John Constantine could be heading back to the movies, which raises an entertaining possibility for DC: Its future might look brighter with a man who knows his way around hell. (Maybe all that hellfire and brimstone can illuminate the hallways so he doesn’t stub his toe.)
Deadline reports that DC Studios has tapped Francis Galluppi to write a new John Constantine movie. The filmmaker behind “The Last Stop in Yuma County” and the upcoming “Evil Dead Wrath” has inherited an occult detective whose baggage could keep an airport carousel running until Judgment Day.
The project is in very early development, with DC declining to comment. Good thing your pals at NSN won’t.
Before anyone irons Keanu Reeves‘ tie, his involvement has not been announced. The actor (“The Matrix,” “John Wick”) has a long-discussed sequel of his own, and how this project relates to that film remains unclear. So does its place in the DCU. For now, we have a writer, a character and plenty of room to get ourselves into trouble.
Naturally, Constantine would approve.
The timing invites a question that has followed DC through several regimes, competing visions and enough online warfare to make Darkseid mute his notifications. Why do so many of its most compelling movie prospects appear when somebody turns down the lights?
DC fans keep finding their way into the dark
Think back to walking into Gotham. Director Tim Burton (“Beetlejuice,” “Edward Scissorhands”) made it a place of impossible buildings, industrial grime and people whose real estate agents owed them an explanation. Michael Keaton, the actor known for “Beetlejuice” and “Birdman,” gave that city a Batman who looked perfectly capable of making criminals reconsider their career choices without saying a word.
The darkness had personality and bite. Gotham looked much more campy, but for a fandom that only had Christopher Reeve’s goated Superman, different was wonderful.
Director Christopher Nolan (“Memento,” “Inception”) later invited audiences into a Gotham where organized crime, terrorism and the collapse of public trust could share a summer blockbuster. “The Dark Knight” crossed $1 billion worldwide. People bought tickets to watch Batman wrestle with questions that would make most superhero press conferences uncomfortable.
Then came “Joker,” a descent into humiliation, violence and a city’s indifference that earned nearly $1.08 billion worldwide. By the time director Matt Reeves (“Cloverfield,” “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes”) delivered “The Batman,” Gotham looked as if it developed a drinking problem. That film earned more than $772 million worldwide.
Admit it: Darkness pays off for DC, so why look for sunshine? It seems fans are nocturnal and want to keep it that way.
Those grosses cannot tell us precisely why every customer bought a ticket. They do establish that audiences will follow DC into some thoroughly unpleasant places. There is an appetite here, and it has survived several versions of Batman’s eyeliner.
Constantine could take it somewhere Gotham’s streetlights cannot reach.
Superman brought sunshine, but the lights went out in Gotham
James Gunn, the writer-director behind “Guardians of the Galaxy” and “The Suicide Squad,” offered a warmer invitation with “Superman.” Its earnestness gave fans something hopeful to embrace and detractors something cheerful to throw tomatoes at.
For the latter crowd, all that sunshine landed with a wet, juicy meh.
That response should not become the film’s entire obituary. “Superman” earned about $619 million worldwide, including more than $354 million domestically. Whatever somebody typed beneath a trailer, people did turn up. The movie also cannot reasonably be expected to settle years of arguments about what DC ought to be.
Director Zack Snyder (“300,” “Watchmen”) gave his films a monumental solemnity that continues to inspire fierce loyalty. His admirers found grandeur and sacrifice there; his detractors sometimes looked ready to prescribe Superman a vacation. Replacing one temperament with another was always going to leave somebody standing outside the theater with a grievance.
The more interesting possibility is that DC could stop expecting one temperament to carry the whole enterprise. Superman has reasons to stand in the sunlight. Constantine has reasons to avoid explaining what happened after sunset.
Their differences could make the universe worth exploring. Getting from one world to the other ought to feel like crossing a dangerous neighborhood, with some discovery waiting beyond it.
Constantine has more to offer than a dimmer switch
There is a difference between darkness that gets under your skin and a picture that makes you check the television settings.
Constantine’s appeal starts with the man making the bad decisions. DC’s official character profile describes a grifter and sorcerer whose past has a body count, whose talents include lying and stealing, and whose decency survives beneath considerable self-loathing. His first appearance was in “The Saga of the Swamp Thing” No. 37 in 1985.
Put that man in a room with a desperate stranger, and we already have trouble.
John Constantine might help. He might calculate the price before the stranger knows there is one. The fascination comes from waiting to discover whether his conscience will arrive before somebody else pays for his cleverness.
A supernatural thriller can make those choices frightening in intimate ways. An apartment becomes unsafe. A familiar voice comes from the wrong mouth. Somebody accepts a bargain because grief has made the terms sound reasonable. Heaven and hell can loom over the story while the damage happens across a kitchen table.
That is fertile ground for Galluppi. His assignment brings a filmmaker with a crime thriller behind him and an “Evil Dead” film ahead of him into a character built for dread, desperation and deals going spectacularly wrong.
We have no footage or screenplay to judge his version against. The attraction is the possibility of a Constantine movie willing to sit with an ugly consequence long enough for us to feel it. John can supply the gallows humor himself. He has earned a few coping mechanisms.
Which leads DC fans to one natural and oh, so hopeful conclusion.
There is another door marked Justice League Dark
Follow Constantine far enough, and the possibilities begin to get aggravating. DC has an entire supernatural neighborhood waiting beyond him: Swamp Thing, Zatanna, Deadman and the other characters associated with Justice League Dark.
Director Guillermo del Toro (“Pan’s Labyrinth,” “The Shape of Water”) spent years developing a film around that territory. Discussing the abandoned project on “Happy Sad Confused,” he recalled, “I loved that screenplay; I was in love with [it].” His description included a fleshed-out Swamp Thing, a brief Batman appearance and a chase involving Deadman moving between bodies.
You can almost hear the ticket money leaving somebody’s wallet.
His comments also complicate the fandom trench warfare: Del Toro praised Gunn and said he loved “Superman.” Apparently, a filmmaker can adore monsters and still enjoy watching somebody rescue the world in primary colors. We may need to alert the internet.
A new Constantine film would not automatically revive that screenplay or announce a team movie. What it could do is establish an audience’s interest in this part of DC, allowing another story to emerge from a world people already want to revisit.
That is a more inviting prospect than watching a promising character spend his first movie assembling somebody else’s sequel.
Could Constantine leave the lights on?
DC’s history gives us enough evidence to take the darker possibilities seriously. It also gives us “Joker: Folie à Deux,” a reminder that returning to a bleak world does not guarantee anybody will enjoy the trip. The sequel’s musical detours supplied plenty of additional ammunition.
The shadows still need a story.
Constantine has one built into him: a man who understands evil, contributes his share of it and occasionally drags himself toward doing something decent. We can recognize that struggle without knowing a single spell. His victories might be compromised, his methods appalling, but the possibility that he could choose better keeps us watching.
Perhaps that is where the dark-to-light argument becomes most interesting. A little goodness can look extraordinary when it survives somewhere it has every reason to disappear.
As we explored in our look at the filmmakers guiding “The Batman: Part II,” preserving a world’s particular vision gives audiences something worth caring about. Constantine deserves that same attention to the things that make his world dangerous, strange and occasionally human.
DC could find a brighter future down there. First, somebody has to get John out of development hell. By now, he really ought to know the way.
Add us as a preferred source on Google.