    Actually I’m waiting for his remake of The Dark Knight.

  7. Everton you’re possibly making some premature assumptions.
    First of all a “Justice League” movie doesn’t have to be made before Nolan/Bale puts a capstone on his version of the franchise. Secondly Batman doesn’t have to be that involved in a first “Justice League” movie, unless DC/WB insists on an origin movie. In fact, it would probably be nice to have him more in the background, if only a year or two separates a 3RD Batman film from “Justice League.”

    If it was my choice It would all depend on where Superman goes at this point. If he goes to Disney then make the movie about how the Justice League moves on without him. If he stays then focus a little more on him but still make the real story about the other characters. It wouldn’t please everybody, however it would put a Justice League movie in the can. As long as it’s profitable and entertaining it doesn’t have to be the acme of the DC universe. Even if Disney ends up with Superman, nothing is stopping them from licensing him back out to WB. Making the movie would overcome one or two big hurdles. No one could say it couldn’t be done or that it wouldn’t be profitable. A proven property, even a weak one, is better in the eyes of the studio than an unproven one. We’ve all seen time and again that pattern of studio behavior.

    Here’s an impossible but interesting proposition. What if WB were to offer Disney licensing opportunity to its characters?
    Let Disney make a Justice League movie! It spreads the risk, puts more talent to the problems and lets Warner focus on other properties for awhile.

    You know it wouldn’t surprise me if neither studio ended up owning Superman. Why not just license him for particular projects? It’s a long term strategy that could pay off down the road. Let Universal get a crack at him or better yet let Fox make a movie. When they get done making a mess out of things WB can come back in and pick him up for cheap…

  8. @ TheOldMan

    Hi again.

    No I’m not making assumptions, this is all there from when Warners actually went into pre-production on a Justice League movie that only stalled because of the Writers’ strike. They had a director (Geroge Miller) and a full cast, the most famous of which was Common as Green Lantern). They also annoyed Nolan to such a degree that there was doubt as to whether he was ging to walk from his new series of Batman movies (rumours).

    Post the writer’s strike Dc have (again) decided to copy Marvel and have 4 solo movies before doing a J League movie. This throws up all sorts of questions though as the Green Lantern movie stars Ryan Reynolds which suggests that He would be the J league lantern thus stopping Dc from having one of their tiny number of non white characters (the John Stewart Lantern) from being in the team movie. It also suggests that the solo Lantern, Wonder Woman, Batman and (new) Superman movies will now have their actors in the J League movie, which again is something that Nolan and (I think) Bale have said they are not happy with.

    As to Superman, he’s a DC character and ALL of their characters belong to Warner Bros, who own DC comics.

    Disney are tryiing to buy Marvel. Marvel are by far the more successful comic book business but many of their most famous characters have their movie rights owned / leased to different film stuios. Fox has the X-Men and Daredevil; Sony have Spider-man and the Ghost Rider.

  9. But it seems to me your allowing the past rather than present or future situations govern your reasoning. Your aware as I am that WB/DC could lose Superman. That’s been discussed here. Then there’s the issue that Nolan could want to do a 3RD Batman movie sooner than you expect. That rumor is already public too. Their’s no indication that Nolan would want or need to go beyond 3 movies. Finally Batman doesn’t have to be out front in a Justice league movie. The movie line-up your arguing could easily change, especially if the Disney/Marvel deal goes through.

    You make it sound like you know about contracts and projects that are already signed and in motion beyond what’s been publicly announced. I’m sure everybody would be interested in you elaboration on that…

    Anxiously awaiting your breaking news.

  10. You’re confusing me again. To be honest I’m really not sure what you are talking about at all, and fail to see how I’ve said anythin that isn’t common knowledge, and been clear where speculation / extrapolation has is being used. Also you seem to be confusing Marvel comics with DC ones. Superman is DC and has nothing to do with Marvel at all.

    Warners can’t lose Superman. Theyhave lost rights to some aspects of his character / backround to the creator’s estate but that’s a long way from losing Superman.

    The Disney deal has nothing whatsoever to do with DC or Warne brothers. It is a deal between Disney and Marvel. So NO DC characters will have anything to do with it at all.

    I have no idea when Nolan would film the next Batman film, although I remember reading that he would want to.

    You can only adress what you believe will happen based on what you read / hear HAS been or IS happening. Warners were very clear on their intentions for the Justice league and the involvement of different actors for Batman & Superman. The only CHANGE to that that has been announced is the copying of Marvel’s strategy of having the core team members appear in stand allone films BEFORE releasing the team movie. That’s a statemnt of fact. What isn’t clear iss if this new strategy means they WILL now TRY to have the same actors in the stand alone films (for example Bale’s Batman, Routh’s Superman {although Superman is alledgedly being rebooted AGAIN}. Reynold’s Green Lantern and ???? Wonderwoman)OR if they are sticking to George Miller / Warner’s original plan to have a cast complete;y seperate from those in stand alone movies. Which I say again SEVERAL people are / were oppossed to. The last news on the director and direction of the film was earlier this year and it is from that news, as well as an absence of any further news that we know Miller is still attached t the movie and that DC are following Marvel’s blueprint of stand alone movies followed by a team movie. As stated though we don’t know if that means the actors in the stand alones will play the characters in the team movie, as in the Marvel movies; OR if the original idea of having different actors will continue.

    Given that the only DC characters that your average customer cares about are Batman, Superman and to a much lesser degree Wonder Woman the odds of any of those not being in a Justice league movie are pretty remote, and even more so given What we know about them using Marvel’s bluepint.

  11. @Everton

    Warner Bros. CAN lose DC if they don’t get their butts in gear and start production on another movie SOON. The deadline escapes me, but it’s not that far away.


  12. Vic Holtreman
    Hi Vic…

    No it can’t.
    DC is owned by warners, technical speak ir is a subsidiary of Warners so it isn’t going anywahere.

    The estate / family of Siegel & Shuster (creators of Superman) have won back the rights to various parts of Superman, mostly from the first few weeks of the comic etc so Krpton, Krypton exploding him being found as a baby etc. Warners have kept the rest.

    there’s talk, surrounding an ongoing issue with the money owed from Superman Returns, which Warner won I believe.

    In the trial Warners said that there was no Superman movie in production and consequently the earliest one could be in cinemas is 2012. So the court ruled that if a Superman movie isn’t in production by 2012 then the siegeels and estate of Shuster can sue for damages; in other words for the money they would expect to make if they used their pieces of the Superman story to make a film.

    There’s a lot of grund to cover and IF, IF Warners / DC were to lose the rights it wouldn’t be until around 2013 AND would probably require so many things to be poorly handled by Warners / DC as to remain highly unlikely.

    Once again that is ONLY related to Superman and not either other DC charchters OR DC comics itself.

    Here’s a quote from the media release.

    “The court ruled, for the most part, that the Siegels successfully recaptured most of the works at issue, including those first two weeks of daily Superman strips, as well as key sections of early Action Comics and Superman comics.This means the Siegels, repped by Warners’ nemesis Marc Toberoff, now control depictions of Superman’s origins from the planet Krypton, his parents Jor-El and Lora, Superman as an infant, the launching of the baby Superman into space and his landing on Earth in a fiery crash.

    But Warners/DC still owns other elements, including Superman’s ability to fly, the term “kryptonite,” the villain Lex Luthor, Jimmy Olsen, and some of Superman’s powers.”

  13. I understand owning characters, but how do you own a power? anyone can write any character with the ability to fly if they acquired him/her/it, no?

  14. Anyone can give any NEW character any powers they want to. But when it comes to existing characters it’s very much up to whoever owns the character what is and is ot allowed.

    Superman is, at the moment, in shared ownership and the estates / families of his two creators own all of his early characteristics but him being able to fly was one (of many, many, many increasingly boring) additions to his list of powers.

    I’m not sure if this is a decent example, actually I know it isn’t but it’s a example of how weird it can all be.

    Sony had the rights to the story Thunderball with al the characters therein, but mgm (broccoli) still had the wider James Bond rights so Sony remade Thunderball (it wasn’t Sony at the time) as never say never again but couldn’t make use of Bond in any other films.

  15. why the hell does the superman charactor need reinventing?

  16. why the hell does the superman charactor need reinventing?