Who'd You Rather: Cronenberg, Cuaron, Innaritu on Studio Wishlist for Catching Fire?

According to an LA Times report citing an insider in the know, Lionsgate is looking at a few notable names to take the helm of the Hunger Games franchise for the series sequel Catching Fire. Among the "seven or eight names" -- all men, it's noted -- are David Cronenberg, Alfonso Cuaron, and Alejandro González Iñárritu.

Supposing this shortlist is accurate, and knowing that the studio wants to get a move on with a director capable of wrangling the sequel into shape for an August start date, which of these three alleged candidates would you rather see bring Katniss Everdeen's next adventure to life?

From The LA Times:

According to a source with knowledge of the list who isn't permitted to speak on the record, Lionsgate needs to find a director with enough credits and accolades to appeal to Collins, who is much more interested in quality filmmaking than box-office prowess. This director also needs to have an even keel; no petulant crybabies allowed... task will require someone who can wrangle a large ensemble of actors, juggle the demands of a swift schedule and collaborate on a script with Collins and writer Simon Beaufoy.

"No petulant crybabies allowed." Interesting. Well, Cuaron's got Harry Potter cred under his belt. Iñárritu would certainly drive home the abject desperation of the world of Panem. And maybe working with Twilight's Robert Pattinson has brought Cronenberg one step closer to the YA universe. But I'm more curious about the other four or five names on this list... who else matches the profile for non-crybaby, good with kids, franchise-able serious-movie directing?

[LA Times]


  • G says:

    Wherever this list came from, they better not be giving my Cuaron hopes up only to crush my dreams.

  • AdamA says:

    Innaritu all the way, I mean who else can put miserablism on screen better than him and get great performances out his actors.

  • chris says:

    Cronenberg would not do this movie.

  • j'accuse! says:

    Cuaron by a hair, w/ Cronenberg as a close second. W/ Chris likely being correct that Cronenberg wouldn't do it, Cuaron would do a spectacular job. Loved Children of Men, shows he can do dystopian stuff well.

  • AS says:

    I'd like to see Sofia Coppola tackle it... whoops, not a man 🙁

  • DougW says:

    Cuaron is a strong choice, but he may be too busy finishing "Gravity" which opens around Thanksgiving. I like the idea of Duncan Jones who directed "Source Code" and "Moon."

  • Jake says:

    Inarritu is the absolute pinnacle of pretension. I can't think of much that could make the second hunger games worse than the first, but having inarritu direct it would definitely be one of them.

    The guy is the absolute worst director living today. By all means, have Uwe Boll direct it before that pretentious hack gets anywhere near it.

    Also, Cuaron would be awesome.

  • HV says:

    Nicolas Winding Refn

    • Jake says:

      Love that director, but he doesn't seem right for a big blockbuster. His stuff is too brooding and artistic. But I would love to be proven wrong about that since I think he's absolutely brilliant. But some directors just aren't blockbuster type directors.

      Why not Brad Bird instead?

  • Edie Gardiner says:

    juggle the demands of a swift schedule and collaborate on a script with Collins and writer Simon Beaufoy.

  • Blanch Bolin says:

    Who else matches the profile for non-crybaby, good with kids, franchise-able serious-movie directing?

  • ! says:

    I would go out of my way to see this movie if it was directed by Cuaron or Inarritu.

  • Sean Watson says:

    Duncan Jones really should do this, like Gary Ross he's had two previous films, both critically and financially successful. He is on my wish list to direct!!

  • The Cantankerist says:

    Who we'd rather did it out of these three? None of them will do it, so it's irrelevant.

    Cuaron is just lazy boardroom thinking: "remember, he took over that other franchise and did a good job." Yes, and then didn't return. He learned what he needed to and moved on.

    Inarritu - even were he to be interested, the film he auteured would not be the film Lionsgate would want. And that goes double for Cronenberg - CRONENBERG! Are they serious?

    • KevyB says:

      Cuaron is more than one picture. Children of Men is the best qualification on any of the resumes here. Dystopian future? Check. Battles where you can actually follow the action? Check. Great action scenes without any CGI? Check. The ludicrous is made to seem utterly believable? Check. Keeping the camera in a stationary position? CHECK!

      • The Cantankerist says:

        "Qualification"? Of course he could do it - he's way OVERqualified - but if he wanted to keep pumping through franchise films on a compressed timeframe, he would have done it with HP. He chose not to, so "Cuaron on the shortlist" seems a bit fanciful of Lionsgate.

        Of course, he still probably wouldn't make the cut - I hear Orson Welles, Alfred Hitchcock and D.W. Griffith are all on the shortlist too, fighting desperately for a chance to follow in Gary Ross' footsteps. (There's nothing Orson loves more than studio interference and an accelerating deadline).

        It's kinda sad and predictable to see Lionsgate frothing at the mouth, red mist over the eyes. They smell money! They're gonna RAM that sequel through production! We'll see how Collins manages to withstand the pressure...

      • The Cantankerist says:

        And "Children Of Men" is not a great qualification as much as an obvious reason why Cuaron won't make this film: he's already made it. To put it another way: if he did return to reprise a lot of the "Children Of Men" techniques for "Catching Fire", he wouldn't be the filmmaker you want him to be. But it's more classic studio thinking - you see it in casting all the time: "She played that role in Film X, so of course she's a perfect fit for the same kinda role in Film Y." Um, no, she's not. Because we all saw Film X. How can she possibly make the same kind of impact, have the same kind of power? We've seen it already.

        Admittedly, it's a different game for Cuaron, where Children Of Men was probably underseen - and, as director, his techniques are more malleable - but that's why directors tend to think pretty hard before taking on projects; they know how much work goes into them. The upside of being involved with "Catching Fire" is largely gonna be financial and, given the lead times, not much else. That's gonna attract directors whose ambitions are chiefly financial. Hard to see where Cuaron, Inarritu and Cronenberg (!) feature in that.

  • Insoles says:

    You ought to really moderate the remarks on this website