Fourth Bourne to be bad?

Sorry for the bad pun in the title, but humor — even when it’s as lame as that — is the only thing holding me in check right now.

Last week, Deadline New York’s Michael Fleming broke the news that Tony Gilroy, who wrote The Bourne Identity, The Bourne Supremacy, and The Bourne Ultimatum, would not only write a fourth film in the series — called The Bourne Legacy — but direct it, as well.

(He previously directed the Julia Roberts/Clive Owen thriller Duplicity and the excellent Michael Clayton starring George Clooney.)

First of all, what else is there to say about the character after Ultimatum‘s perfect ending? Matt Damon said he’d only consider revisiting the character if director Paul Greengrass (who made the last two) would come back, and Greengrass has already said that he wouldn’t do another one, because Damon and Greengrass know what I know, and what you know — we don’t need to sully a perfectly crafted trilogy with a sequel that might not deliver.

Anyway, Jeffrey Wells from Hollywood Elsewhere was contacted by Mr. Gilroy, who didn’t feel Fleming’s article gave him or the project a fair shake. (Why didn’t he just contact Fleming?)

What Gilroy told Wells eases my mind in one direction but confuzzles it in another. Let’s break this thing down.

Gilroy says his “completely original screenplay” shares nothing with the fourth Bourne novel (which was written by a new guy, Eric Van Lustbader, in light of the passing of original Bourne creator Robert Ludlum) but its title.

Which is fine with me — the movies didn’t follow the novels anyway, and Van Lustbader isn’t Robert Ludlum.

(And I don’t mean that in a snarky sense; I’ve not read the book. But the fact remains that Van Lustbader literally is not Ludlum, and he probably took the series in directions that Ludlum might not have. In fact, I’d like to think that Ludlum would have agreed with Damon and Greengrass that the story didn’t need to be continued at all. Just don’t tell Van Lustbader that, as he’s cranked out five new Bourne books at last count.)

“This is not a reboot or a recast or a prequel,” Gilroy continues. “No one’s replacing Matt Damon. There will be a whole new hero, a whole new chapter…this is a stand-alone project.”

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

“”The easiest way to think of it is an expansion or a reveal.”

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

“Jason Bourne will not be in this film, but he’s very much alive. What happened in the first three films is the trigger for what happens. I’m building a legend and an environment and a wider conspiracy … the world we’re making enhances and advances and invites Jason Bourne’s return [down the road].”

It enhances! It advances! It puts terrorists and tyrants in trances! And yet, it doesn’t make me do any dances.

Finally, Gilroy goes for the gold: “Everything you saw in the first three films actually happened, and everyone who got into them will be rewarded for paying attention. We’re going to show you the bigger picture, the bigger canvas. When you see where we’re going and see what we’re doing it’ll be pretty obvious…but Jason Bourne’s activities in the first three films is the immediate trigger.”

This sounds awfully desperate and even a little insulting. I paid attention to the first three movies and was rewarded considerably by the exciting, intelligent path it took to its spectacular ending; it seems like they’re trying awfully hard to milk something better left alone.

That being said, I think Gilroy’s tremendously talented, which in a way makes this even more frustrating, because I wish he’d just write/make another great movie with another great idea rather than mining the Bourne depths again.

At least they’re not rebooting it, right? And will other actors from the films appear? Joan Allen? Julia Stiles? Or will this be brand new from top to bottom?

Whatever, man. I’m still holding out for The Bourne Zoology …

(Be patient. Matt Damon appears near the middle.)

How I’d cast the new Superman movie

Before I begin, I’d like to express the great love I hold in my heart for Tom Welling and Erica Durance, who play Clark Kent and Lois Lane on Smallville. I’d love to see them in a Superman movie with Michael Rosenbaum as Lex Luthor, but it’s just never going to happen, so on we go.

I’ll begin with Clark, Lois, and Zod.

CLARK KENT/SUPERMAN

Jon Hamm. He’s an excellent actor with a powerful screen presence. He’s a man’s man who exudes strength and authority. And I think that’s what you need from Superman.

I don’t want to see a young Clark Kent learning the ropes — we’ve got Smallville for that. I want to see Superman doing Superman things, and that’s why I just can’t imagine anyone under 30 taking the role. (In all fairness, Christopher Reeve was 24 when he first played Superman, but he was an anomaly and able to exude grace and power and goodness far beyond his years.)

Hamm’s performances on this season of Mad Men are his finest yet, and he’s only getting better. But in addition to being a dramatic powerhouse, he’s also shown an incredible flair for comedy on 30 Rock and Saturday Night Live.

And though I know we’ll never see this movie’s Superman interacting with Christian Bale’s Batman, I’d like to think that if they did meet, they’d look believable together. Hamm is the man. There’s just no other choice for me right now.

(And he also just finished working with new Superman director Zack Snyder in Snyder’s upcoming Sucker Punch. which means he’s still fresh in the director’s head.)

LOIS LANE

Carla Gugino! She’s another Zack Snyder favorite, having worked with him in Watchmen and Sucker Punch.

She’s gorgeous, she’s sexy, she’s tough, and she’d look amazing standing next to Hamm.

In my Superman movie, Clark and Lois would already be married.

I don’t want any romantic angst.

I don’t want to feel sorry for Superman.

I want to see why he’s the one superhero who’s really got it all figured out, and his marriage to Lois is a huge part of that.

I’d also heavily utilize Lois and her journalistic skills in the story. While Clark’s battling the bad guys up in the sky, Lois is using her wits to help on the ground. Show us how they work as a team, and show us that the relationship between two happily married thirty-somethings can still be fresh and sexy and romantic.

Carla’s the girl for the job.

If they cast younger, and they probably will, then I’d go with Zooey Deschanel or Alison Brie as Lois, but that would involve recasting my Clark, and like I said, I just can’t bear to think about that yet.

I’d also love to see Rashida Jones as Lois.

GENERAL ZOD

Edward Norton. He’s already said he’d like to be in Christopher Nolan’s next Batman movie, and we know he looks good in a goatee and can bring plenty of charisma and menace.

Other possibilities could be Gerard Butler, who famously played King Leonidas for Snyder in 300, and Oscar Isaac, who’s in Snyder’s Sucker Punch and stole many a scene as King John in Ridley Scott’s recent Robin Hood. Clive Owen would be awesome, too.

If they bring in Ursa and Non (who ravaged Metropolis alongside Zod in Superman II), then Carrie-Anne Moss as Ursa and Michael Clarke Duncan as Non.

You need a Zod who comes across as a dark version of everything Superman could have been, but isn’t. Superman seeks to respect and protect the world that adopted him, while Zod just wants to rule it. And the more moral ambiguity you can work into Zod’s motivations, the better, and an actor of Norton’s caliber would rock that.

And before I close, let’s watch this video of Jon Hamm looking and sounding like Superman:

Yeah. He’s the one.