ROTTEN TOMATOES: Zak Penn Talks The Avengers Comments

Zak Penn Talks The Avengers

by | June 25, 2009

Summary

Speaking at a Los Angeles Film Festival panel earlier this week, Zak Penn discussed the difficulties of tying together multiple film franchises for "The Avengers." Back to Article

(1-20 of 21 posts) | Reply

Alex L. writes:
on Jun 25 2009 06:47 AM

Anyone else worried about Zak Penn writing the Avengers movie? I mean, he doesn't have the best resume for writing good movies:

The Incredible Hulk (2008) (screen story) (screenplay)
X-Men: The Last Stand (2006) (written by)
Fantastic Four (2005) (VG) (writer)
Elektra (2005) (written by)
X2 (2003) (story)
Inspector Gadget (1999) (screenplay)
Last Action Hero (1993) (story)

I wonder why Marvel is entrusting him with such a major project.

(Reply to this)

BUCK69 writes:
on Jun 25 2009 08:08 AM

I've been saying this for years now: If this isn't done correctly it will be nothing more than a big train wreck and it might very well kill-off a few of the better stand-alone franchises [like Iron Man] that are part of it. Hiring Penn is not what I would call a good sign that Marvel is going about this in the right way. For the record, I'm not a DC Fan or a Marvel hater. I just happen to like good super hero movies. I had the very same concerns with the Justice League.

(Reply to this)

King Thor writes:
on Jun 25 2009 08:45 AM

Man he has written some bombs. I agree with Alex L. I don't understand why Marvel would give probably their biggest movie ever to a guy who is clearly not very good. He is very iffy...X2 and Inc. Hulk were good....others were bad.

(Reply to this)

ARTaylor writes:
on Jun 25 2009 09:26 AM

Whatever he did for Incredible Hulk and X2 he needs to do again. Those were great. Whatever he did for X-Men Last Stand, Fantastic Four, and Electra he needs to not do. Those were crap.

(Reply to this)

The Cunning Linguist writes:
on Jun 25 2009 10:29 AM

I liked The Incredible Hulk. That's about it.

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on Jun 25 2009 11:09 AM

The only positive I see is that INCREDIBLE HULK came from the Marvel paradigm, and working in that environment might do wonders for him if he's indeed given the creative flexibility to tell the story he wants to tell.

(Reply to this)

Zed'sDead writes:
on Jun 25 2009 12:14 PM

This movie is probably going to suck. As it's been noted, his resume is pretty bad, and the one good credit, to me, that he came up with was the story in X2, which is pretty much just a juxtaposition of different X-men comic storylines. As you can see with his other works, dialouge and character development are not his areas of expertise.

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on Jun 25 2009 12:32 PM

In all honesty, I'd rather the scripts for these movies be written by some of the writers that actually work on the comics. I think they have a great sense of the characters, their stories, and by the nature of the medium they work in, they have a strong visual sense as well. A screenwriter could be called in later to assist with some of the differences between media, but I definitely feel like the cart is put before the horse in some cases when it comes to writing comic book adaptations.

(Reply to this)

buddablz writes:
on Jun 25 2009 12:40 PM

In reply to this comment (#2517107)
But I'm not sure if how much of what he's written appeared on screen in the Incredible Hulk. The novelization of the film had some silly elements. What I would guess with no confirmation was that Edward Norton revised most of what we saw. Edward Norton probably developed some of the characterization but left the overall story the same for Zak Penn to get credited.

Nothing he's done would suggest that he's a good storyteller. The only good films are the ones he gets story credit for meaning someone else handle the characterization. I would have better hope if they allowed him to develop a story and have an actual screenwriter write it. I want to see a good story rather than a mash up of superheroes from various blockbuster franchises. I would rather see the characters involved in some kind of story that can be engaging as much as the comics. Not a lot of characters I like showing up just to cover up the fact that there is no story. Compare X2 with the last stand, where they have a bunch of mutants showing up.

(Reply to this)

buddablz writes:
on Jun 25 2009 12:42 PM

In reply to this comment (#2517169)
I agree with Bob S. A comic book writer should contribute to the screenplay

(Reply to this)

Elixor writes:
on Jun 25 2009 01:25 PM

Good buzz kill Alex L. I thought Incredible Hulk was decent in terms of writing (the movie itself I think turned out very well), but the rest ...... Yeeesh. The Avengers has to have a good writer to make a screenplay that will work with this many main characters. I've got close to no confidence that he'll get the job done. Likely a bomb.

(Reply to this)

De4ective Detectiv3 writes:
on Jun 25 2009 02:10 PM

I really don't have any faith in an Avengers movie because I don't think they've done enough to establish a cohesive universe, I think it would just come off as contrived.

It just doesn't feel like these character's world's would relate to each other that well at all. I think its gonna take a little more than Nick Fury popping up in a few movies for them to pull this off.

(Reply to this)

De4ective Detectiv3 writes:
on Jun 25 2009 02:21 PM

Am I the only one here who prefered the first Hulk movie to the second?

Sorry, but I actually liked the fact that the story was deeper. The effects were better, and I just thought Ang Lee got the scale down better. What makes the Hulk so awesome is how massive he is, I like the way in the first Hulk they are constantly juxtaposing him with objects to get his scale across. I kinda thought that was lost in The Incredible Hulk.

I also thought the cast in the first one was much better. I found Eric Bana to be much more believable, he just has this way of conveying his emotion, he seemed alot more tore up inside. Not to mention, horseface mcgee, I mean Liv Tyler, is no replacement for Jennifer Connoley. Then you always have the awesomeness that is Nick Nolte, I really thought his performance was underrated in that movie.

And just the way Ang Lee cuts from scene to scene, I could watch the movie just for that alone. It was very creative how he kind of mocked a comicbook storyboard.

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on Jun 25 2009 03:55 PM

In reply to this comment (#2517228)
@CtrlAltDestroy:
While not alone, I think you're part of a vanishingly small and rather silent minority. I thought Ang's HULK had some strong points, but feel it was the worse movie (both disappointed me, but I think INCREDIBLE HULK was actually decent) for several reasons. Yes, you get some scale for the Hulk in Lee's vision, but some of the action scenes are just silly. The tank-toss, for example, not only looked fake, but *felt* fake. I didn't feel very convinced by the green behemoth in his version, and I prefer the CGI of the later film. I don't think Lee's HULK was particularly deep. It felt like it brushed on some themes of Freudian psychology and repression, of fatherhood and abandonment, but never really explored with a satisfying degree of depth. The movie just lacked coherency on many levels, perhaps the most pointed of which was the villain. Nick Nolte alone? Maybe I could have dealt with that, those silly gamma-dogs aside. He ended up becoming something altogether ludicrous by the end of the film (Hulk fights a cloud!). Josh Lucas? The embodiment of the military industrial complex, the guy who pushes Bana around, but who can't hold a candle to the Hulk physically, again, doesn't hold up too well. General Ross and the full might of the military machine could have worked, but by instead splitting the thrust of the narrative into a three-fold story, none of the results seem entirely satisfactory. After the military captures and attempts to execute Bana, it felt like that should have been the end of the film. Maybe have him turn into Hulk one last time and bound away. Instead, it felt like there was another climax tacked on, almost as if they said, "Hey, we've got another $25 million in the budget - let's film some wild effects shot that doesn't feel like a real payoff to the story!"

The strength of THE INCREDIBLE HULK, I think, lies in the fact that there's a cohesive story and a villain. The narrative isn't doing backflips and trying to juggle the viewpoints of two or three different villains throughout, but rather has Abomination as a product of the initial threat of the military, and the emergence of The Leader at the end. It nicely ties together a couple of different plot lines, though I did find myself wishing for a little more action. There's that scene in the bottling plant where you see almost nothing, the one on the campus, and the battle against Abomination. Between Bana and Norton, I felt like Norton brought something unique to the role, convincingly portraying a guy who is trying very, very desperately to control the beast within. The story also picks up in the middle, and the origin is just a bit of a flashback, whereas Lee's movie is entirely an origin movie and there's a lot of boring exposition.

A couple of things that I did like better about Ang Lee's version: I preferred the explanation that Bruce Banner's father began the genetic alterations that would subsequently be passed onto his son. It's more biologically plausible, but the nanotechnology angle that is later introduced sort of negates the points I'd give it for biotechnological verisimilitude. The other was Jennifer Connolly. Pre-breast reduction, easily one of the most gorgeous women in Hollywood. Even after, miles ahead of Liv Tyler.

(Reply to this)

scifimark writes:
on Jun 25 2009 04:06 PM

Unless I actually read the script i will never rip on a writer without knowing the director. I think its just as important to team up the right writer or writers with the right director. Also there are some directors who are also writers that will severly modify a script and others who make minor tweaks. Personally i think an avengers movie is a disaster waiting to happen in general but thats a seperate issue

(Reply to this)

De4ective Detectiv3 writes:
on Jun 25 2009 04:08 PM

I don't know, the thing that bothered me about 'The Incredible Hulk' was that it was even more over the top then the original Hulk. I think there is still potential to make a great Hulk movie, but they haven't done it yet.

I would just like to see The Hulk toned down a little. He doesn't have to jump over a building, busting through the wall is awesome enough. I felt that in both movies, they could have done a better job of conveying his size, but even more so in 'The Incredible Hulk'.

When you see him performing all these outlandish feets, it just gets cartoony after awhile. If they toned it down a little, it would add a lot more weight to the scenes when he does pick up a tank or hurl a car 100yrds.

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on Jun 25 2009 07:55 PM

In reply to this comment (#2517282)
@CtrlAltDestroy:
Yeah, I agree, the definitive HULK has yet to be made. As I noted, I was a bit disappointed with both versions. I would like to see a story somewhat similar to The Ultimates Vol. 1, where the Avengers' first mission is to put down the Hulk as he rampages through NYC. I think the way that comic book was handled (particularly given Mark Millar's cinematic touch), translating it to film would be relatively easy. They've already shown that they liked Millar's casting for Nick Fury (hell, Fury even says he should be played by Samuel L. Jackson in the comic), so maybe that's the route they're going with it.

(Reply to this)

ColinTheCimmerian writes:
on Jun 25 2009 08:31 PM

Alex L, I was going to make the same post you did. When they first announced Penn would be writing The Avengers, I basically gave up on the project then and there. I definitely think he got the job solely due to the quantity of comic book movies he's been involved in, because I can see absolutely no justification for giving it to him based on the quality of them.
Discounting Last Action Hero (which I actually thought was a nice combination of action and clever satire), the only good movies on his resume are X2 and Incredible Hulk. But here's the thing: he wrote the original treatment. When Norton came on, he basically thought it needed a total overall, and that's exactly what he did. It was Norton who fleshed out the characters and story. Now granted, a lot of what he added ended up getting cut in the end to keep the running time down and the pace up (Marvel was deliberately trying to move away from the more cerebral nature of Lee's film and focus on action), which is why he was denied an official writing credit, but nonetheless, the impression I get is that Penn's script was pretty darn weak.

Similarly, I question if the quality of X2's writing really has anything to do with Penn's involvement. He may have been a part of story conception, but he had Bryan Singer's and David Hayter's help with that, and Singer brought in his own writing team, Dan Harris and Michael Dougherty to write the actual screenplay. I really do hope Marvel brings in some additional writers to supplement whatever crap Penn hacks together, otherwise I don't think we'll be seeing the Avengers movie we're hoping to.

CtrlAltDestroy, I wouldn't say I liked Lee's Hulk better than the latest one, but I definitely think I like it more than the average person; in many ways I thought Lee's version was superior. I appreciated his more cerebral take on the material and thought he did a better job getting into the psychology of Banner and Betty. I also felt Bana and especially Connelly did much better in their respective roles than Norton and Tyler. Then again, I'm madly in love with Jennifer Connelly, so I'm perhaps biased :). But anyway, I thought the Banner in Lee's film really seemed like a haunted, deeply troubled man, whereas in Leterrier's the intensity just wasn't there. Similarly, Connelly's Betty seemed genuinely troubled and torn by what was happening to Banner and equally frustrated by her father's actions and how he and Banner were connected. Tyler's Betty just seemed to go back and forth between looking scared and concerned. I guess Lee's just felt like it had more depth compared to Leterrier's light and breezy version.

Lee's had its flaws though. Josh Lucas's character was over-the-top and just plain annoying and distracting; I hated every second he was on screen. The mutant dogs were similarly over-the-top and just weird. I kinda liked what was done with Nolte's father character, but then that all went to hell in that last bizarre FX scene, which was just too much for me. I agree with Bob that they should have focused on General Ross and the army as the main foe, or the psychotic and eventually super-powered father, but trying to do both just threw the movie into disarray in the last half. Although I felt like Leterrier's film was a little too simple and straightforward, at least it was cohesive. I'm torn about the inclusion of Abomination; having Hulk fight another giant super-strong gamma mutant, essentially an evil version of himself, is kind of an uninspired choice, but at the same time, I did love seeing an all-out brawl between two incredibly powerful beings (something neither Superman Returns nor X-men 3 could provide, much to my disappointment). Iron Man did the same thing, having Iron Man fight another guy in an armored suit. A bigger, scarier armored suit. Really creative.

Anyway, I'd say I prefer the character elements and tone of Lee's movie better, but I thought Leterrier's had much better action and a better plot. In terms of sheer entertainment value, I tend to favour action and story over characterization, so for that reason I'd say I prefer Leterrier's film, but just barely. What I really want to see someday is a combination of the two; a movie that has a strong story and strong characters, and enough satisfying action to keep the adrenaline pumping. Hopefully someday it'll happen.

(Reply to this)

King Thor writes:
on Jun 25 2009 10:58 PM

@ Bob S.

Hey. Great idea. I would love to see some of the actual comic book writers contribute to writing the Avengers. That would be great. It would be really cool to see Marvel hire its own writers from comic books to at least contribute to characterization or writing the story in its movies. I think we could get some truly amazing movies if they did that!

(Reply to this)

RottenRob writes:
on Jun 26 2009 07:08 PM

CtrlAltDestroy,

I'm with you. I prefer Lee's Hulk. Again, it's not perfect, but I think the atmosphere and pacing was much better. I liked Eric Bana a lot. And I also think Hulk looked better in Lee's version. There were a couple moments when he looked a little cartoonish, but overall I thought he was more convincing than in the newer one. The new Hulk looked like a cool video game Hulk to me.

But whatever. I know we're among a relatively small group of people who feel this way.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

The Avengers

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links