During publicity for her latest release, Love and Other Drugs, Anne Hathaway told the LA Times that she's ready to take a break from romantic comedies ("I think I've exhausted that muscle") and insists instead that she wants to fly a spaceship. "And I want to shoot a laser into some intergalactic goop."
It's possible that Anne may get her wish.
Superman: Man of Steel may have a director, Zack Snyder, but it does not yet have a hero. Avoiding famous names and seeking an unknown aged '28 to 32', it is clear that the film's centre, the Man of Steel himself, Clark Kent, may be hard to find. Lois Lane could be less of a challenge.
What's Playing today claimed that the film's action would take place in West Africa amongst warring tribes. In the same article, they also dropped the name of Anne Hathaway as a possible candidate for Lois Lane.
With filming tentatively scheduled for June 2011, Anne Hathaway's schedule may be compatible, but it may be more pertinent to ask why Hathaway would wish to take a subordinate role in a movie that makes no apologies for focusing on the man in the tights. The role is comparable with that taken by another Oscar nominee, Maggie Gyllenhaal, who replaced Katie Holmes as Batman's feisty but doomed love interest Rachel in The Dark Knight. That was a role in which she could never be anything more than a weapon used against the hero. Nevertheless, Gyllenhaal accepted that, grasped it with both hands and gave it everything she had. It also meant that she could do a major film while working for just a few days at a time when she had recently had a baby. Hathaway does not share that post natal motivation.
An unknown young actor has yet to be selected for the role of Clark Kent, but will be. Does that mean that he needs a well-known and respected actress to support him? And, if he does, what would be the incentive? It's unlikely that she would be the one shooting the laser into the intergalactic gloop.