|
Wan leaving may not become the case, but losing two directors for the exact same reason in under a year is concerning as hell.
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 16:07 |
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:Wan leaving may not become the case, but losing two directors for the exact same reason in under a year is concerning as hell. Then Marvel should fall apart any minute, with driving away at least 3 directors and all.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
How bad of a work environment does it have to be for one of the best action directors in the business currently working to quit your project. I mean seriously I can't think of a more perfect pairing than Michelle MacLaren and Wonder Woman, and WB really loving sunk that one. Hopefully Marvel picked her up for Captain Marvel.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
He didn't. The bad director they hired for the Flash that made everyone wonder what the gently caress they were thinking quit.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
If you're very generous, those Guy Ritchie Sherlock Holmes films are almost superhero movies, aren't they? Stick a pair of pointy ears and a cape on Robert Downey Jr., move it from London to Gotham City and swap Watson, Adler and Moriarty out for Alfred, Talia and Ra's al Ghul and you have the makings of the "world's greatest detective" take on Batman that fans sometimes clamour for. Interesting that the second one had Moriarty enacting basically the same plot he had in the LXG movie - starting World War I a decade early and profiting by selling advanced weaponry to both sides.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:Then Marvel should fall apart any minute, with driving away at least 3 directors and all. In that short a span of time? And how many of them dropped out prior to production verses "elected not to come back"? I can only think of Edgar Wright.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
I believe Alan Taylor had a falling out with them over Thor 2, but he finished the movie first. Did they have a problem with Joe Johnston? I don't remember. I feel as though I remember hearing there were problems between them and Joe Johnston.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
It cant have been too bad, since he did an episode of Agent Carter.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:In that short a span of time? And how many of them dropped out prior to production verses "elected not to come back"? I can only think of Edgar Wright. And with everything coming out of Marvel it sounds like with Perlmutter out of the picture on the movie side, everyone who at one point was like "Nah I'm done with this poo poo when my deal is up"(Chris Evans, RDJ etc etc) are now like "Sure lets make some more loving movies". Favreau has spoken up recently about how he wouldn't be against directing another Marvel movie.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:It cant have been too bad, since he did an episode of Agent Carter. I'm probably mistaken anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:In that short a span of time? And how many of them dropped out prior to production verses "elected not to come back"? I can only think of Edgar Wright. If you're just counting "creative differences" for reasons directors left than Thor 2 lost two directors prior to shooting. Thor 1's director Kenneth Branagh left prior to Thor 2 starting because of "creative differences", Patty Jenkins signed on, then left for "creative differences". Ava DuVernay turned down directing Black Panther citing "creative differences". E: Alan Taylor left after completing Thor 2. He says Marvel ignored him in the cutting room, but has expressed interest in assembling a Director's Cut. MacheteZombie fucked around with this message at 21:27 on May 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:If you're just counting "creative differences" for reasons directors left than Thor 2 lost two directors prior to shooting. Thor 1's director Kenneth Branagh left prior to Thor 2 starting because of "creative differences", Patty Jenkins signed on, then left for "creative differences". Ava DuVernay turned down directing Black Panther citing "creative differences". Using Ava DuVernay is a bit disingenuous. She had never even signed on to officially do it. She walked away before any ink was signed.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
I had no idea about any of that, see. Thank you for educating me. Everything I'd heard about Ava Duvernay said that she'd never fully signed on, though. That it was just talking about the direction and possibility of it. I dunno if that was wrong or not. Nodosaur fucked around with this message at 21:36 on May 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Using Ava DuVernay is a bit disingenuous. She had never even signed on to officially do it. She walked away before any ink was signed. They had several group talks and went into details about how the movie would play out, and she didn't agree with their vision. That is "creative differences" in my book. TFRazorsaw posted:I had no idea about any of that, see. Thank you for educating me. No, you're right about her not signing on officially, but she did cite "creative differences" as the reason she didn't sign on. "I'm not signing on to direct Black Panther. I think I’ll just say we had different ideas about what the story would be. Marvel has a certain way of doing things and I think they’re fantastic and a lot of people love what they do. I loved that they reached out to me... In the end, it comes down to story and perspective. And we just didn't see eye to eye. Better for me to realize that now than cite creative differences later." She basically says "I'll take creative differences now rather than later" e: And just to point out, I specifically said she turned down the chance. MacheteZombie fucked around with this message at 21:32 on May 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:I had no idea about any of that, see. Thank you for educating me. She essentially walked into a job interview, got to the second interview, and realized that she wouldn't have been a good fit for company culture and removed herself from consideration. quote:I'm not signing on to direct Black Panther. I think I’ll just say we had different ideas about what the story would be. Marvel has a certain way of doing things and I think they’re fantastic and a lot of people love what they do. I loved that they reached out to me.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Marvel can afford those losses. Edgar Wright leaving Ant-Man and Ava DuVernay turning down the gig in the first place is fine because they have a thematically coherent and built universe that can survive the shuffling of directors on any one movie. Also, it's a real stretch to say the latter's even the case, considering directors are courted to helm projects until their creative vision is at odds with the vision of the studio. It happens all the time, it's not a unique thing, and saying it's some damning thing for Marvel's process is...let's say, a bit exaggerated. DuVernay had nothing but positive things to say about her dealings with Marvel Studios, which even if it's what she would of course say doesn't betray any malice or hurt feelings. And the trade was arguably a trade up, considering Marvel ended up hooking the director of one of the best films of 2015 and, tonally speaking, works better with the ideals of BP than DuVernay. Coogler's an awesome legacy director; he made a loving Rocky spin-off that's only exceeded in quality by the original, and that's arguable. He's an awesome choice for BP.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:They had several group talks and went into details about how the movie would play out, and she didn't agree with their vision. That is "creative differences" in my book. MacheteZombie posted:Then Marvel should fall apart any minute, with driving away at least 3 directors and all. You initially said driven away. Coming to a mutual agreement, and realization that it wouldn't be a good fit beforehand is a bit different than someone being driven away after they have already started production on the movie.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Marvel can afford those losses. Edgar Wright leaving Ant-Man and Ava DuVernay turning down the gig in the first place is fine because they have a thematically coherent and built universe that can survive the shuffling of directors on any one movie. Also, it's a real stretch to say the latter's even the case, considering directors are courted to helm projects until their creative vision is at odds with the vision of the studio. It happens all the time, it's not a unique thing, and saying it's some damning thing for Marvel's process is...let's say, a bit exaggerated. DuVernay had nothing but positive things to say about her dealings with Marvel Studios, which even if it's what she would of course say doesn't betray any malice or hurt feelings. I don't think it's a killer for either DC or Marvel. I was just pointing out to TZR that it is not an issue only facing DC. Marvel and DC, and probably any "cinematic universe" is going to face these kinds of issues. Hunger Games ditched the director after the first movie, Star Wars specifically planned on switching directors, and I'm sure if I googled a bit I could find more examples. It's just one of those things that's going to happen.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
In contrast DCEU has two movies to its credit, both of which were mixed bags at best, and they've been having creative troubles for the better part of a year. Losing directors is really really bad for DC in a way that it's not for Marvel, because the brand can survive a bad movie or one with a troubled development. gently caress, look at Ant-Man. It's an Ant-Man movie, and not only that but one with a super rocky development history. And it was still a critical and financial success. If Marvel can make Ant-Man into a genuine hit, then they can survive some creative reshuffling. Can DC say the same? Because I'd argue no. If Wonder Woman is a critical failure and financial disappointment in the same way BvS was, WB's in a ton of hot water when it comes to brand continuation.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Dexo posted:You initially said driven away. Coming to a mutual agreement, and realization that it wouldn't be a good fit beforehand is a bit different than someone being driven away after they have already started production on the movie. MacheteZombie posted:If you're just counting "creative differences" for reasons directors left than Thor 2 lost two directors prior to shooting. Thor 1's director Kenneth Branagh left prior to Thor 2 starting because of "creative differences", Patty Jenkins signed on, then left for "creative differences". Ava DuVernay turned down directing Black Panther citing "creative differences". Toxxupation posted:In contrast DCEU has two movies to its credit, both of which were mixed bags at best, and they've been having creative troubles for the better part of a year. Losing directors is really really bad for DC in a way that it's not for Marvel, because the brand can survive a bad movie or one with a troubled development. gently caress, look at Ant-Man. It's an Ant-Man movie, and not only that but one with a super rocky development history. And it was still a critical and financial success. If Marvel can make Ant-Man into a genuine hit, then they can survive some creative reshuffling. Can DC say the same? Because I'd argue no. If Wonder Woman is a critical failure and financial disappointment in the same way BvS was, WB's in a ton of hot water when it comes to brand continuation. If you mean this specific iteration of the DCEU than sure, MAYBE, DC might have something to talk internally about. If something catastrophic actually killed this current DCEU I am comfortable saying DC will make more movies with their IP and be successful. Marvel on the other hand, struggled with success in movies until their MCU took off. MacheteZombie fucked around with this message at 21:43 on May 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:I don't think it's a killer for either DC or Marvel. I was just pointing out to TZR that it is not an issue only facing DC. Marvel and DC, and probably any "cinematic universe" is going to face these kinds of issues. Hunger Games ditched the director after the first movie, Star Wars specifically planned on switching directors, and I'm sure if I googled a bit I could find more examples. It's just one of those things that's going to happen. Hunger Games was a smash hit that was a creative success. Not only that but it's a contained universe. Plus there's a difference between switching directors and having them quit mid-development, one implies that your studio leadership and creative direction is faulty, too restrictive, or both. This is problematic for DC when they're in the middle of creating a brand. They're not like Star Wars, which always switched directors anyways, or Marvel, because both of those have incredibly strong cinematic brands that can survive creative issues. WB realistically can't. They need success, and they need stability, and they need it fast. They have neither.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
Directors drop out of superhero films a lot. It's basically a rite of passage and could mean any number of things. That said, Ava DuVernay on Black Panther never got past preliminary talks and was never even officially confirmed (edit: okay I see everyone has mentioned this but I'm gonna mention it anyway  ), and we can't really compare Grahame-Smith and MacLaren leaving a production in development with Marvel directors like Branagh and Taylor who...y'know...did their jobs and finished their films with Marvel. I mean, we could, but then we can see that they're not really that comparable. The former suggests that production is going through internal issues, while the latter suggests that internal issues didn't really deter the production.And then you have to consider that the DCEU doesn't really have that many films out in the first place and these two are, well, the first ones that aren't directed by Snyder. Again, it could mean any number of things, but it's tough to put a positive spin on it...other than it being a good thing that an inexperienced director like Grahame-Smith is being shuffled out for someone "better," I suppose, but then, why seek him out in the first place?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
I bet Kevin Smith would direct the Flash movie for free
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
The weird thing about the creative differences with Seth Grahame-Smith is that supposedly they're still using the script he wrote. So if that's the case what were the differences? The real answer is that there probably weren't any and they just didn't want to risk another poorly received film because they chose a guy who's never directed anything but an episode of some random MTV show.Rurea posted:I bet Kevin Smith would direct the Flash movie for free Think of all the daily videos of him weeping on set.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:If you mean this specific iteration of the DCEU than sure, MAYBE, DC might have something to talk internally about. If something catastrophic actually killed this current DCEU I am comfortable saying DC will make more movies with their IP and be successful. Marvel on the other hand, struggled with success in movies until their MCU took off. Marvel didn't make movies until Iron Man, and even that was co-produced with Paramount. And yeah, of course, DC's gonna keep making movies. I'm speaking about the DCEU, which needs to be creatively and financially successful in the same way the MCU was to continue. Marvel built a brand with the MCU and now can comfortably reap the rewards for possibly decades at this point. WB and DC in specific are scrambling to replicate that success, mostly via an all-in tactic and relying completely on Zack Snyder for their creative vision. And now they're at the point where, unless the solo projects start bearing fruit, they could be looking at a universe reboot barely five or so years into it.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Hunger Games was a smash hit that was a creative success. Not only that but it's a contained universe. Plus there's a difference between switching directors and having them quit mid-development, one implies that your studio leadership and creative direction is faulty, too restrictive, or both. Big budget franchises often change director for various reasons, and it doesn't actually impact a film/franchise's success/failure nearly as much as people on the internet seem to think. As BrianWilly pointed out, DC has only lost 1 director and has only put out 2 movies. Claiming the sky is falling right now for DC over a change in directors is silly hyperbole.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
X-O posted:The weird thing about the creative differences with Seth Grahame-Smith is that supposedly they're still using the script he wrote. So if that's the case what were the differences? The real answer is that there probably weren't any and they just didn't want to risk another poorly received film because they chose a guy who's never directed anything but an episode of some random MTV show. Movies are director-led over screenwriter-led, and the way studios work on scripts with the customary hiring of a couple of in-house writers to rework or smooth out anything the studio doesn't like means that Grahame-Smith's name on it doesn't really mean anything.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Movies are director-led over screenwriter-led, and the way studios work on scripts with the customary hiring of a couple of in-house writers to rework or smooth out anything the studio doesn't like means that Grahame-Smith's name on it doesn't really mean anything. Yeah, but I still don't buy creative differences as a reason for him leaving. I think it's clearly they just want a name director because they feel they need to have it done right. Creative differences is just a cop out to make him look better because they wanted to dump him.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Here's fun. What are: a) Cemetery Man/Dellamorte Dellamore b) Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990) and Mystery Men c) Blankman and The Incredibles
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
X-O posted:Yeah, but I still don't buy creative differences as a reason for him leaving. I think it's clearly they just want a name director because they feel they need to have it done right. I'm very curious to see who gets to direct it.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:Claiming the sky is falling right now for DC over a change in directors is silly hyperbole. Nobody's saying that. And yes, creative vision being so in flux can absolutely negatively impact a fledgling brand, which is the point. Think of all the very bad Fantastic Four movies, the most recent of which was plagued with production issues. The most recent one was a massive creative and financial failure because the F4 as a brand is in the loving toilet. In contrast, look at Creed, which took a brand that had been sullied for a long time and, as a spinoff, revitalized it to massive financial success. Creative direction matters when establishing a brand, because it engenders audience trust. Heck, you can even see it with BvS. Technically speaking it was a "success", but after its first weekend ticket sales plummeted because everyone decided to stay the gently caress away. It underperformed in Asia as well, because the narrative had already run away from it - it was a "Bad Movie", whether or not you agree, and profits suffered as a result.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
Jamesman posted:a) Cemetery Man/Dellamorte Dellamore fuckin love that movie redbackground fucked around with this message at 22:11 on May 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Here's fun. What are: a) A History of Violence or Road to Perdition b) Rocketeer or Mystery Men c) Eliminators or The Incredibles
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
redbackground posted:I had that as my first answer initially. Didn't think it really fit the question, though. that movie is amazing, I've subjected nearly all of my friends to it at some time or another
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
a) Dredd / Popeye b) Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles / Hellboy c) The Incredibles / Unbreakable
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Here's fun. What are: For a) or b) I want to say the first TMNT film, which it falls into depends on if you consider them "superheroes" or not. I am going to consider them non-superheros and say that's my a) b) I kind of want to cheat and say Project A-ko or Kamen Rider or something  c) I quite liked Mercury Man, although it's been years since I've seen it now. I also wanted to work Tank Girl into this list somewhere but it didn't seem to quite fit.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 22:55
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Here's fun. What are: a) Dredd b) TMNT c) Super
|
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Marvel can afford those losses. Edgar Wright leaving Ant-Man and Ava DuVernay turning down the gig in the first place is fine because they have a thematically coherent and built universe that can survive the shuffling of directors on any one movie. Also, it's a real stretch to say the latter's even the case, considering directors are courted to helm projects until their creative vision is at odds with the vision of the studio. It happens all the time, it's not a unique thing, and saying it's some damning thing for Marvel's process is...let's say, a bit exaggerated. DuVernay had nothing but positive things to say about her dealings with Marvel Studios, which even if it's what she would of course say doesn't betray any malice or hurt feelings.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
Akira would also work for a)
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 16:07 |
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Look at Creed, which took a brand that had been sullied for a long time and, as a spinoff, revitalized it to massive financial success. It would be fairer to say Rocky Balboa laid down a lot of the work to restoring the series' reputation. It's doubtful Creed would have even gotten made if Rocky V was people's last lingering memory of the character/property.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:47
|
|