Love the show, but Mr. Rob continues to be the best part of this show. His insight and input are always well explained and understood. You learn from his discussions and he provides great examples. I hope he gets even more time to speak
I agree with Rob. Marvel doesn’t have studio interference. Marvel has the creative control at the end of the day. Studio interference is what DC did to Justice League by having a new director reshoot a lot of the movie or Suicide Squad and have a trailer company re edit the movie. One is studio interference, the other is studio intervention.
Greatly said here. The other point they made on Feige produces a lot of these movies really ensures a culture of consistency and also consistency in quality that keeps bringing people back to see a Marvel movie.
People forget Chadwick’s untimely passing, the Fox purchase, the uncertainty of the Sony/Spidey deal etc have all had significant impacts on the MCU moving forward. Marvel is just repositioning themselves to have the best continuity/content they can provide.
Very interesting debate here over what constitutes studio interference. In the specific case of Marvel Studios, I have to side with Rob on this one. It all boils down to the fact Kevin Feige is creative and not just a suit and that directors sign up for these movies knowing that they are highly collaborative efforts. While John’s observation of a double standard for studio interference is initially amusing, it completely ignores the context as to why that is the case.
I feel like people r too easily freaked out and manipulated without understanding the whole situation, just look like the comments below it’s just hilarious and sad
Right. Marvel Studios is not Sony Pictures Entertainment and Feige is no idiot. He knows what he is doing and what he wants. These all all Feige’s movies and the directors execute his vision.
@@davadh saying Thor 3 was "Pretty bad" couldn't be farther from the truth. That totally revitalized the Thor character and whatever changes or "interferences" were made were 100% worth it and even Chris Hemsworth stated to have more fun with the character on the 3rd film, so your claim is probably a 1 in a billion occurrence.
Yet again, I side with Rob with this one. I can see where he's coming from. I think if a director comes in to direct a Marvel Studios movie, that director already knows that it's going to be more of a collaboration with the studio. I would assume that Feige already speaks with the director and even plans things out with the director...the director knows for sure that their vision won't be 100% executed because there is an understanding set in place with the studio, therefore, it's not interference...in my opinion at least.
I hate it when john completely misses the point that ROB is making! Yes its all interference, but what the fans are complaining about is BAD interference (non creative/ corporate decisions) SO YES JOHN!! its all interference, but when fans complain, the y are complaining about corporate interference, fans accept the marvel changes because they are usually creative interference.
It's more collaborative than interference. If you're working as a team all towards one goal then its a collab. When you're supposed to have autonomy, working on your own, doing your own thing with your own vision and that gets usurped by a higher power then that is interference. There is a clear difference.
To follow on Rob's show runner analogy, if a director of an episode of a TV show in the middle of the season is told they need to make some changes, remove a scene, add a scene, because of things that will be happening later in the season, I don't think anyone would call that "interference".
John couldn’t be more wrong comparing the Edgar wright situation and the David Ayer situation. Justice league/ suicide squad were already shot and then there was MASSIVE reshoots and rewrites. Joker pulled out, flash ruined, darkseid pulled out and the list goes on. Marvel is more of a collaboration, they will part ways with directors before it even gets to that point because they make it clear that you will not have full creative control. John off the mark here…
John can you just let Rob have one for crying out loud why is it always your way or the highway slingshot him in the first for once I'm starting to think it's a weird pride issue because Rob makes a lot of good points and you shut it down immediately just my take love the show
What people need to remember is that Marvel runs their movies like they do their books, like a publisher. Writers on books have an editor. Feige is the editor. Editors keep the continuity of the overall story consistent with the larger connected universe. It's not strange that a studio that specializes in comic book movies, runs their comic book movies like their comic book publishing. They're effectively translating their comic book universe to screen. That's why it's effective.
My personal definition of “studio interference” is when a director is hired under the assumption they have complete creative control over the content/edit of the final cut of the film, but then the studio takes that away from them and does their own “cut” for the release etc…I think Alien 3 would be a prime example of my definition.
To me John is completely and utterly wrong on this one. Interference is when the studio and director agree on the movie, then in the middle of filming the studio goes back on their word and take control of the filming/editing, not when from the get go the director knows that their movie is part of universe and may have to change some things to fit in it. One has nothing to do with the other. Also the example of Ant-Man with Edgar Wright is terrible, as this was started years before the MCU became what it was at that time and Edgar was not interested on where this was going, so they amicably decided to go their own way, this happened because of how long it took Edgar, not because Marvel blindsided him.
Rob immediately hit it on the nail! Kevin Feige and Marvel aren't like other studios; They operate more like classic studios and producers did, i.e. Showrunners and the like. There's a reason why the Marvel movies are starting to say "A Kevin Feige Production", that's because we're not only going for the MCU and the cinematic universe that's been built, but we're also going to see more of Kevin's vision and story play out. You don't want go to see Morbius to get some executives "vision" of it, but unfortunately that's what happens with other studios. Kevin Feige is a one of a kind, visionary producer who's fanbase is the same as the ones who go for the MCU new releases.
I have to side with Rob on this one, John is trying to push a "the end justifies the means" narrative while leaving aside the importance of communication between the different parts of a project, which honestly is relatable in any setting
Yes, technically they're both studio interference. But I think the main difference is that Kevin Feige is actually an artist himself with a vision. Whereas a lot of interference from other studios they're from executives making changes based on "financial interest" rather than artistic / storytelling vision. Like WB changing Snyder's vision is because they think a "lighter" movie will get more people to watch it & make more money - not because it will make the movie better. And usually those interference based on financial interest end up having poor results due to them making the product worse. So they're both interference but they come from different intent.
Completely agree on the part where the distinction is the executives deterring the director from his/her intended creative vision to satisfy the studios own financial interests. Though I wouldn’t consider someone like Feige to be interference bc it’s obvious by now, directors sign on to a pre-existing cohesive storyline and is going to be limited on what they want to do bc the story is ultimately decided by Feige. The directors are more so there to execute his vision.
Rob made a great point about collaboration that reminded me of something we've already known about Kevin Feige. He hires directors because he considers them to be great storytellers. He has been known to say that a great storyteller is a great storyteller. That said, so many of the MCU directors (besides Raimi) have had no experience with gigantic films until they join the MCU. Additionally, MCU movies need to have a certain amount of continuity with the other MCU movies. Marvel provides the machine that already knows how to take care of all of that. Just plug the director into the machine. If you rely too much on the vision of the directors without a unifying central vision, then you can end up with the lack of continuity we got with the Star Wars sequel trilogy films. Feige has the grand overview.
@@festo8756 There’s no evidence that the Star Wars directors were given much guidance from above as far as overarching themes. JJ Abrams made his Ep. 7, then Rian Johnson pitched his own story for Ep. 8. Abrams comes back for Ep. 9 after the fact, needing to find a way to tie up what Rian Johnson did. Every production has producers and/or show runners, but they don’t always exert the same influence.
@@nicksmith2010 I was talking about the original trilogy under George Lucas. He would set up lore in one film then contradict himself in the next film. Can you explain that?
@Joshua Munna new hope: Obi wan talking about lightsaber: "your father wanted me to give you this when you were old enough" Empire : Yoda:" too old to begin the training" Which one is it? How old do you have to be to start training as a Jedi?
Is it just me or John have difficulty agreeing with another person opinion or view on a topic or subject.? In my opinion Rob had a very good point about how Marvel handle their movies.
@@Kuoropoika1 I know , it just sometimes you have to admit that even if you don't agree entirely with the other person they may have a point. Love the show, dont get me wrong. We all have different opinions and that's what makes it fun.
John is ignoring a lot of context here and honestly it's a bit annoying. He is like a dog with a bone when he keeps pursuing a point just because he wants to hear someone acknowledge that he is "right". "Studio interference" is such a broad term and these scenarios are all different.
in this type of business there must always be concessions from both the studio and the director and their respective team but it is fair (whether it is a good idea or a bad idea) that the last word belongs to the studio because the investment is theirs so this champion jonh finally earned more by being quiet but anyway, as he is an insider, he has a hot back but that can't and shouldn't be worth everything, that is, he arrests marvel for having a dog as he arrests him for not having the belief that he will go there and impose himself and he ends up being fired, finally his problem and a lot of people don't is to criticize we can and should all criticize but you have to know how to do it and have common sense or at least the least common sense and respect the director's team and respective studio because if it weren't for them (I'm talking in general not only of marvel of course) a lot of its visibility and relevance as an insider would go down the drain and become a speaker which is not bad on the contrary but it would lose a lot of interest there so don't try to find negative points but positive ones about the negatives use them as a stimulus or plot holes I see them as something stimulating that is me when I come across plot holes mentally I am creative and make it make sense in some way in my head for example in the way home I did not fall in love with the film but after being creative using the power of the mind that we should all use I managed to see beyond the obvious, that is, I didn't reduce myself to what the film presented to me but I saw more and now I'm in love with the film... all movies have plot holes if they didn't have it I wouldn't see it because they wouldn't make me think to question and evolve...be happy
Studio interference is usually bad because there tends to be too many cooks in the kitchen, or the people giving notes don't really understand the film but force changes they think will make the film more "marketable". What Kevin is doing is different. You have to think of the MCU as a tapestry of films. He is as instrumental as any person in the backround and frankly IS the most important person. He may not be writing the scripts but he's certainly behind the scenes coming up with the ideas and the direction. So when he makes a decision, you can certainly call it studio interference, but to me it feels like a completely different thing. He understands what is going on on a micro-detail level. Most people in other studios sending down mandates to the director are probably not nearly as familiar with the material at hand as someone like Kevin is. So when he makes a decision, it feels like it has a real purpose.
See usually w/ other studios I’d be more worried, but w/ marvel it’s different. Like Bruce Campbell said, they’re making 8 projects (probably more) at a time that all somewhat have to either connect or at least maintain continuity & not screw things up, so to me it sounds like stuff they add or takeaway is more for continuity reasons not so much creative reasons (although I’m sure they still have some restrictions, as all major blockbusters do). Also this is kind of the norm for marvel films, they constantly work on these until they’re satisfied, and that can be right up until release sometimes. This isn’t some 5-10 million dollar indie film where directors essentially have complete freedom, every major blockbuster is going to have some input or direction from the studio, for me I’m just glad it’s feige & the other marvel producers rather than Sony & WB executives bc at least feige feels like he’s also a creative who generally knows what he’s doing. Even Robert Eggers had to take notes from the studio which he doesn’t usually have to do bc the Northman had cost much more than his prev films. If anyone was actually expecting marvel to just give ultimate control and free reigns to raimi to do whatever he wanted with one of their most popular characters and their most important film since endgame which probably cost $300+ million w/ marketing, they were sadly mistaken from the beginning lol. Marvel isn’t perfect but when it comes to comic book films, I don’t get as nervous when they give studio notes compared to when another studio does.
This has literally happened with every mcu project whether if it's for better or worse. So while I understand some people's worries especially with raimis history with marvel with Spiderman 3, the film should honestly be fine atp and should turn out solid from a quality standpoint.
It’s interesting you guys brought up James Gunn because he has gone on record saying that he does get full creative control when he makes a movie for Marvel. Idk if every director gets that treatment but Fiege has worked with Raimi before on the Spider-Man films & Raimi is a well respected director whose a great collaborator & a king of pacing. I’m less worried because Kevin Fiege has massive respect for Sam Raimi & these are two men who work really well together. Also, even if the movie got changed from what Raimi wanted, when you sign up for a Marvel movie, you know what might happen yet you still sign up. All I can say is, let’s wait for the movie to come out & see what they wanna show us.
The difference between collaboration and interference might seem subtle but it's an important distinction. Collaboration is working together to make the best project possible. Interference is something mandated solely without collaboration.
In terms of the "semantics" of studio interference, I think the better term to use is MICROMANAGING or UNILATERAL DECISION making which isn't the same as collaboration. I do think that directors that have left Marvel projects like Patty Jenkins and Edgar wright have very unique visions for movies that they make and they prefer to hash out all the details of the movie being made in the pre-production and negotiation phases. Wright and Jenkins aren't typically conventional directors in the visions they have for a film, which doesn't always fit in a corporate machine like Marvel Studios.
The word “interference” in its self has a negative connotation to it so I believe Robs point of disagreeing on the studio interference matter is more so towards the basis of the actual word interfering because to interfere is to impede something or change something not wanted.
Edgar wright never shot any footage it's completely different. they didn't edit out anything he did and use any of his footage. Ayer and Snyder were replaced during production Ayer not even technically replaced.
Lol they did this since the first Avenger. After the premiere, they shot the restaurant scene. Also, it’s really easy to “reshoot” scenes if 90% of the movie is shot on a green screen and pretty much all of the assests is made ready for rendering.
I am very worried about multiverse of madness… 1. Early reports indicated 3 hour film, now under 2 hours. 2. Very late and extensive reshoots. 3. Directorial changes. 4. Delayed. 5. Reports of extra cameos being shot? 6. Close friend of Rami, taking passive aggressive shots at marvel. 7. Negative early test screenings.
Only the last two stand out to me Most films cut huge portions of what's been filmed, three hours down to two? Sounds about right. Late reshoots are common on every marvel film. I'd have to know what you mean by extensive. I mean forty percent of rogue one was reshot, back to the future fired their lead and had to reshoot everything they'd done up till then. Look up reshoots. Lots of movies with massive reshoots have been wildly successful. The only thing that matters is how the movie turned out. There was no relevant directorial change. Movie that are already being filmed like Solo (or Wizard of Oz or Superman 2...) and change directors are very concerning. This movie switched to Sam Raimi from Scott Derrickson long before it ever began filming or even the script was finished All the people who made this movie were on the same page before filming began, and remain the people in charge at this time I don't see how cameos matter But I'll give you Campbell being a little spicy would be concerning if he seemed to me to actually be upset on his friends behalf That's just not how I took his words I just figured that he's not allowed to say if he is or isn't in this movie so he just said whatever he could However, negative screenings is a bit concerning, even tho I know plenty of times that that's happened and the movie was great, or it was screened to standing ovations and then everyone hated it, like BvS
@@rockyseverino9230 while it’s an odd comparison, The Godfather Part II had extremely negative test screenings, which Coppola looked at what didn’t worked and re-cut the movie to what it is now and it’s considered one of the best movies of all time. I’m not too concerned because you can do more with a negative test screening to make a film better
@@thatoneguy9399 yeah, I haven't heard enough rumblings to get me nervous yet Like we knew something insane must have happened on the set of Solo, so I went into that movie pretty cautiously This movie has reshoots? What movie doesn't. But I've liked all the marvel movies, even if I haven't loved all of them So even if this is as "bad" as Thor The Dark World, I'll at least be fine. I liked even that one Tho I'd be a bit disappointed, I'm much more hyped for this than I was for that
Why did John keep cutting Rob off while he spoke in order to keep making exactly the same point in exactly the same way? Yes John, you've said that lots of studios interfere and if it is successful fans don't object to it. It's not a hard point to grasp. We got it first time.
I always saw marvel studios as different from a typical corporate studio. Kevin feige is a true creative and has a vision for the mcu. He hires directors to execute his vision. Sometimes that leads to creative differences. He's not gonna give his directors complete and total freedom when it means interfering with his vision.
@@metallicnole4514 oh yes his vision is truly a miracle even tho that he has changed into a male feminist do to Disney, speaking of disney. disney is fully capable of telling him no since they have the rights to the mcu to begin with like you said " He's not gonna give his directors complete and total freedom when it means interfering with his vision" same to be said with the empire of the mouse. his second in command either way.
@@MsDiving1 (not starting to cause problems but this is whats going on behind the mcu hq) Hate to tell you this, my dude but, is that the only thing you wanted to say? Because surely there's better things to say rather than just that, one excuse. literally if you cared enough of what happened back then you wouldn't be sucing his dic right now do to, he wasn't acting like this when Disney bought the rights. he has been acting very diverse and against the idea of men being more powerful than women in the mcu or even smarter at that case. he said that the reason why that dr strange couldn't be in wandvision was because it was her show and a white man being shown to be more powerful than her would be bad and yet guess where wanda is rn, in dr strange 2. thats very male feminist like and very gender agenda like and very bias.
Marvel directors don't have control; it's not Raimi's vision, it's Feige's vision. Just enjoy the ride Raimi, be creative as much as Feige will let you and collect your huge paycheck. Being a Marvel director is like hitting the lottery
If Raimi doesn't get to bring "His" vision, the movie will not be good, just more Mcu puff and fluff written by the same writers that brought you "The suite life of zack and cody".
@@syminite1 Well, I'd just point out Edgar Wright tried to bring his "vision," to the MCU and look how well it turned out for him. The directors in the MCU are not in charge, one could argue for the better
@Joshua Munn Yes, personally, I get it. Feige wants a Raimi feel to this movie following the MCU storyline guided by Feige. It's why Feige makes the big bucks.
Marvel so far has known what they’re doing. If they’re asking for changes I believe it’s to make the best movie possible. If it was Sony or WB on the other hand I would be 100% confident they’re going to mess it up.
The difference is that kevin feige will decide something for a movie because of creative reasons. Avi arad shoehorned in venom because he wanted to sell toys.
here's the difference that John's missing, Kevin is firmly in charge of his marvel ship and has a clear vision and direction in relation to how everything else is going on AND IS INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS.. where WB and Fox for example, they hire a director to make an IP movie for them cause they want that particular directors take on the property, and then after the fact will come in and mess with things with NO CLEAR VISION, that's why one is studio interference and the other is collaboration
Are we forgetting that raimi isn’t even the first director that was for this film? He knew full well what he was getting into. The previous director left the project because his vision didn’t work with what marvel wanted.
I definitely don’t think that was for continuity, as it just muddled it more and showed a lack of understanding. It’s function was to build more into their Sony-verse. Continuity didn’t need to be addressed as it was not a middle section of a character’s progression like MoM is.
The difference is Kevin has a VISION he hires directors as his employees for HIS vision so his interference makes sense and can be positive. When a studio lets the director have the vision for a movie and THEN interferes because they wanna chase trends or somthing cough DC. Then it can have negative impact
*mcu. also "makes decisions based on what works for all the projects in the future" where did that lead them with black widow, enternals,ect "There is always an Endgame" which they should of ended there to begin with.
@@JordanWheeler1999 * Marvel sir is the all farther of movies. AND ALL decisions made for the MCU are based on what's best. Not everything I'd perfect so be grateful for what we have 🤟💫 👊🏾
@@SIRGP99 *mcu. "sir is the all farther of movies." you're delusional ain't it, son? "AND ALL decisions made for the MCU are based on what's best" sure is that why, captian marvel bombed, same with antman 2, aou, ironman 3, entarnals, black widow? yea thought so "based on what's best" right? "Not everything I'd perfect so be grateful for what we have 🤟💫 👊🏾" A. mcu went down hill when they started to be political and diversed B. you just threaten me over a cooperation that you give free money too? yea ok bud lmao have a nice day or night lmao
It's a problem if Rami thinks it's a problem, if Rami feels the movie is still worthy of his name, then what's the problem. The alternative is the Last Jedi blowing up an entire franchise. It could have pulled in twice what it did, and the damage done to the brand would still make it not worth it. That movie could cost Disney 10 Billion in future revenue, easily
@@PSDrew-io7dy i howdy doubt that. it's just there are people that favors people that are in the spotlight and i get that but people get attend to over do it by belittling others that isn't as popular that talks about what they think
@@JordanWheeler1999 Do not take internet comments so seriously. P.S. Rob is the best part of the show, and by no means, "isn't as popular". I suggest you check out some of his late night streams, they are really good.
If you want an example of studio interference look no further than Clive Barker's Nightbreed. Not only did the studio make him add and remove a large number of scenes they didn't even know how to market it correctly.
What’s gonna upset me is in this movie, is that instead of it being a Doctor Strange story and his battles within the protection of reality or multiverse and the mistakes he’s made by his choices, this is starting to look like it’s the continuation of the Scarlet Witch story and her mistakes which should’ve been handled by her own solo movie and or 2nd season of Wanda/Vision. I mean I’m a big fan of the Strange Tales and Doctor Strange comics, He’s easily in my top 3 comic heroes of all time. I loved the first Doctor Strange movie, I was so excited that it was finally coming after about 20 years of hearing it was coming and then it being cancelled. I like the direction they been going and all how they used him in infinity war and endgame, but Spider-Man No Way Home through me off a little, I wanted to see Mordo’s continuation of being the antagonist and his going to serve Dormamu or Nightmare, and the introduction of Clea, I can only hope that’s what gonna happen in the 3rd movie if he gets one which we don’t know yet. I’ll most likely like the movie but will I love it like the first or his role in infinity war I’m not sure.
The better analogy is of sports franchises. There’s a difference between an owner who hires a GM and allows them to run the show IN ACCORDANCE to the establish culture vs. an owner who hires a GM but only as a symbolic figure head.
It’s not “interference” when you are the creative head, or the show-runner, and you hire a director to help execute YOUR vision (albeit through their storytelling lens). When someone pitches their pet project to multiple studios, and is passionate about telling a particular story, and their project gets green lit, and then suddenly the studio is making them use a particular actor that isn’t right for the part because of some contract situation, or they force a scene to take place at a particular establishment because of some marketing deal, or they force the director to cut certain crucial scenes to the point that the narrative no longer makes sense just because they believe that shorter movie = more screenings = more money, or the studio decides to change the entire tone of a movie because they want it to fill some programming slot (I.e. they want to make it more of a kids movie, or they want it to be a comedy) without concern for how that effects the quality of the film… THAT is studio interference. In short, I consider it interference when a studio comes in and makes decisions that disrupt the creative vision of a film, not because they truly believe it will make the film better, but for some non-creative business reason. Kevin Feige may also do this from time to time, but the difference is that he is one of the creators, not just a suit (as John said). So he understands the story being told and isn’t trying to undermine that. The success of marvel proves that while each movie has the added task of existing within the parameters of the greater MCU, which is too restrictive for some directors, the studio is invested in making sure each movie tells a decent story.
Im pretty sure Scott Derrickson had an autor vision just like Matt Reeves with The Batman, but Marvel didnt want that because it didnt fit their Mcu studio agenda. He wants to go full horror and not dig deep into the multiverse.
Eh kinda disagree. I don’t think marvel cares how auteur they are lol, they probably actually prefer it, I mean they hired him for the 1st one, chloe zhao, taika waititi, & even Edgar Wright (before they parted ways). The thing is, they have an overarching story they want to tell, any studio that’s making a connected cinematic universe is going to want continuity and a through-line with these films, so in derricksons case, he probably just wanted to go a different direction, than the overall plan marvel had, which is fine bc apparently derrickson is still on good terms w/ marvel and has said he hopes to come back. The Batman is different bc it’s totally separate from the dceu and a stand alone franchise. I don’t agree with the notion that marvel didn’t want derrickson bc his “auteur” vision didn’t align with their “studio agenda” 💀😂. It’s more feasible that derrickson probably just wanted to do nightmare as the villain and not mess w/ the multiverse to this extent whereas marvel wants to go full out multiverse (to eventually set up secret wars) & have wanda be the villain. Bc tbh if they didn’t want horror or an “auteurs vision” they wouldn’t have hired raimi. It’s prob just more narrative direction than anything.
Actually Scott had another movie he wanted to work so he ultimately choose to work on that . He's cool with marvel , he's a fan of it . Kevin is also cool with
John, we were discussing this the other day, the difference in leadership between Kevin Feige and the MCU and WB leadership and the DCEU and it boiled down to this analogy: Kevin Feige is like 1998 Vince McMahon and the MCU is like the WWE and the competition is like the Monday Night Wars. Feige has complete control, he does give the talent an opportunity to voice their opinions in the creative process, and it all flows and works together to put out an entertaining product. But at the end of the day, its Vince's vision that overrules it all. The DCEU is like WCW, where the talent and management have had varying degrees of freedom that didn't work collaboratively and it was always messy, inconsistent and usually a step behind (minus the NWO angle).
I really hope we get a LOTR Extended Edition style special features for this movie. Not an extended edition, but hours of special features and deleted scenes, and artwork for potential/planned cameos. It would be great!
I'm indifferent. The Marvel films from Disney have been mainly successful because of their formula. Some call it generic, but it works for the mass audience. They saw how letting directors do their own thing might not be the best with Eternals. Then again it is Sam Raimi, so they should havent interfered too much.
"I'm indifferent. The Marvel films from Disney have been mainly successful because of their formula." to each there own i guess "Some call it generic" they are when theres no creativity like captain marvel and balck widow "but it works for the mass audience." as to who your family? "They saw how letting directors do their own thing" they don't they have to follow what the mcu guidelines are? "might not be the best with Eternals." something that we both agree "Then again it is Sam Raimi, so they should havent interfered too much." sadly they do
It's a huge project spanning multiple films, which means a whole lot of moving parts and when things shift in one place, it needs to shift in another to make sense. I'm sure every new phase causes massive headaches. There is literally nothing else like this in movies and when you add in the TV shows that's a whole nother level of complexity. I'm sure it throws a lot of people off.
My takeaways from the conversation. 1) It’s Feige’s Multiverse, we just visit from time to time. 🤣 2) Raimi & Feige go back 2 decades. They’re side by side on what MoM ends up becoming. I’m sure the film will b amazing. 3) W/ Bruce Campbell coming out saying what he said, I’m convinced we’ll c him in the film. I’ll even say I’m convinced he will b a variant of Mysterio.! It’s finally happening.! 🥹😂 4) After hearing Rob describe the MCU as being one giant quilt, I nw want a giant quilt of the MCU. 💯
even if we like it or not, John's right. I know we'll get so much of Raimi magic in the movie; like the Camera works and so much of his craziness; Yet I also believe we'll get so many unnecessary MCU stuff like un-landing jokes pulling the punches of Raimi in so many of the action and weird scenes because of ....you know, Disney lol And I wish this kind of last-minute production won't lead to a rushed plot structure (Like what we got in Spider-Man No Way Home)
Without guidence you end up with Fox's X-Men where the same character can pop up in two or three time periods with no explanation and continuity thrown out the window
I’m not too concerned. My theory is maybe they were adding too many characters and cameos in scenes that it took away from the emotional core of the scene or scenes. Heck, maybe some of the outlandish ideas they had weren’t translating very well in editing and they had to go back and do it a different way.
Spider-man 3 (2007) is not that bad. People hated because of the walking down the street dancing scene. 🤦♀️ They didn't understood the idea of the scene. The movie has its flaws of course but its fun and have some delightful scenes like the sandman born scene or when spiderman get into and out of his black suit.
Everyone says it tho but actually that movie has a lot of sam raimi and his team's ideas. Their name are in the script as well. He does way more for this movie than he did for Sm2 or Sm1 basically. The concept for Venom and the lines and scenes of Bully Maguire are 100% Sam Raimi's idea. He and his team.
The biggest problems with Spiderman 3 were: 1. They never explained where the Venom suit came from or what it really was. 2. Terrible acting, from Thomas Hayden Church as Eddie Brock, who came across as comical and bumbling, when he's the most scary and vicious Spiderman villain of all time. 3. Harry Osborne as a 5th wheel villain, a plot device just to make Peter Parker look darker, then he switches sides on a dime with the family butler saying, "I cleaned your dad's wounds, he was responsible for his own death, from being impaled on his own sled." 4. Kirsten Dunst getting barely any screen time or character development as Mary Jane. She had morphed from a viable co-star in Spiderman 1, to yet another plot device.
Guarantee it's all continuity-based as this was originally scripted to be out before No Way Home. Everyone is up in arms now, but if the story didn't make sense because characters are way off due to previous developments, in other films, everyone would hate it and criticize it for them not understanding their own canon and it being a muddled mess, just like Morbius.
yes a movie that makes a lot of money does not imply that it is good or worthy in argumentative terms unfortunately it is like that but when it comes to marvel (for me) there is not a single movie (even before 2008) that has not been successful, that is, all have had it. because of its history...ok one could have made more money but let's be frank success there is always the hulk for example had two hundred and little box office but the argument the dark side of the hulk was imbued there the sensitive intelligent side of bruce banner was there so for me it didn't make so much money due to the fact that there was already a hulk movie before the iron man as it was something fresh and new played in favor but overall marvel can make money and with beautiful stories visually and in script and that's hard to achieve
@@jonhconner1191 What is this reply? Nothing said here has anything to do with what I stated, nor is it coherent as well as being poorly written. Also, I'm on the side saying there no reason to over-react before the movies even out, which is seemingly what you're trying to say? This feels like bot wrote it, because I mentioned key words.
There was a lot of background noise going into this movie from the very beginning. Did we forget that Scott derrickson was supposed to come back and direct this movie and he stepped away because the movie was going away from his vision. That's why Sam had to step in in the first place. Everybody's just trying to set out to make the right movie in the marvel cinematic universe
The way I see it, there’s Studio Interference and Studio/Filmmaker Cooperation. I define interference as a studio forcing their vision upon a filmmaker without negotiation and cooperation is the exact opposite where both the studio and the filmmaker are both collaborating to make the best movie possible. Interference is just the wrong word to use for this scenario in my opinion.
Robert said the point of this. It's about the criteria of the producer and how he/she works with the director with respect and conscience. Unlike WB with Zack Snyder and David Ayer.
This is the consequence of Marvel working on so many projects at the same time. Feige is doing his best to make everything in the MCU fit together like a big complete puzzle, moreso than in any other film or TV universe. That's what we want him to do. We love the interconnectedness of everything in the MCU. We love the little eggs and hints and references and foreshadowing that don't pay off sometimes for 2, or a dozen shows/movies later. No one has even attempted to do anything like this before, not even DC, certainly not in the Bond universe. Has everything been perfect? Not quite. But overall, it's been quite an amazing ride with quite remarkable results.
Love the show, but Mr. Rob continues to be the best part of this show. His insight and input are always well explained and understood. You learn from his discussions and he provides great examples. I hope he gets even more time to speak
I follow RMB show on RUclips. His discussions on his show are very insightful and deep. With a sense of humor.
@@robertcolon6719 thanks for letting me know! That’s great to hear. Wish he had more time to speak on this show
Rob : Makes great talking points with insight
*okay we really gotta wrap this up
@Tom Ford Lol you look so sad constantly hating on Rob. What’d he do to you?
I agree with Rob. Marvel doesn’t have studio interference. Marvel has the creative control at the end of the day. Studio interference is what DC did to Justice League by having a new director reshoot a lot of the movie or Suicide Squad and have a trailer company re edit the movie. One is studio interference, the other is studio intervention.
Well said. 👏🏻
@@florincalin3698 you think marvel in general interferes all the time and no creative freedom? You're mistaken
Greatly said here. The other point they made on Feige produces a lot of these movies really ensures a culture of consistency and also consistency in quality that keeps bringing people back to see a Marvel movie.
People forget Chadwick’s untimely passing, the Fox purchase, the uncertainty of the Sony/Spidey deal etc have all had significant impacts on the MCU moving forward. Marvel is just repositioning themselves to have the best continuity/content they can provide.
Yeah bro you are right and some people don’t understand it
Very interesting debate here over what constitutes studio interference. In the specific case of Marvel Studios, I have to side with Rob on this one. It all boils down to the fact Kevin Feige is creative and not just a suit and that directors sign up for these movies knowing that they are highly collaborative efforts. While John’s observation of a double standard for studio interference is initially amusing, it completely ignores the context as to why that is the case.
I feel like people r too easily freaked out and manipulated without understanding the whole situation, just look like the comments below it’s just hilarious and sad
Right. Marvel Studios is not Sony Pictures Entertainment and Feige is no idiot. He knows what he is doing and what he wants. These all all Feige’s movies and the directors execute his vision.
Ethan Hawke said he talked to Scott Derrickson before joining the MCU, and he told him Kevin Feige is 'the only artist in charge of a studio'
@@dude_1983 Iron Man 2 and Thor 3 was pretty bad under Kevin
@@davadh saying Thor 3 was "Pretty bad" couldn't be farther from the truth. That totally revitalized the Thor character and whatever changes or "interferences" were made were 100% worth it and even Chris Hemsworth stated to have more fun with the character on the 3rd film, so your claim is probably a 1 in a billion occurrence.
Love love love Rob’s “show runner” explanation. I think it describes Marvels relationship with all the different directors perfectly.
Yet again, I side with Rob with this one. I can see where he's coming from. I think if a director comes in to direct a Marvel Studios movie, that director already knows that it's going to be more of a collaboration with the studio. I would assume that Feige already speaks with the director and even plans things out with the director...the director knows for sure that their vision won't be 100% executed because there is an understanding set in place with the studio, therefore, it's not interference...in my opinion at least.
I hate it when john completely misses the point that ROB is making!
Yes its all interference, but what the fans are complaining about is BAD interference (non creative/ corporate decisions)
SO YES JOHN!! its all interference, but when fans complain, the y are complaining about corporate interference,
fans accept the marvel changes because they are usually creative interference.
It's more collaborative than interference. If you're working as a team all towards one goal then its a collab. When you're supposed to have autonomy, working on your own, doing your own thing with your own vision and that gets usurped by a higher power then that is interference. There is a clear difference.
To follow on Rob's show runner analogy, if a director of an episode of a TV show in the middle of the season is told they need to make some changes, remove a scene, add a scene, because of things that will be happening later in the season, I don't think anyone would call that "interference".
John couldn’t be more wrong comparing the Edgar wright situation and the David Ayer situation. Justice league/ suicide squad were already shot and then there was MASSIVE reshoots and rewrites. Joker pulled out, flash ruined, darkseid pulled out and the list goes on. Marvel is more of a collaboration, they will part ways with directors before it even gets to that point because they make it clear that you will not have full creative control.
John off the mark here…
John can you just let Rob have one for crying out loud why is it always your way or the highway slingshot him in the first for once I'm starting to think it's a weird pride issue because Rob makes a lot of good points and you shut it down immediately just my take love the show
Rob nailed it with the showrunner analogy. Great analogy.
analogy
What people need to remember is that Marvel runs their movies like they do their books, like a publisher. Writers on books have an editor. Feige is the editor. Editors keep the continuity of the overall story consistent with the larger connected universe. It's not strange that a studio that specializes in comic book movies, runs their comic book movies like their comic book publishing. They're effectively translating their comic book universe to screen. That's why it's effective.
My personal definition of “studio interference” is when a director is hired under the assumption they have complete creative control over the content/edit of the final cut of the film, but then the studio takes that away from them and does their own “cut” for the release etc…I think Alien 3 would be a prime example of my definition.
John hate to let people talk he always want to be right lol
Facts lmao
To me John is completely and utterly wrong on this one. Interference is when the studio and director agree on the movie, then in the middle of filming the studio goes back on their word and take control of the filming/editing, not when from the get go the director knows that their movie is part of universe and may have to change some things to fit in it. One has nothing to do with the other. Also the example of Ant-Man with Edgar Wright is terrible, as this was started years before the MCU became what it was at that time and Edgar was not interested on where this was going, so they amicably decided to go their own way, this happened because of how long it took Edgar, not because Marvel blindsided him.
John Campea always has to interject before anyone else finishes their sentence my god
Everytime Rob wants to discuss something in depth John Campea interferes... Everytime!
Rob immediately hit it on the nail!
Kevin Feige and Marvel aren't like other studios; They operate more like classic studios and producers did, i.e. Showrunners and the like. There's a reason why the Marvel movies are starting to say "A Kevin Feige Production", that's because we're not only going for the MCU and the cinematic universe that's been built, but we're also going to see more of Kevin's vision and story play out.
You don't want go to see Morbius to get some executives "vision" of it, but unfortunately that's what happens with other studios. Kevin Feige is a one of a kind, visionary producer who's fanbase is the same as the ones who go for the MCU new releases.
@Tom Ford but he's the producer and the one to create the idea for it and the one who get to decide everything in the movie
I have to side with Rob on this one, John is trying to push a "the end justifies the means" narrative while leaving aside the importance of communication between the different parts of a project, which honestly is relatable in any setting
Johnny Boy don’t like being disagreed with 💀💀💀
No matter how it ends up being, Feige is still at the helm and he’s a fan of the material. Unlike the “suits” over at WB that are clueless.
Thing is just if you’re not a fan of his very family friendly style you’ll end up liking none of his films
@@dertodesking8379 Well it seems like the majority of people like it so I don’t see the issue
@@dertodesking8379 ok, and???
@@farhadarian2 That’s ofc true
Yes, technically they're both studio interference. But I think the main difference is that Kevin Feige is actually an artist himself with a vision. Whereas a lot of interference from other studios they're from executives making changes based on "financial interest" rather than artistic / storytelling vision. Like WB changing Snyder's vision is because they think a "lighter" movie will get more people to watch it & make more money - not because it will make the movie better. And usually those interference based on financial interest end up having poor results due to them making the product worse. So they're both interference but they come from different intent.
Completely agree on the part where the distinction is the executives deterring the director from his/her intended creative vision to satisfy the studios own financial interests. Though I wouldn’t consider someone like Feige to be interference bc it’s obvious by now, directors sign on to a pre-existing cohesive storyline and is going to be limited on what they want to do bc the story is ultimately decided by Feige. The directors are more so there to execute his vision.
Kevin feige is not a artist but a hack.
@@robertrainford6754 lol sure.
Rob made a great point about collaboration that reminded me of something we've already known about Kevin Feige. He hires directors because he considers them to be great storytellers. He has been known to say that a great storyteller is a great storyteller.
That said, so many of the MCU directors (besides Raimi) have had no experience with gigantic films until they join the MCU. Additionally, MCU movies need to have a certain amount of continuity with the other MCU movies. Marvel provides the machine that already knows how to take care of all of that. Just plug the director into the machine.
If you rely too much on the vision of the directors without a unifying central vision, then you can end up with the lack of continuity we got with the Star Wars sequel trilogy films.
Feige has the grand overview.
The star wars original trilogy was all under one person but it lacked continuity. Can you explain that?
@@festo8756 There’s no evidence that the Star Wars directors were given much guidance from above as far as overarching themes. JJ Abrams made his Ep. 7, then Rian Johnson pitched his own story for Ep. 8. Abrams comes back for Ep. 9 after the fact, needing to find a way to tie up what Rian Johnson did.
Every production has producers and/or show runners, but they don’t always exert the same influence.
@@nicksmith2010 I was talking about the original trilogy under George Lucas. He would set up lore in one film then contradict himself in the next film. Can you explain that?
@Joshua Munna new hope: Obi wan talking about lightsaber: "your father wanted me to give you this when you were old enough"
Empire : Yoda:" too old to begin the training"
Which one is it? How old do you have to be to start training as a Jedi?
@Joshua Munn Then why are two year olds training in attack of the clones?
justice league vs Snyder cut I think that says it all about directors visions on movies
Studio interference gave us "I am Iron Man" at the end of EndGame.
Is it just me or John have difficulty agreeing with another person opinion or view on a topic or subject.?
In my opinion Rob had a very good point about how Marvel handle their movies.
No, I was going to write the same thing.
@@Kuoropoika1 I know , it just sometimes you have to admit that even if you don't agree entirely with the other person they may have a point.
Love the show, dont get me wrong. We all have different opinions and that's what makes it fun.
John has shit takes plenty of times, and won't budge on most things. mhmhmmm
@@Kuoropoika1 aint his job to whine complain and disagree 24/7 either but look where we are
I came here to say this. It's getting cringy.
I totally get John's point here but I think he's purposely ignoring a lot of context to make his point. Rob is on the money with this one
John is ignoring a lot of context here and honestly it's a bit annoying. He is like a dog with a bone when he keeps pursuing a point just because he wants to hear someone acknowledge that he is "right". "Studio interference" is such a broad term and these scenarios are all different.
in this type of business there must always be concessions from both the studio and the director and their respective team but it is fair (whether it is a good idea or a bad idea) that the last word belongs to the studio because the investment is theirs so this champion jonh finally earned more by being quiet but anyway, as he is an insider, he has a hot back but that can't and shouldn't be worth everything, that is, he arrests marvel for having a dog as he arrests him for not having the belief that he will go there and impose himself and he ends up being fired, finally his problem and a lot of people don't is to criticize we can and should all criticize but you have to know how to do it and have common sense or at least the least common sense and respect the director's team and respective studio because if it weren't for them (I'm talking in general not only of marvel of course) a lot of its visibility and relevance as an insider would go down the drain and become a speaker which is not bad on the contrary but it would lose a lot of interest there so don't try to find negative points but positive ones about the negatives use them as a stimulus or plot holes I see them as something stimulating that is me when I come across plot holes mentally I am creative and make it make sense in some way in my head for example in the way home I did not fall in love with the film but after being creative using the power of the mind that we should all use I managed to see beyond the obvious, that is, I didn't reduce myself to what the film presented to me but I saw more and now I'm in love with the film... all movies have plot holes if they didn't have it I wouldn't see it because they wouldn't make me think to question and evolve...be happy
Studio interference is usually bad because there tends to be too many cooks in the kitchen, or the people giving notes don't really understand the film but force changes they think will make the film more "marketable". What Kevin is doing is different. You have to think of the MCU as a tapestry of films. He is as instrumental as any person in the backround and frankly IS the most important person. He may not be writing the scripts but he's certainly behind the scenes coming up with the ideas and the direction. So when he makes a decision, you can certainly call it studio interference, but to me it feels like a completely different thing. He understands what is going on on a micro-detail level. Most people in other studios sending down mandates to the director are probably not nearly as familiar with the material at hand as someone like Kevin is. So when he makes a decision, it feels like it has a real purpose.
That isn’t “studio interference.” Marvel has directors make changes so it fits in with other MCU projects.
i wish john would let rob finish a thought instead of interrupting, the way he allows john to.
After 20 plus films there are only 2 that I don't really care for. Dark World and Eternals. Even those weren't horrible. I trust Marvel.
Gosh Rob and Jon's debates are getting better and better. Keep rolling lads
Feels like John just wanted to argue to argue.
that seems to happen alot
Marvel doesn’t hire directors, they cast them and tell them how to make the movie.
*mcu
also i don't really use "Cast" but just treat everyone as objects
See usually w/ other studios I’d be more worried, but w/ marvel it’s different. Like Bruce Campbell said, they’re making 8 projects (probably more) at a time that all somewhat have to either connect or at least maintain continuity & not screw things up, so to me it sounds like stuff they add or takeaway is more for continuity reasons not so much creative reasons (although I’m sure they still have some restrictions, as all major blockbusters do). Also this is kind of the norm for marvel films, they constantly work on these until they’re satisfied, and that can be right up until release sometimes. This isn’t some 5-10 million dollar indie film where directors essentially have complete freedom, every major blockbuster is going to have some input or direction from the studio, for me I’m just glad it’s feige & the other marvel producers rather than Sony & WB executives bc at least feige feels like he’s also a creative who generally knows what he’s doing. Even Robert Eggers had to take notes from the studio which he doesn’t usually have to do bc the Northman had cost much more than his prev films. If anyone was actually expecting marvel to just give ultimate control and free reigns to raimi to do whatever he wanted with one of their most popular characters and their most important film since endgame which probably cost $300+ million w/ marketing, they were sadly mistaken from the beginning lol. Marvel isn’t perfect but when it comes to comic book films, I don’t get as nervous when they give studio notes compared to when another studio does.
Well put. Couldn’t have said it any better
We call it ‘input’ when we think it’s positive. We call it ‘interference’ when we think it’s negative.
Title should be - 28 minutes praise of Kevin Feige...
This has literally happened with every mcu project whether if it's for better or worse. So while I understand some people's worries especially with raimis history with marvel with Spiderman 3, the film should honestly be fine atp and should turn out solid from a quality standpoint.
It’s interesting you guys brought up James Gunn because he has gone on record saying that he does get full creative control when he makes a movie for Marvel. Idk if every director gets that treatment but Fiege has worked with Raimi before on the Spider-Man films & Raimi is a well respected director whose a great collaborator & a king of pacing.
I’m less worried because Kevin Fiege has massive respect for Sam Raimi & these are two men who work really well together. Also, even if the movie got changed from what Raimi wanted, when you sign up for a Marvel movie, you know what might happen yet you still sign up. All I can say is, let’s wait for the movie to come out & see what they wanna show us.
The difference between collaboration and interference might seem subtle but it's an important distinction. Collaboration is working together to make the best project possible. Interference is something mandated solely without collaboration.
In terms of the "semantics" of studio interference, I think the better term to use is MICROMANAGING or UNILATERAL DECISION making which isn't the same as collaboration. I do think that directors that have left Marvel projects like Patty Jenkins and Edgar wright have very unique visions for movies that they make and they prefer to hash out all the details of the movie being made in the pre-production and negotiation phases. Wright and Jenkins aren't typically conventional directors in the visions they have for a film, which doesn't always fit in a corporate machine like Marvel Studios.
Wonder woman 1984 was a conventional film. Patty Jenkins just didn't like the story to Thor the dark world and wouldnt compromise.
The word “interference” in its self has a negative connotation to it so I believe Robs point of disagreeing on the studio interference matter is more so towards the basis of the actual word interfering because to interfere is to impede something or change something not wanted.
Warner Bros. interference: oh boy....
Marvel Studios interference: yas.
Edgar wright never shot any footage it's completely different. they didn't edit out anything he did and use any of his footage. Ayer and Snyder were replaced during production Ayer not even technically replaced.
Lol they did this since the first Avenger. After the premiere, they shot the restaurant scene. Also, it’s really easy to “reshoot” scenes if 90% of the movie is shot on a green screen and pretty much all of the assests is made ready for rendering.
I am very worried about multiverse of madness…
1. Early reports indicated 3 hour film, now under 2 hours.
2. Very late and extensive reshoots.
3. Directorial changes.
4. Delayed.
5. Reports of extra cameos being shot?
6. Close friend of Rami, taking passive aggressive shots at marvel.
7. Negative early test screenings.
Bro you’re starting to make me worry
Very worrying Signs…
Only the last two stand out to me
Most films cut huge portions of what's been filmed, three hours down to two? Sounds about right.
Late reshoots are common on every marvel film. I'd have to know what you mean by extensive.
I mean forty percent of rogue one was reshot, back to the future fired their lead and had to reshoot everything they'd done up till then.
Look up reshoots. Lots of movies with massive reshoots have been wildly successful. The only thing that matters is how the movie turned out.
There was no relevant directorial change.
Movie that are already being filmed like Solo (or Wizard of Oz or Superman 2...) and change directors are very concerning.
This movie switched to Sam Raimi from Scott Derrickson long before it ever began filming or even the script was finished
All the people who made this movie were on the same page before filming began, and remain the people in charge at this time
I don't see how cameos matter
But I'll give you Campbell being a little spicy would be concerning if he seemed to me to actually be upset on his friends behalf
That's just not how I took his words
I just figured that he's not allowed to say if he is or isn't in this movie so he just said whatever he could
However, negative screenings is a bit concerning, even tho I know plenty of times that that's happened and the movie was great, or it was screened to standing ovations and then everyone hated it, like BvS
@@rockyseverino9230 while it’s an odd comparison, The Godfather Part II had extremely negative test screenings, which Coppola looked at what didn’t worked and re-cut the movie to what it is now and it’s considered one of the best movies of all time. I’m not too concerned because you can do more with a negative test screening to make a film better
@@thatoneguy9399 yeah, I haven't heard enough rumblings to get me nervous yet
Like we knew something insane must have happened on the set of Solo, so I went into that movie pretty cautiously
This movie has reshoots? What movie doesn't.
But I've liked all the marvel movies, even if I haven't loved all of them
So even if this is as "bad" as Thor The Dark World, I'll at least be fine. I liked even that one
Tho I'd be a bit disappointed, I'm much more hyped for this than I was for that
Campea has a HARD-ON for Kevin Feige. Who knows how much better it could have been with the WASP instead of Black Widow.
Amen
Why did John keep cutting Rob off while he spoke in order to keep making exactly the same point in exactly the same way? Yes John, you've said that lots of studios interfere and if it is successful fans don't object to it. It's not a hard point to grasp. We got it first time.
I always saw marvel studios as different from a typical corporate studio. Kevin feige is a true creative and has a vision for the mcu. He hires directors to execute his vision. Sometimes that leads to creative differences. He's not gonna give his directors complete and total freedom when it means interfering with his vision.
@@metallicnole4514 oh yes his vision is truly a miracle even tho that he has changed into a male feminist do to Disney, speaking of disney. disney is fully capable of telling him no since they have the rights to the mcu to begin with like you said " He's not gonna give his directors complete and total freedom when it means interfering with his vision" same to be said with the empire of the mouse. his second in command either way.
@@JordanWheeler1999
Hate to tell you this, my dude, but if having women in movies means a male feminist? He’s always been that.
@@MsDiving1 (not starting to cause problems but this is whats going on behind the mcu hq) Hate to tell you this, my dude but, is that the only thing you wanted to say? Because surely there's better things to say rather than just that, one excuse.
literally if you cared enough of what happened back then you wouldn't be sucing his dic right now do to, he wasn't acting like this when Disney bought the rights.
he has been acting very diverse and against the idea of men being more powerful than women in the mcu or even smarter at that case.
he said that the reason why that dr strange couldn't be in wandvision was because it was her show and a white man being shown to be more powerful than her would be bad and yet guess where wanda is rn, in dr strange 2.
thats very male feminist like and very gender agenda like and very bias.
Respectfully, The MCU is not Sam Raimi’s Marvel of 20 years ago. Sam’s first Tobey Maguire Spider-Man movie opened six years before The MCU began.
Kevin Fiege is the farmer, Sam Raimi is the shepherd and everyone else are chickens…that’s the power structure!
Marvel directors don't have control; it's not Raimi's vision, it's Feige's vision. Just enjoy the ride Raimi, be creative as much as Feige will let you and collect your huge paycheck. Being a Marvel director is like hitting the lottery
If Raimi doesn't get to bring "His" vision, the movie will not be good, just more Mcu puff and fluff written by the same writers that brought you "The suite life of zack and cody".
@@syminite1 Well, I'd just point out Edgar Wright tried to bring his "vision," to the MCU and look how well it turned out for him. The directors in the MCU are not in charge, one could argue for the better
@Joshua Munn Yes, personally, I get it. Feige wants a Raimi feel to this movie following the MCU storyline guided by Feige. It's why Feige makes the big bucks.
@Joshua Munn The fans will surely them know 😁
Marvel so far has known what they’re doing. If they’re asking for changes I believe it’s to make the best movie possible. If it was Sony or WB on the other hand I would be 100% confident they’re going to mess it up.
Yeah, it’s still interference, but the difference is that Marvel Studios knows how to make good movies. Sony and WB just mess everything up
MCU directors playin checkers, Feige playin chess lol
The difference is that kevin feige will decide something for a movie because of creative reasons. Avi arad shoehorned in venom because he wanted to sell toys.
here's the difference that John's missing, Kevin is firmly in charge of his marvel ship and has a clear vision and direction in relation to how everything else is going on AND IS INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS.. where WB and Fox for example, they hire a director to make an IP movie for them cause they want that particular directors take on the property, and then after the fact will come in and mess with things with NO CLEAR VISION, that's why one is studio interference and the other is collaboration
Are we forgetting that raimi isn’t even the first director that was for this film? He knew full well what he was getting into. The previous director left the project because his vision didn’t work with what marvel wanted.
Did the "director" sign up for this much input is the question.
People know how integrated the MCU is.
There is no other franchise quite like it
Exactly why the movies are 50/50 for me
From what I understand Morbius could have used some “interference” for the sake of continuity
I definitely don’t think that was for continuity, as it just muddled it more and showed a lack of understanding.
It’s function was to build more into their Sony-verse. Continuity didn’t need to be addressed as it was not a middle section of a character’s progression like MoM is.
If Bruce Campbell is not in the final cut. We won't Riot, We'll go Nuclear!
Thanks John!!! This needed to be said, and repeated! I'm saying this for ages!!!
The difference is Kevin has a VISION he hires directors as his employees for HIS vision so his interference makes sense and can be positive. When a studio lets the director have the vision for a movie and THEN interferes because they wanna chase trends or somthing cough DC. Then it can have negative impact
Agree with Rob. John always think he is correct
Marvel makes decisions based on what works for all the projects in the future. There is always an Endgame
Word
*mcu. also "makes decisions based on what works for all the projects in the future" where did that lead them with black widow, enternals,ect "There is always an Endgame" which they should of ended there to begin with.
@@JordanWheeler1999 * Marvel sir is the all farther of movies. AND ALL decisions made for the MCU are based on what's best. Not everything I'd perfect so be grateful for what we have 🤟💫 👊🏾
@@SIRGP99 *mcu. "sir is the all farther of movies." you're delusional ain't it, son?
"AND ALL decisions made for the MCU are based on what's best" sure is that why, captian marvel bombed, same with antman 2, aou, ironman 3, entarnals, black widow? yea thought so "based on what's best" right?
"Not everything I'd perfect so be grateful for what we have 🤟💫 👊🏾" A. mcu went down hill when they started to be political and diversed B. you just threaten me over a cooperation that you give free money too? yea ok bud lmao have a nice day or night lmao
It's a problem if Rami thinks it's a problem, if Rami feels the movie is still worthy of his name, then what's the problem.
The alternative is the Last Jedi blowing up an entire franchise. It could have pulled in twice what it did, and the damage done to the brand would still make it not worth it. That movie could cost Disney 10 Billion in future revenue, easily
Sometimes without interference, you get Rian Johnson and The Last Jedi. Just sayin.
Or WW84
There’s a difference between collaborating with a studio and a studio taking the film away and getting an ad company to edit the movie.
that sounds like Bruce being coy and avoiding trying to ask questions about spoilers.
🗣 John can you please not disregard what the other gentleman think. This panel is all on theory’s.
Thank you.
Why does Rob always look so annoyed when John starts ranting lol. Maybe it’s just his resting face.
maybe you should think outside the box of the issue in hand rather than acting as if the other person has a problem with john
@@JordanWheeler1999 I’m not sure you or myself understand what you were trying to say. But I was being sarcastic…
@@PSDrew-io7dy i howdy doubt that. it's just there are people that favors people that are in the spotlight and i get that but people get attend to over do it by belittling others that isn't as popular that talks about what they think
@@JordanWheeler1999 Do not take internet comments so seriously.
P.S. Rob is the best part of the show, and by no means, "isn't as popular". I suggest you check out some of his late night streams, they are really good.
People haven't seen the movie and reacting off of someone's comments. One person vision screw stuff up all the time.
If you want an example of studio interference look no further than Clive Barker's Nightbreed. Not only did the studio make him add and remove a large number of scenes they didn't even know how to market it correctly.
What’s gonna upset me is in this movie, is that instead of it being a Doctor Strange story and his battles within the protection of reality or multiverse and the mistakes he’s made by his choices, this is starting to look like it’s the continuation of the Scarlet Witch story and her mistakes which should’ve been handled by her own solo movie and or 2nd season of Wanda/Vision. I mean I’m a big fan of the Strange Tales and Doctor Strange comics, He’s easily in my top 3 comic heroes of all time. I loved the first Doctor Strange movie, I was so excited that it was finally coming after about 20 years of hearing it was coming and then it being cancelled. I like the direction they been going and all how they used him in infinity war and endgame, but Spider-Man No Way Home through me off a little, I wanted to see Mordo’s continuation of being the antagonist and his going to serve Dormamu or Nightmare, and the introduction of Clea, I can only hope that’s what gonna happen in the 3rd movie if he gets one which we don’t know yet. I’ll most likely like the movie but will I love it like the first or his role in infinity war I’m not sure.
The better analogy is of sports franchises. There’s a difference between an owner who hires a GM and allows them to run the show IN ACCORDANCE to the establish culture vs. an owner who hires a GM but only as a symbolic figure head.
It’s not “interference” when you are the creative head, or the show-runner, and you hire a director to help execute YOUR vision (albeit through their storytelling lens).
When someone pitches their pet project to multiple studios, and is passionate about telling a particular story, and their project gets green lit, and then suddenly the studio is making them use a particular actor that isn’t right for the part because of some contract situation, or they force a scene to take place at a particular establishment because of some marketing deal, or they force the director to cut certain crucial scenes to the point that the narrative no longer makes sense just because they believe that shorter movie = more screenings = more money, or the studio decides to change the entire tone of a movie because they want it to fill some programming slot (I.e. they want to make it more of a kids movie, or they want it to be a comedy) without concern for how that effects the quality of the film… THAT is studio interference.
In short, I consider it interference when a studio comes in and makes decisions that disrupt the creative vision of a film, not because they truly believe it will make the film better, but for some non-creative business reason.
Kevin Feige may also do this from time to time, but the difference is that he is one of the creators, not just a suit (as John said). So he understands the story being told and isn’t trying to undermine that. The success of marvel proves that while each movie has the added task of existing within the parameters of the greater MCU, which is too restrictive for some directors, the studio is invested in making sure each movie tells a decent story.
Shit like this HAS to happen now. And Essentially it's due to leakers and such. I wouldn't blame disney.
John campea is so obessed with kevin feigie lmao
Im pretty sure Scott Derrickson had an autor vision just like Matt Reeves with The Batman, but Marvel didnt want that because it didnt fit their Mcu studio agenda. He wants to go full horror and not dig deep into the multiverse.
Eh kinda disagree. I don’t think marvel cares how auteur they are lol, they probably actually prefer it, I mean they hired him for the 1st one, chloe zhao, taika waititi, & even Edgar Wright (before they parted ways). The thing is, they have an overarching story they want to tell, any studio that’s making a connected cinematic universe is going to want continuity and a through-line with these films, so in derricksons case, he probably just wanted to go a different direction, than the overall plan marvel had, which is fine bc apparently derrickson is still on good terms w/ marvel and has said he hopes to come back. The Batman is different bc it’s totally separate from the dceu and a stand alone franchise. I don’t agree with the notion that marvel didn’t want derrickson bc his “auteur” vision didn’t align with their “studio agenda” 💀😂. It’s more feasible that derrickson probably just wanted to do nightmare as the villain and not mess w/ the multiverse to this extent whereas marvel wants to go full out multiverse (to eventually set up secret wars) & have wanda be the villain. Bc tbh if they didn’t want horror or an “auteurs vision” they wouldn’t have hired raimi. It’s prob just more narrative direction than anything.
Actually Scott had another movie he wanted to work so he ultimately choose to work on that . He's cool with marvel , he's a fan of it . Kevin is also cool with
@@cable7152 That's just what the trailer looks like though, not necessarily the movie.
Ray’s right. Sam hasn’t left the movie, or anything.
John, we were discussing this the other day, the difference in leadership between Kevin Feige and the MCU and WB leadership and the DCEU and it boiled down to this analogy: Kevin Feige is like 1998 Vince McMahon and the MCU is like the WWE and the competition is like the Monday Night Wars. Feige has complete control, he does give the talent an opportunity to voice their opinions in the creative process, and it all flows and works together to put out an entertaining product. But at the end of the day, its Vince's vision that overrules it all. The DCEU is like WCW, where the talent and management have had varying degrees of freedom that didn't work collaboratively and it was always messy, inconsistent and usually a step behind (minus the NWO angle).
I absolutely love this analogy, you nailed it!
I really hope we get a LOTR Extended Edition style special features for this movie. Not an extended edition, but hours of special features and deleted scenes, and artwork for potential/planned cameos. It would be great!
I'm indifferent. The Marvel films from Disney have been mainly successful because of their formula. Some call it generic, but it works for the mass audience. They saw how letting directors do their own thing might not be the best with Eternals. Then again it is Sam Raimi, so they should havent interfered too much.
"I'm indifferent. The Marvel films from Disney have been mainly successful because of their formula." to each there own i guess "Some call it generic" they are when theres no creativity like captain marvel and balck widow "but it works for the mass audience." as to who your family? "They saw how letting directors do their own thing" they don't they have to follow what the mcu guidelines are? "might not be the best with Eternals." something that we both agree "Then again it is Sam Raimi, so they should havent interfered too much." sadly they do
It's a huge project spanning multiple films, which means a whole lot of moving parts and
when things shift in one place, it needs to shift in another to make sense. I'm sure every new phase
causes massive headaches. There is literally nothing else like this in movies and when you add in the TV shows
that's a whole nother level of complexity. I'm sure it throws a lot of people off.
In Kevin Feige We trust
-Excelsior
My takeaways from the conversation.
1) It’s Feige’s Multiverse, we just visit from time to time. 🤣
2) Raimi & Feige go back 2 decades. They’re side by side on what MoM ends up becoming. I’m sure the film will b amazing.
3) W/ Bruce Campbell coming out saying what he said, I’m convinced we’ll c him in the film. I’ll even say I’m convinced he will b a variant of Mysterio.! It’s finally happening.! 🥹😂
4) After hearing Rob describe the MCU as being one giant quilt, I nw want a giant quilt of the MCU. 💯
even if we like it or not, John's right. I know we'll get so much of Raimi magic in the movie; like the Camera works and so much of his craziness; Yet I also believe we'll get so many unnecessary MCU stuff like un-landing jokes pulling the punches of Raimi in so many of the action and weird scenes because of ....you know, Disney lol
And I wish this kind of last-minute production won't lead to a rushed plot structure (Like what we got in Spider-Man No Way Home)
This was the dumbest argument I’ve heard in awhile
Wdym I thought it was pretty good. Don’t mean that in a hostile way just wanna know what you think
Without guidence you end up with Fox's X-Men where the same character can pop up in two or three time periods with no explanation and continuity thrown out the window
I’m not too concerned.
My theory is maybe they were adding too many characters and cameos in scenes that it took away from the emotional core of the scene or scenes. Heck, maybe some of the outlandish ideas they had weren’t translating very well in editing and they had to go back and do it a different way.
In Kevin Feige I trust
We trust
In Kevin Feige We trust
-Excelsior
Spider-man 3 (2007) is not that bad.
People hated because of the walking down the street dancing scene. 🤦♀️ They didn't understood the idea of the scene.
The movie has its flaws of course but its fun and have some delightful scenes like the sandman born scene or when spiderman get into and out of his black suit.
It does reek of studio interference tho
Everyone says it tho but actually that movie has a lot of sam raimi and his team's ideas. Their name are in the script as well. He does way more for this movie than he did for Sm2 or Sm1 basically.
The concept for Venom and the lines and scenes of Bully Maguire are 100% Sam Raimi's idea. He and his team.
The biggest problems with Spiderman 3 were:
1. They never explained where the Venom suit came from or what it really was.
2. Terrible acting, from Thomas Hayden Church as Eddie Brock, who came across as comical and bumbling, when he's the most scary and vicious Spiderman villain of all time.
3. Harry Osborne as a 5th wheel villain, a plot device just to make Peter Parker look darker, then he switches sides on a dime with the family butler saying, "I cleaned your dad's wounds, he was responsible for his own death, from being impaled on his own sled."
4. Kirsten Dunst getting barely any screen time or character development as Mary Jane. She had morphed from a viable co-star in Spiderman 1, to yet another plot device.
Every studio interferes, I don’t think any director has full control of a movie
Guarantee it's all continuity-based as this was originally scripted to be out before No Way Home. Everyone is up in arms now, but if the story didn't make sense because characters are way off due to previous developments, in other films, everyone would hate it and criticize it for them not understanding their own canon and it being a muddled mess, just like Morbius.
yes a movie that makes a lot of money does not imply that it is good or worthy in argumentative terms unfortunately it is like that but when it comes to marvel (for me) there is not a single movie (even before 2008) that has not been successful, that is, all have had it. because of its history...ok one could have made more money but let's be frank success there is always the hulk for example had two hundred and little box office but the argument the dark side of the hulk was imbued there the sensitive intelligent side of bruce banner was there so for me it didn't make so much money due to the fact that there was already a hulk movie before the iron man as it was something fresh and new played in favor but overall marvel can make money and with beautiful stories visually and in script and that's hard to achieve
@@jonhconner1191 What is this reply? Nothing said here has anything to do with what I stated, nor is it coherent as well as being poorly written.
Also, I'm on the side saying there no reason to over-react before the movies even out, which is seemingly what you're trying to say? This feels like bot wrote it, because I mentioned key words.
Not worried at all
Same. There’s no reason to be worried.
There was a lot of background noise going into this movie from the very beginning. Did we forget that Scott derrickson was supposed to come back and direct this movie and he stepped away because the movie was going away from his vision. That's why Sam had to step in in the first place. Everybody's just trying to set out to make the right movie in the marvel cinematic universe
In Feige I trust.
The way I see it, there’s Studio Interference and Studio/Filmmaker Cooperation. I define interference as a studio forcing their vision upon a filmmaker without negotiation and cooperation is the exact opposite where both the studio and the filmmaker are both collaborating to make the best movie possible. Interference is just the wrong word to use for this scenario in my opinion.
Robert said the point of this. It's about the criteria of the producer and how he/she works with the director with respect and conscience. Unlike WB with Zack Snyder and David Ayer.
This is the consequence of Marvel working on so many projects at the same time. Feige is doing his best to make everything in the MCU fit together like a big complete puzzle, moreso than in any other film or TV universe. That's what we want him to do. We love the interconnectedness of everything in the MCU. We love the little eggs and hints and references and foreshadowing that don't pay off sometimes for 2, or a dozen shows/movies later. No one has even attempted to do anything like this before, not even DC, certainly not in the Bond universe. Has everything been perfect? Not quite. But overall, it's been quite an amazing ride with quite remarkable results.