Is Kevin Feige the New Tom Rothman?

[BlackLantern]

I can get up any interest for it...X3 and Wolverine kind of soured the X-men as a film franchise for me

 

[venom892]

Same here Black Lantern.Of the four superhero movies coming out next year I think First Class will make the least money.

 

[david icke]

I can get up any interest for it...X3 and Wolverine kind of soured the X-men as a film franchise for me

I've never really got that attitude at all, they were not good X-movies for reasons of the creatives behind them, not because the ideas for X-Men stories have been exhausted. Now we have a movie with a very good director and writers who know the universe inside out.
I don't write off a franchise because of some poor desicions in some of the movies, if people did that with the comics, there would be no comics being sold on earth today, every regular run has had a creative bad patch.

 

[TheVileOne]

I still have no idea how they are going to make the new X-men movie work, but whatever.

I just wish Marvel could get the rights back on Ghost Rider, Fantastic Four, and Daredevil.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Maybe FC will be good, maybe it will bomb... all we know is that the interest in the franchise has waned and the movie will more than likely suffer because of it. Maybe the concept of a young Xavier/Erik will entice the GP, but with four other superhero films due out and a bunch of other blockbusters, it may easily go unnoticed.

 

[david icke]

I still have no idea how they are going to make the new X-men movie work, but whatever.

Well, MV just made a 30mil superhero movie that looked and felt like a 100mil one, so he could do some wonders with the time constraints.

and yeah, i realise there will be a little fatigue from the GA due to the average quality the last two were, but y'know, folk still go back to Bond, Star Wars, and most importantly Star Trek movies after a couple of average/stinkers in a row. this could feel like the new Star Trek movie to them, a fresh start with a new cast in younger versions of the roles they are familiar with.

 

[Gabe99]

How Marvel Became the Envy (and Scourge) of Hollywood
Ike Perlmutter has become one of the town's most feared (and frugal) moguls. Now, as "Guardians of the Galaxy" takes the $6 billion-grossing brand in a new and risky direction, insiders open up about the never-seen executive's ironfisted style and the underside of a superhero empire.

When Marvel began financing its own movies, the company made unconventional choices for directors such as Jon Favreau (Iron Man) and Kenneth Branagh (Thor). But both are said to have moved on in large part because Marvel was not willing to make the type of deal directors expect after launching a franchise. Feige now seems increasingly confident in managing the movies himself, relying on fresh directors to execute his vision. "They actually do good things for these filmmakers," says one talent rep. "Who was Shane Black? But Iron Man 3 — totally entertaining."

When it comes to creative decision-making, a source with knowledge of the players says Perlmutter is largely reliant on the soft-spoken Feige, who has found a way to accommodate his boss while getting what he wants. "Kevin never says, 'I would pay you, but Ike won't let me,' " says an exec who has worked on the films. "He's kept to the company line — always loyal to Ike." But Perlmutter's longtime associate Alan Fine, president of Marvel Entertainment, runs the creative committee, and chief counsel David Galluzzi takes the lead on dealmaking.

As the highly detail-oriented man in charge of Marvel's creative strategy, Feige works closely with a team that includes Louis D'Esposito, who runs physical production, and Victoria Alonso, who handles effects and postproduction. The line between creative and production blurs on Marvel films. "Louis understands how films physically get made but with a more creative bent," explains one source. "He has sort of created a situation where he hires people almost apart from the director — a conceptual artist, this and that — because they're part of the Marvel brand." (Production designer Charles Wood, for example, moved from the Thor sequel to Guardians.)

While on most movies the power resides with the director and top stars, at Marvel those players have little influence. "They view the director as executing their vision," says an exec involved with the company. Another says Feige monitors filming so closely that rather than wait for dailies, he's often on set and "sees the takes as the directors see the takes."

Another distinctive Marvel trait is the assumption that a film can be shaped in postproduction, which is Alonso's domain. "If you're a director and 75 percent of the script is good, you have to rely on them to finish and complete the movie," says this observer. An exec with experience on Marvel movies concurs: "The approach is more like animation than live action — 'We can tweak it.' "

Underlying Marvel's success, says one talent rep, is that "they know what their brand is, and they stick to it. … The minute you deviate, like Patty Jenkins [fired in 2011 as director of the Thor sequel], they get rid of you." But this source notes admiringly: "They manage to not just change the outfits of their superheroes. They've actually created a Captain America brand versus a Thor brand versus an Iron Man brand."

The tantalizing question now is whether Marvel can create a Guardians of the Galaxy brand and an Ant-Man brand. "Now they're trying some lesser characters, and it's a little more creatively risky," says an executive with Marvel experience. "But who knows? If you can sell Captain America, maybe you can sell Ant-Man."

 

[Gabe99]

Variety:
Marvel’s Victoria Alonso Keeps Budgets of Superhero Franchises From Soaring
That said, Marvel’s movies are hardly cheap, often costing around $200 million to produce.

 

[metaphysician]

Sony would probably *love* if they could make their Spider-man movies for 200M.

 

[KangConquers]

In a nutshell:
*Not paying Terrence Howard to come back as Jim Rhodes/War Machine in Iron Man 2

*Rushing Jon Favreau into making Iron Man 2 (thereby, complicating/compromising his artistic vision in the process) and then turning it into a semi-infomercial for The Avengers

*Not giving Jon Favreau a raise (considering that Iron Man broke the bank) in exchange for directing The Avengers. Not that Joss Whedon is a bad choice per se, it's just that he has an unproven track record regarding box office hits.

*Firing Edward Norton from The Avengers for not being enough of a "team player".

These are pretty lolerrific 4 years later.

 

[Rorschach2012]

hehehe first i was like "wtf thread?" then i saw when it was created.

no. feige is the opposite of Rothman