Hawley's Doctor Doom Film

[Zarex]

There is still doubt over who will buy Fox, if it will be approved and when it will happen.

Most likely, Disney will buy Fox, and it will be approved, and it'll be completed within 3 years. I think that will happen, but there's doubt.

In the mean time, Fox will keep making films, and they'll continue to exploit the properties they have rights to.

Question is whether the process takes long enough for Doom to get so far into production that it'd cost too much to stop.

If I were to bet, I'd say the Hawley Doom film won't happen. But I still think there's maybe a 20% chance it gets made. Unlikely, but far from impossible.

If Disney has the votes on July 21st the deal gets done by Christmas.

 

[Flint Marko]

Because Alvarez was the most frank. Everyone else who's parted ways kept it so tight lipped.

And, again, Alvarez was in talks with Marvel back in phase 2. See how you completely dodged that?

The biggest difference I notice in phase 3 is that the MCU is willing to poke fun of its own tropes in this discussion of creative freedom. That suddenly doesn't make Dr Strange have this unnecessary sense of humor with a familiar plot, that suddenly doesn't make Homecoming obviously written by a committee, that suddenly doesn't make Ragnarok feel less like they wanted another GOTG, and that suddenly doesn't make BP packed to the brim with all these tropes yet none of his trademark action direction.

Your personal quibbles with the (incredibly well-received and successful) films in question have no real bearing on this particular conversation.

A Hawley Doom movie under FOX would be far and away different from that.

Sure it would. Just like that Josh Trank FF. Or that New Mutants movie. Or Tim Millers Deadpool 2. Or maybe even Dark Phoenix, delayed for major reshoots.

You keep cherry-picking what you want to believe and downplaying things that refute your point. Just because you want something to be true doesn’t make it so.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

There is still doubt over who will buy Fox, if it will be approved and when it will happen.

Most likely, Disney will buy Fox, and it will be approved, and it'll be completed within 3 years. I think that will happen, but there's doubt.

In the mean time, Fox will keep making films, and they'll continue to exploit the properties they have rights to.

Question is whether the process takes long enough for Doom to get so far into production that it'd cost too much to stop.

If I were to bet, I'd say the Hawley Doom film won't happen. But I still think there's maybe a 20% chance it gets made. Unlikely, but far from impossible.

Three years?!?! I think most people think it will be closed before the end of this year. The department of justice has given their blessing, the shareholder meeting is scheduled for July 27th, and after that there should just be some administrative details to clean up.

 

[Big Bang]

Three years?!?! I think most people think it will be closed before the end of this year. The department of justice has given their blessing, the shareholder meeting is scheduled for July 27th, and after that there should just be some administrative details to clean up.

At the moment, all that remains beyond that is for a judge to rubber stamp the sale of the RSN's.

No way on God's green Earth does this process take 3 years. Not after how expediently the DOJ gave its approval. The shareholders are likely chomping at the bit to take advantage of that and get a deal done ASAP.

 

[1627523]

And, again, Alvarez was in talks with Marvel back in phase 2. See how you completely dodged that?



Your personal quibbles with the (incredibly well-received and successful) films in question have no real bearing on this particular conversation.



Sure it would. Just like that Josh Trank FF. Or that New Mutants movie. Or Tim Millers Deadpool 2. Or maybe even Dark Phoenix, delayed for major reshoots.

You keep cherry-picking what you want to believe and downplaying things that refute your point. Just because you want something to be true doesn’t make it so.

Again with Tim Miller? Do people think he left because of FOX? I'm actual baffled. it's pretty much accepted it wasn't between FOX and Tim Miller. I'm confused as to why people want to push this notion he had a fight with FOX when that isn't the truth.
From THR
"The filmmaker has parted ways with the studio over what insiders say are creative differences between him and Ryan Reynolds, the actor who plays the titular Marvel character."

I'm missing something here? It seems some people need to do more research before they claim stuff.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Three years?!?! I think most people think it will be closed before the end of this year. The department of justice has given their blessing, the shareholder meeting is scheduled for July 27th, and after that there should just be some administrative details to clean up.

The only way it doesn't happen is if Comcast comes in with a superior bid before it is too late. I admit that I'm not sure when exactly "too late" is. The 27th, perhaps?

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

The only way it doesn't happen is if Comcast comes in with a superior bid before it is too late. I admit that I'm not sure when exactly "too late" is. The 27th, perhaps?

In theory, Comcast has right up until they actually close.

Realistically, they better have something before the 27th if they want to make another bid.

And even more realistically, they should have, if they have any serious intention of offering a new bid, said something last week so Fox could have applied the brakes and not scheduled the meeting and not started printing ballots etc.

Fox is quickly approaching the point that nobody will want to deal with another delay unless Comcast has something like a $100 billion bid.

And even a $100 billion bid would likely be viewed skeptically because it's highly likely Comcast's own shareholders would reject such a bid.

 

[Big Bang]

In theory, Comcast has right up until they actually close.

Realistically, they better have something before the 27th if they want to make another bid.

And even more realistically, they should have, if they have any serious intention of offering a new bid, said something last week so Fox could have applied the brakes and not scheduled the meeting and not started printing ballots etc.

Fox is quickly approaching the point that nobody will want to deal with another delay unless Comcast has something like a $100 billion bid.

And even a $100 billion bid would likely be viewed skeptically because it's highly likely Comcast's own shareholders would reject such a bid.

Pretty much. At the end of the day, it's certainty vs. uncertainty. Fox knows on one hand what they can get today without any potential for the deal getting scuttled. Contrasted with Comcast who carries an amount of potential deal scuttling that it may not even be worth the risk, even if substantially higher.

The potentials remind me of when back in 2008 Microsoft tried to buy Yahoo! to the tune of $44.6 Billion. Long story short, Jerry Yang, co-founder of Yahoo! and CEO at the time, did everything he could to torpedo a deal. Fast-forward to 2016, and Yahoo! is finally sold....to Verizon....for $4.8 Billion. On paper, Yang looks like the dumbest S#B to ever have been running a company and have a chance to sell. Glad I didn't own any shares in that train wreck.

Investors don't like being burned. Especially by ego. They have a definite opportunity here with the DOJ having already blessed the deal. I don't see them walking away from Disney unless Comcast can bring together something like $120 Billion to cover all potential failures.

 

[Silvermoth]

Unlike the Fox cinematic versions, comic book Victor Von Doom doesn't have super powers.

Well, genius level intellect. Gauntlets that shoot fire and an army of robots. They count. Plus we do classify him as a super villain. And he has magic and is second in line to be sorcerer supreme

 

[Flint Marko]

Again with Tim Miller? Do people think he left because of FOX? I'm actual baffled. it's pretty much accepted it wasn't between FOX and Tim Miller. I'm confused as to why people want to push this notion he had a fight with FOX when that isn't the truth.
From THR
"The filmmaker has parted ways with the studio over what insiders say are creative differences between him and Ryan Reynolds, the actor who plays the titular Marvel character."

I'm missing something here? It seems some people need to do more research before they claim stuff.

He left after Fox sided with Reynolds and not him. Thats not giving a director ample creative freedom, which was the point.

Again, I entered the conversation when 2KT09 hilariously claimed that Fox is a Studio that regularly gives directors ample creative freedom when it comes to Marvel projects. They have with certain projects but not with others, to the point where they’re currently reshaping at least one movie because of their meddling. You’d have to have your head buried in the sand to actually make that claim.

 

[1627523]

He left after Fox sided with Reynolds and not him. Thats not giving a director ample creative freedom, which was the point.

Again, I entered the conversation when 2KT09 hilariously claimed that Fox is a Studio that regularly gives directors ample creative freedom when it comes to Marvel projects. They have with certain projects but not with others, to the point where they’re currently reshaping at least one movie because of their meddling. You’d have to have your head buried in the sand to actually make that claim.

You could hardly blame FOX. You expect them to fire Ryan Ryenolds? He's the face of the franchise. Imagine if RDJ and Shane Black were having fights do you expect Marvel Studios to give RDJ the shaft to support Shane? At the end of the day they're arguments were holding production up, so FOX took the necessary action. This isn't an example of FOX micro managing. FOX was giving both of them creative freedom. I feel like your grasping at straws here. Again the fact Tim Miller jumped on to another marvel fox move a mere 1 1/2 years later shows there is no bad blood between them.

 

[BaronZemo]

Because Alvarez was the most frank. Everyone else who's parted ways kept it so tight lipped.

The biggest difference I notice in phase 3 is that the MCU is willing to poke fun of its own tropes in this discussion of creative freedom. That suddenly doesn't make Dr Strange have this unnecessary sense of humor with a familiar plot, that suddenly doesn't make Homecoming obviously written by a committee, that suddenly doesn't make Ragnarok feel less like they wanted another GOTG, and that suddenly doesn't make BP packed to the brim with all these tropes yet none of his trademark action direction.

A Hawley Doom movie under FOX would be far and away different from that.

There is absolutely not reason to keep it tight liped and they haven't. Again you really haven't your homework. Shane Black basically said that Ike gave her a memo to scrap the female villain in IM3 because of toys. Does that looks like keeping it silent to you? You seem to think that the creative freedom that all the fans and critics applaud the MCU for is just another conspiracy so directors don't enrage Feige? Whedon and Black left and they had nothing but praise for Feige. If you have a certain notion about Phase 3 that's up to you. Wishing the sky was purple doesn't make him purple.

HC was not written by a committee, Ragnarok had Taika's signature humor in that you are clearly unaware of and Guardians, Black Panther and IW all had the respective sensibilities and voices of their directors shown. Professional critics with much bigger experience in movies than you have noted that. Just because you can't tell the difference between two styles of comedy apart it doesn't mean they are the same.

 

[BaronZemo]

You could hardly blame FOX. You expect them to fire Ryan Ryenolds? He's the face of the franchise. Imagine if RDJ and Shane Black were having fights do you expect Marvel Studios to give RDJ the shaft to support Shane? At the end of the day they're arguments were holding production up, so FOX took the necessary action. This isn't an example of FOX micro managing. FOX was giving both of them creative freedom. I feel like your grasping at straws here. Again the fact Tim Miller jumped on to another marvel fox move a mere 1 1/2 years later shows there is no bad blood between them.

If Alan Taylor is getting rehired to do another MCU movie does that mean there weren't any creative differences? Burton had creative differences with WB over Batman 89 and he still returned. The one doesn;t negate the other.

You are the one gasping at straws trying to defend a studio with much richer micro-managing history than MS. There are various past and on-going examples. And neither you nor 2kt9 have any substantial argument for the smooth sailing of MS over many years after Pelmutter was booted and various articles painting his Creative Committee as restricting. It's really not that hard to figure it out.....

 

[1627523]

If Alan Taylor is getting rehired to do another MCU movie does that mean there weren't any creative differences? Burton had creative differences with WB over Batman 89 and he still returned. The one doesn;t negate the other.

You are the one gasping at straws trying to defend a studio with much richer micro-managing history than MS. There are various past and on-going examples. And neither you nor 2kt9 have any substantial argument for the smooth sailing of MS over many years after Pelmutter was booted and various articles painting his Creative Committee as restricting. It's really not that hard to figure it out.....

I'm not here to argue about FOX overall track record. I was just arguing about the Tim Miller situation. There have been no actual reports of FOX and Tim having creative diffrences that's the point im trying to make.

Here some more evidence:"The Wrap reports that the sequel to Deadpool had actually been in the works before the first movie was even in front of cameras. However, by the time the sequel was officially announced this past April at CinemaCon, Tim Miller was already starting to have some creative disagreements not only with Ryan Reynolds, but with writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick."

This quote tells us that Tim Miller was disagreements with the writers and Ryan Ryenolds. If the star of your movie and your writers are against you do you HONESTLY believe the studio is going back you? More people were against him than for him so FOX took the necessary action. End of story.

 

[2kt09]

There is absolutely no reason to keep it tight liped and they haven't. Again you really haven't done your homework. Shane Black basically said that Ike gave him a memo to scrap the female villain in IM3 because of toys. Does that looks like keeping it silent to you? You seem to think that the creative freedom that all the fans and critics applaud the MCU for is just another conspiracy so directors don't enrage Feige? Whedon and Black left and they had nothing but praise for Feige. If you have a certain notion about Phase 3 that's up to you. Wishing the sky was purple doesn't make him purple.

HC was not written by a committee, Ragnarok had Taika's signature humor in that you are clearly unaware of and Guardians, Black Panther and IW all had the respective sensibilities and voices of their directors shown. Professional critics with much bigger experience in movies than you have noted that. Just because you can't tell the difference between two styles of comedy apart it doesn't mean they are the same.

Yes, I also know Favreau made a not so subtle movie about his experience. Alvarez is still the only one to be that concise.
I've seen the marketing and the movies. If you're referring to Ragnarok, it's so obvious they wanted to apply what Gunn's done with GOTG and they brought in the closest other guy to do it. That mindset was apparent even with the trailers.

The creative freedom I refer to is something akin to a Doom movie, a Doom solo, not just another F4 reboot, and it only being a thing because Hawley came forward with it. If that goes through, I absolutely expect him to have the most liberties possible because it doesn't make sense otherwise given little to no tie-in incentive is there. Just his movie.

 

[HBarnill]

Again with Tim Miller? Do people think he left because of FOX? I'm actual baffled. it's pretty much accepted it wasn't between FOX and Tim Miller. I'm confused as to why people want to push this notion he had a fight with FOX when that isn't the truth.
From THR
"The filmmaker has parted ways with the studio over what insiders say are creative differences between him and Ryan Reynolds, the actor who plays the titular Marvel character."

I'm missing something here? It seems some people need to do more research before they claim stuff.

Yeah. He left because Ryan Reynolds was being an egotistical a-hole and the sequel suffered greatly because of it.

 

[1627523]

Yeah. He left because Ryan Reynolds was being an egotistical a-hole and the sequel suffered greatly because of it.

Deadpool 2 has an 82% RT with an 8.1 on imdb and it has already made more than 700 million at box office. While I probably agree with you that the first Deadpool with Tim Miller was better I still think Deadpool 2 is a solid film also. Are u sure YOU weren't the one that was suffering because the film seems to be doing fine.

 

[Krystal]

This Doom movie intrigues me.

 

[Flint Marko]

If you're referring to Ragnarok, it's so obvious they wanted to apply what Gunn's done with GOTG and they brought in the closest other guy to do it. That mindset was apparent even with the trailers.

What does this have to do with anything? Taika made the movie he wanted to make, and we all know it. The fact that there are similarities between it and Guardians doesn’t negate the creative freedom he was clearly offered.

The creative freedom I refer to is something akin to a Doom movie, a Doom solo, not just another F4 reboot, and it only being a thing because Hawley came forward with it. If that goes through, I absolutely expect him to have the most liberties possible because it doesn't make sense otherwise given little to no tie-in incentive is there. Just his movie.

I’m sure Josh Boone thought the same thing. And Trank.

Oh, another example: Mangold was reticent to make Logan after his experience with the Wolverine given how that movie was, in his words, “compromised”. So no, I have no idea why you think Fox is known for giving directors creative freedom.

You could hardly blame FOX. You expect them to fire Ryan Ryenolds? He's the face of the franchise. Imagine if RDJ and Shane Black were having fights do you expect Marvel Studios to give RDJ the shaft to support Shane? At the end of the day they're arguments were holding production up, so FOX took the necessary action. This isn't an example of FOX micro managing. FOX was giving both of them creative freedom. I feel like your grasping at straws here. Again the fact Tim Miller jumped on to another marvel fox move a mere 1 1/2 years later shows there is no bad blood between them.

We’re specifically talking about studios relationship with directors and the creative freedom given to them as the director of a movie. Tim Miller’s departure fits that bill. If, for example, Shane Black had parted ways with Marvel because of disagreements with RDJ you better believe it’d still be brought up as an example of them not working well with directors and it’d be understandable.

 

[1627523]

What does this have to do with anything? Taika made the movie he wanted to make, and we all know it. The fact that there are similarities between it and Guardians doesn’t negate the creative freedom he was clearly offered.



I’m sure Josh Boone thought the same thing. And Trank.

Oh, another example: Mangold was reticent to make Logan after his experience with the Wolverine given how that movie was, in his words, “compromised”. So no, I have no idea why you think Fox is known for giving directors creative freedom.



We’re specifically talking about studios relationship with directors and the creative freedom given to them as the director of a movie. Tim Miller’s departure fits that bill. If, for example, Shane Black had parted ways with Marvel because of disagreements with RDJ you better believe it’d still be brought up as an example of them not working well with directors and it’d be understandable.[/QUOTE ]

but the fact is he was given creative freedom. his problems were with a fellow creative not the studio. The reason I think this doesn't count is because the studio was stuck between a rock and a hard place. While I guess you could say this is an Example of them not giving creative freedom this in no way is on FOX. If any other studio was put in the same situation whether it be Marvel studios or Blum house they would make the same choice. The point your trying to make is that Fox is not good for Dr.Doom because they won't give creative freedom. Your argument implies that Fox has a choice to give creative freedom or not right? How does Tim Miller's situation fit that implication? Fox really had no choice in that situation. Both the star of the movie and the writers were against Tim and he was holding up production. If Fox gave him creative freedom that would most likely negatively impact the movie because Ryan and the writers hearts wouldn't be in it. So realistically what could of FOX done? That's why I think this doesn't count.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I think there's a fallacy creeping into this discussion that 'studio involvement is bad'.

I don't think that's true. Studios are ultimately the ones responsible for the product they put out. They hire directors, they give directors the resources they need and when necessary, they guide the director and/or fire the director.

That inherent partnership works very well with Marvel because they have an over-arching vision and they hire the right directors and they work with those directors and the result is quality film after quality film that are generally faithful to the comics.

Fox, on the other hand, is clueless. They get involved when they shouldn't and they don't get involved when they should. They're a blind squirrel trying to find a nut, and like that blind squirrel, they occasionally get lucky and stumble upon a competent director and let them make a good film. But their incompetence leads to failure as often as a watchable film.


Daredevil, Fantastic Four 2005, Elektra, X-Men: The Last Stand, Fantastic Four, Rise of the Silver Surfer, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, Fant4stic, X-Men: Apocalypse

Those aren't just flukes, they're half the films Fox has made.

Now, just to make a point, I'm going to embarrass myself horribly:

"I remember the first time I saw Memento, I thought: "Wow! This director is really good."

And we've seen what Christopher Nolan has done since then. If you go back and look at some of the early films of directors who ended up being great, you can generally see a certain something.

Great directors can take simple stories and tell them in fresh and interesting ways, and I think we saw some clear evidence of that in Chronicle.

I feel reasonably confident that Trank is a good director, but that doesn't ensure he can do a film like FF - I felt exactly the same way when I heard Nolan when I heard he was doing Batman.

Trank's history is far too brief to make any firm judgemets at this point, but I feel about as good as I could about any director with a similarly limited track-record."


That's a quote from me from January 2013, and I believed every word I said when I wrote that.

And I still believe Trank showed me more in Chronicle than Hawley has shown me with Fargo and Legion.

I enjoyed Fargo and Legion, but those are 13 hour TV shows and the writing, story-telling, cinematography, special effects, production design etc. for a 13 hour TV show are very different than those for a 2 hour feature film.

And Hawley's actual directing experience is extremely limited. He has only directed 4 TV episodes. Other directors have done all the other Fargo and Legion episodes.

So at this moment, Hawely could be better than Trank or he could be worse. And I have no way to know if he knows and likes and respects Doom, or doesn't give a s*** about Doom. And in the case of the latter, I can't count on Fox to correct him if his story is completely off.

If Trank had been working for Marvel, I have absolutely no doubt they would not have green-lit his script or production design for Fant4stic. They would have sent him back to start over, and if he wasn't able to drastically improve his first effort, they would have fired him.

As crazy as it may seem, I still believe Trank is a talented director and could make a good film under the right conditions. I'm actually looking forward to his Al Capone film and suspect it could really be something. And, get this, if Marvel actually hired him to do a Marvel film, I would look forward to seeing that film.

I was dead wrong in 2013 when I thought Trank could make a good film with Fox, but I've learned from experience.

And I think some people are making the exact same mistake now that I made in 2013.

And on the topic of studio involvement, Fox studio involvement is bad, Marvel involvement is good. In this case, if Fox makes this film, we have to hope Fox doesn't stick their nose in it because they'll screw it up. So we have to hope Fox will stay out of it and we have to hope Hawley can direct a feature film (when he has never done it before), and we have to hope that Hawley understands Doom. That's a lot of hoping and a lot of things that could go wrong.

With Marvel, we wouldn't have to put that blind faith into it because they have a history of doing it right, and they would either make sure Hawley had the vision and resources to do it right... or they wouldn't let him do it.

 

[Aurakles]

Yeah I'm not going to defend any of those films, but 50/50 odds isn't that bad.

I still haven't seen Chronicle, I bought the DVD but haven't gotten around to watching it.

It's true Hawley doesn't have a lot of directing experience, so I think it's good he's making Pale Blue Dot first. That should hopefully give him a better idea of how to make Doom.

I'm not going expect little of this film simply because Fox is behind it, yes they've made some terrible films, but they've made some brilliant ones too. I take their films on a case by case basis. I'm worried about New Mutants, skeptical of Dark Phoenix, and I think of Gambit as a bit of a joke.
But Hawley has completely won me over, I'll give any project he's involved with a chance.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I still haven't seen Chronicle, I bought the DVD but haven't gotten around to watching it.

Check it out. I think it's a pretty interesting take on "what if some kids got superpowers in the real world?".

And I hope Hawley knocks it out of the park. He definitely has some talent.

I just can't go all-in on him making a Dr. Doom film, at this moment.

 

[The Overlord]

So what would Doom do in his own film? Would he fight a B-list villlain like Diablo?

 

[2kt09]

I'm not going expect little of this film simply because Fox is behind it.

I expect more because Hawley is behind it.
He's got the experience of being more than just a writer and a director as folks seem to disregard what his duties as a showrunner is.
He's doing on a tv budget what guys like Moore and Gaiman dream of.
I expect more because of his character-driven storytelling and especially the case for villains, anti-heroes, "anti-villains"

I expect more because this isn't a Pac Rim Uprising case.
There's no incentive to being a commercial for something else.

I expect more because FOX, more specifically the team behind the recent X-flicks, are A-OK with what I mentioned above ^