Comment on Marvel calls for more reshoots on ‘Captain America: Brave New World’ after failed test screening
TOModera@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Looked up the director, and can’t say I have seen anything beyond Cloverfield Paradox, which didn’t wow me. So maybe hiring someone who didn’t really do any work for 4 years didn’t make an interesting movie? This whole project seems like someone hated Falcon and Winter Soldier and vowed to make it so terrible that no one will ever watch it again.
It seemed like an easy bunt of a movie: Make a 90s political thriller (like they did with Winter Soldier) and call it a day. Yet here we are, a lackluster release. Just scrap it for taxes.
Looked up the director, and can’t say I have seen anything beyond Cloverfield Paradox
That’s because there’s only one other film since. He might have been working on thus since, I suppose, but what I don’t get is how anyone saw the mediocre Cloverfield Paradox and thought “that’s our guy!” However, I suppose that’s why they call him the “director” in the article as he’s just the frontman.
IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
One of the problems Disney has is that they want total control over their movies so they only hire directors who will churn out product and not push back.
Those kind of directors seldom make good movies.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
They still hire some solid directors and then end up with a movie where the best parts are the director’s vision and the worst parts are those that he execs stuffed in, like most movies.
IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
That’s kind of what I’m saying. Any director working for them has to be OK with the studio taking their movie and fucking around with it, they don’t get to kick up a fuss.
That automatically excludes a whole bunch of really talented directors who actually might make something worth watching if the studio wasn’t so meddlesome.
TachyonTele@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
Which all so sad since the movie that started it all was completely left alone and up to the director.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Taiki Waititi? Sam Raimi? James Gunn?
I mean I get what you’re going for, but I would say that they’ve given the reign to some directors who are definitely allowed a little bit of freedom (in Waittiti’s case probably too much), and whose films outside of Disney are generally well regarded and are not considered directors who “churn out product.”
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
They get more slack. But you can practically see the moment the Disney executive walks into the room, in Dr Strange 2, and starts making decisions over Raimi’s head.
Waititi figured out how to go with the flow and still churn good stuff in Love and Thunder. But so much of what he did was a deliberate subversion of Disney tropes, it feels like he hoodwinked the producers.
On the flip side, his series “Reservation Dogs” feels like something Disney would have put out thirty years ago, but has completely forgotten how to do anymore.
And because I’m in the mood to fight, I’m going to say Guardians (particularly 3) is highly overrated.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Big ups for Reservation Dogs, agreed. I actually also agree about the Guardians movies being overrated, but they’re still fun little romps. Gunn’s most subversive days are long past.
IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Oh, I absolutely do not begrudge anyone getting a paycheck, we all need to eat.
I don’t think any of the directors you mentioned would push back against studio interference though. There are directors who will trade control for a paycheck and there are ones who won’t. The ones who won’t often make more interesting movies.
Cort@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Image