Kevin Fiege vs other producers

[batman1]

Love Marvel films. So I have some questions about KF and movies in general

So I have two questions-

1. What is KF doing that other producers can't.
2. What is the difference between a producer and a creative producer. There seems to be a hiarchy where you have KF, Jason Blum, etc. then you have producers who can do business but supposedly don't know what they're doing.

Not what I think but this is how it's always portrayed in the media and public. So what is the difference?

 

[NotNickFury]

I mean, could you be a bit more specific when you say 'other producers'? Because there's umpteenth film producers, many who have been at this game longer than Feige, out there in the industry that probably aren't or even interested in doing a sort of job that he does. Not every producer is trying to craft a cinematic universe or hierarchy within a set series of projects.

What Kevin Feige does would vary from someone like a Joel Silver, or Bonnie Arnold over at Dreamworks.

 

[batman1]

I mean, could you be a bit more specific when you say 'other producers'? Because there's umpteenth film producers, many who have been at this game longer than Feige, out there in the industry that probably aren't or even interested in doing a sort of job that he does. Not every producer is trying to craft a cinematic universe or hierarchy within a set series of projects.

What Kevin Feige does would vary from someone like a Joel Silver, or Bonnie Arnold over at Dreamworks.

Well, explain please.

 

[Hammer!]

1. Picks right talent for projects
2. Greenlights projects, steers them in direction to dip into different genres
3. Runs well oiled production system, promotes from within
4. Continues to find ways to improve films, give film “pluses” right up to release
5. Oversees all production to adequately reach point and contain elements needed for future, whilst giving filmmakers space to do what they want.
6. Has a good pulse on his fan base and what they want while knowing how to surprise and challenge them.
7. Is an actual fan with a passion for creating ambitious, pleasing satisfying projects more than he is counting dollars.
8. Is genuinely well liked which attracts talent and makes deals with other producers (Spider-Man) possible.
9. Never goes off the rails with budgets and sets reasonable goals for projects.
10. Is a great showsman, with great communication with fans and media. Always leaves fans wanting more.

Many producers have one, a few, or many of these qualities, but Feige is probably the only one to have them all. He’s unquestionably the most powerful, successful, and influential producer at the moment. If his next ten years are on par to the last ten, it’s GOAT territory.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

he has a passion and understanding of film making AND a passion and understanding of the source material he adapts, he surrounds himself with people who share his passion and listens to their advices and points of view without losing his own vision.

That's basically it. Love what you do, surround yourself with people that share the love and can help you doing what you do better.

 

[MbJ]

He has a clear vision for what he wants. By contrast, a major reason other shared universe franchises have had trouble getting off the ground is trying to hit too many checkmarks at once.

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

The man is a visionary and like some others were saying he has a love and respect for the comic books. He doesn't rush things, has a clear vision for his projects and the way he wants to shape it.

All hail Lord Feige.

 

[Saitou Hajime]

Feige was a comic book encyclopedia groomed by Donner and Arad in the filmmaking business during the early days of 21st century superhero cinema. He was schooled on what worked and what didn't with Fox's successes and failures. He took those lessons and put them to work with Marvel Studios.

 

[batman1]

Very good answers.

 

[DarkKnight88]

You know Kevin Feige's name cause you like comic book movies. But there are many successful producers from the beginning of cinema who make strong films year after year. Oscar winning films. Feige is no better than those but stands out because he's in a genre you like and may have only knowledge of.

 

[batman1]

You know Kevin Feige's name cause you like comic book movies. But there are many successful producers from the beginning of cinema who make strong films year after year. Oscar winning films. Feige is no better than those but stands out because he's in a genre you like and may have only knowledge of.

What are some of the things they did to get success?

 

[honestbharani]

You know Kevin Feige's name cause you like comic book movies. But there are many successful producers from the beginning of cinema who make strong films year after year. Oscar winning films. Feige is no better than those but stands out because he's in a genre you like and may have only knowledge of.

Does not always mean successful films... And honestly, what he has accomplished is at the level of George Lucas' of the world and I certainly don't see any of this "many successful" producers actually being better than him irrespective of genre.

 

[Herofan]

Feige I suppose is smart to focus on special effects & comedy rather than story as story involves greater risk of alienating long-term readers and also general audiences, Feige is careful to avoid or minimize controversial content and, when it is included, to either quickly resolve it or have it be ignored later on. He sees the movies as wish-fulfillment, feels that's why they're successful, and so makes sure that they focus on and stick to that.

 

[Samuron]

What has set Feige apart is that he he is not embarrassed by his love of comic books.

He doesn't abandon the material, he presents it unashamed and shows the rest of the word what we fans have known all along.

 

[daddydivine]

Edwin Catmull, president of Pixar and Disney animation is just as successful and important to Disney as Kevin Feige. In terms of consistant quality he's the closest thing to Feige.

 

[DACrowe]

I would say he is a showrunner in the television sense. Or in the classic Hollywood sense (pre studio collapse in the 1960s). His is the "authorship" which drives the tone of the movies, and he has a very good handle on what audiences like. More so than most producers and even many directors, whether that translates into great cinema is open for debate.

 

[honestbharani]

Feige I suppose is smart to focus on special effects & comedy rather than story as story involves greater risk of alienating long-term readers and also general audiences

That is, with all due respect, completely and utterly false.

 

[honestbharani]

I would say he is a showrunner in the television sense. Or in the classic Hollywood sense (pre studio collapse in the 1960s). His is the "authorship" which drives the tone of the movies, and he has a very good handle on what audiences like. More so than most producers and even many directors, whether that translates into great cinema is open for debate.

Irrespective of what a few entitled elitists may feel, it is not really up for debate given what "cinema" actually means.


And I would say the best part about Feige is he understands storytelling, characters and what makes these particular things tick, as a fan, as a creative and as an executive. And that is what makes him tick. He is not going to get involved in direction or scripts and such stuff. But he is in the room for these discussions and he gives good pointers that ensure the stories and the characters stay consistent and they prioritize showing the strengths of those characters and those stories.

Put it this way - there are a number of people even here at SHH who could never really write a complete script or screenplay on these characters, but who can, if a story be narrated to them, point out exactly what and how it should change to do these characters justice and ensure they tick with the audience. He is one of those in addition to being an excellent excellent producer and also a generally likeable guy who people seem to like working with. It also helps that he seems to have an amazingly uncanny eye for talent.

 

[BaronZemo]

Feige I suppose is smart to focus on special effects & comedy rather than story as story involves greater risk of alienating long-term readers and also general audiences, Feige is careful to avoid or minimize controversial content and, when it is included, to either quickly resolve it or have it be ignored later on. He sees the movies as wish-fulfillment, feels that's why they're successful, and so makes sure that they focus on and stick to that.

He focuses on story more than most other franchies in history so i have no idea what you are talking about. And the tone is decided by the directors, especially in Phase 3. Which is why Strange doesn't have the same tone as HC and Ragnarok doesn't have the same tone as BP or IW.

 

[BaronZemo]

I would say he is a showrunner in the television sense. Or in the classic Hollywood sense (pre studio collapse in the 1960s). His is the "authorship" which drives the tone of the movies, and he has a very good handle on what audiences like. More so than most producers and even many directors, whether that translates into great cinema is open for debate.

He doesn't drive the tone of the movies. Directors do and it's obvious.

 

[DACrowe]

Irrespective of what a few entitled elitists may feel, it is not really up for debate given what "cinema" actually means.

So what does great cinema mean? And does the Marvel Studios assembly line qualify as it?

I'm not actually going to indulge this conversation, my point is that by simply saying that is stirring the post. Hence "up for debate."

Regardless, it is impossible not to note he has a fantastic grasp of what audiences want and a very strong, present understanding of how to achieve that every time out. He honestly reminds me more of an old Hollywood mogul than a TV showrunner the more I think about it. Someone who understands the genre and his fanbase and knows how to deliver finely tuned products that (almost) always hit the sweet spot.

 

[DACrowe]

He doesn't drive the tone of the movies. Directors do and it's obvious.

With a few notable exceptions--James Gunn and Ryan Coogler spring to mind--most Marvel movies have a very similar aesthetic and a tonal consistency. They frequently feature a mildly self-effacing ironic detachment from which most of the humor derives, a pleasant colorful, but largely flat color palate, and a genuine sense of how the rules in this universe operate. It's why Doctor Strange never got too weird or psychedelic or how even with the world often in peril, there is a breezy, sardonic energy between the heroes' combined efforts.

I am not knocking this. I am observing their tonal and aesthetic similarities, which is fair to say come from Feige to more than a small degree, as he is the one consistent ingredient on all Marvel Studios films.

 

[BaronZemo]

With a few notable exceptions--James Gunn and Ryan Coogler spring to mind--most Marvel movies have a very similar aesthetic and a tonal consistency. They frequently feature a mildly self-effacing ironic detachment from which most of the humor derives, a pleasant colorful, but largely flat color palate, and a genuine sense of how the rules in this universe operate. It's why Doctor Strange never got too weird or psychedelic or how even with the world often in peril, there is a breezy, sardonic energy between the heroes' combined efforts.

I am not knocking this. I am observing their tonal and aesthetic similarities, which is fair to say come from Feige to more than a small degree, as he is the one consistent ingredient on all Marvel Studios films.

If you think that Waititi's humor is similar to Gunn's or Russos's aesthetic the same to Coogler or Watts then you really haven't paid much attention.

You keep using the word tone but again you show bias. The majority of the X-mne movies have the same tone yet i have never seen you calling them out on it. The only ones that stand out tone-wise are First Class with it's pulpy charm and Deadpool with his self-aware anarchy.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

He's like Batman in the world of film producers, prep-time Batman.

 

[DACrowe]

If you think that Waititi's humor is similar to Gunn's or Russos's aesthetic the same to Coogler or Watts then you really haven't paid much attention.

You keep using the word tone but again you show bias. The majority of the X-mne movies have the same tone yet i have never seen you calling them out on it. The only ones that stand out tone-wise are First Class with it's pulpy charm and Deadpool with his self-aware anarchy.

You're right most of the X-films--all of them directed by Bryan Singer, except for First Class and (the awful) The Last Stand--have a very similar aesthetic and tonal consistency. To their detriment by the time we reached Apocalypse. I'm not sure what your point is there? You mention Deadpool 2, that movie has a moody, noir-like high contrast lighting and a texture that is reminiscent of Atomic Blonde and David Leitch's other films. It actually doesn't really look like most superhero movies, which when combined with its callow sense of humor makes for a pretty distinct experience.

I already said Gunn and Coogler are (somewhat) exceptions, but if you don't notice a consistently similar use of humor and ironic detachment to the proceedings that is constantly used to undercut the tension and semi-wink at the audience, and a visual and aesthetic consistency over 10 years, you are in denial.

Spoiler

For the record, this isn't necessarily bad. Auteur is a term that means "author." I would say inside the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Kevin Feige is an author, and you can see that mark on all of the films, some to lesser degrees (Guardians and Black Panther, which were made by real directorial auteurs) and some where it's more obvious (Thor: The Dark World, the Ant-Man movies, the Avengers movies). That isn't a bad thing. It is just an observable thing.