Patty Jenkins no longer directing "Thor 2"

[kedrell]

Regarding DIAB, it can't work for a summer tentpole. It's a movie about a guy suffering from alcoholism. Who the hell wants to munch popcorn, take their kids to see THAT? It would be kind of depressing and more along the lines of Leaving Las Vegas than it would Spider-Man or James Bond. I have no problem with the storyline but it can't work in the movies. Perhaps if they made an Iron Man t.v. series like was mentioned. 2 hours isn't enough to see a guy fall apart, hit a low, and climb back.

Well actually I think it is enough time(and remember I'm the one that was arguing that DIAB wouldn't work as a movie). The problem is that to do the subject matter any justice, THAT'S ALL YOU'D HAVE IN THE MOVIE. And these still need to be summer blockbuster, superhero action movies to boot. That's why it wouldn't work. In order to fit it all in inside a theatrical movie you'd be looking at probably a 3-4 hour movie and few would put up with that. And then the movie would tank at the box office.

 

[kedrell]

The 'good' part is the problem though. I think they're fine but could be much better.

But hey, they make money so who gives a damn..

I think they've all been good so far. A couple of them I'd say were actually great. But I do agree that there will always be room for improvement. I don't think Marvel Studios are blind to this either. They know they'll live or die by the quality of their product.

 

[Crimson King]

I love how people assume you're a blind Marvel Studios supporter just because you don't believe everything you hear in the rumor mill. All it takes is one unfounded "Is Marvel running off its directors?" article (with no proof, mind you) and people take it as fact and call you naive for questioning it.

I'd like to see MS improve in a lot of areas, but their track record is nothing to sneeze at. Five movies, five hits (to various degrees), and a movie event in the making for next summer. I think they're doing just fine.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Add ''the in-betweeners' to the title.

Fair enough .

The 'good' part is the problem though. I think they're fine but could be much better.

But hey, they make money so who gives a damn..

Totally agree, they need to get beyond their formulaic approach at some point.

And that last sentence could be thier tagline .

 

[kedrell]

I love how people assume you're a blind Marvel Studios supporter just because you don't believe everything you hear in the rumor mill. All it takes is one unfounded "Is Marvel running off its directors?" article (with no proof, mind you) and people take it as fact and call you naive for questioning it.

I'd like to see MS improve in a lot of areas, but their track record is nothing to sneeze at. Five movies, five hits (to various degrees), and a movie event in the making for next summer. I think they're doing just fine.

I'm right there with ya.

 

[BigThor]

The 'good' part is the problem though. I think they're fine but could be much better.

But hey, they make money so who gives a damn..

True, but there's alot more room for them to be worse than better.

 

[Godzilla2000]

I don't think Batman and Robin was all that close to the source material.

Oh, it was close to a source material, namely the campy 60's TV series...whichy was not a very good thing to be faithful to.

 

[TheDragonator]

I love how Alexei thinks that not agreeing with him = being a mindless drone.

However, it seems impossible for him to consider that maybe it wasn't Feige plannnig to sabotage all of the MCU movies, but perhaps something like she was offered something else, or that they found someone *gasp* better suited for the job at the last second?

But no, it's 'Feige is the devil and everyone hates me' bull****. AGAIN. Despite the fact that this is an argument he's stated over and over for again, likely gotten infractions for, and was put on probation for. Yet he continues to not get the picture.

Perhaps he doesn't realize the reason we disagree with his 'truth' is because, in fact, he acts like a pompous jerk to everyone he meets that doesn't agree with him? Seriously.

He treats fellow users like crap.
He treats others opinions like crap.
He treats the MODS like crap.
He refuses to listen to others opinion.
He can't spell 'clique' to save his goddamn life.
And acts as though everyone is out to get him.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Nobody's "ignoring" foreign and worldwide numbers. It's just that those of us who use boxofficemojo.com as a touchstone (i.e., most of us on this forum) have to realize that BOM uses domestic (U.S.) as their gauge in all the showdown/comparison charts, including all-time b.o.

But it *is* true that Thor remains something of an anomaly in the superhero genre as pretty much only one of two flicks whose b.o. came *mainly* from overseas markets instead of U.S. at 60%+ of the global take. (The other was Hancock, but nobody ever counts that one, right? )



I'm not calling Marvel and Feige "villains." I'm just saying that they're starting to get a growing reputation among directors and actors alike as being a meat-n-taters penny-pinching Wal-Mart studio.

I understand that Feige's budget-conscious approach to keeping a tight rein on Marvel property comes of necessity, since he (and we) have seen Marvel characters and canon get raped before the MS era; but I don't think his over-your-shoulder constant meddling has yielded any certified all-time blockbusters beyond RDJ's Iron Man, and the box office numbers (and off-screen interviews with actors and directors) proves that.

I agree and disagree with some of this. Before I get to that, I must say thanks for saying this all in a respectful fashion unlike Alexei, who seems to think acting like a pretentious child will help his case.

Worldwide #'s are becoming much more important, even in Hollywood. Larger and larger percentages are coming in from Worldwide while the domestic market is remaining steady/declining. It goes beyond comic book movies, many blockbusters a larger chunk of its money worldwide than domestic.

Thor, I believe isn't an instantly huge blockbuster, but with the numbers, its done good enough to create a stable franchise and potentially be on a bigger plateau with a great sequel (which to be honest, with this news, I'm having some doubts about).

Captain America I expected to make less internationally, but its surprising that it didn't make more than Thor domestically, but in its defense, it was released a week after the last Harry Potter, and had to deal with Cowboys and Aliens, and the surprise blockbuster Rise of the Planet of the Apes (which people were expecting to bomb).

Feige's approach isn't the end-all-be-all approach, but the results have been stable and good. I admit it's not all time good, and I'm glad at the same time people aren't settling, but I dislike when people completely throw away what's happening here.

We have a stable film studio that consistently puts up quality fun, quality superhero movies that aren't frustrating or loses the heart of the source material. Years ago, everyone was asking for at least that, after the Fox was churning out crap, and WB was struggling with the Superman movies and getting their other superheroes released.

Now, we have good stuff, and while some love it, some hate that it doesn't push the genre forward, and I don't think Marvel needs to push the genre forward. They will when they release that their box office is gaining less and less, but for now, I'm fine with enjoying some fun, entertaining Marvel movies.

Leave the revisionist, desconstruction of superheroes to Chris Nolan. Love TDK, but every superhero movie doesn't have to reinvent the wheel.

 

[TheDragonator]

Hey, guess what? Patty just said that there was no problems between her and Marvel for her leaving.

"I have had a great time working at Marvel. We parted on very good terms, and I look forward to working with them again. I have a long love of superhero films and I'd been saying over and over again to my agents at CAA that I'd like to do one. The Marvel guys are so brave in terms of who they choose overall, and I don't think they had any pause about me being a woman."

Although Alexei will just take this as being her covering Marvel's tracks, even though if she said she was upset with Marvel he'd be praising her like a queen for her 'truthfullness'. He'll likely say that because a few people who had nothing to do with Thor 2 whatsoever didn't agree with Marvel, that she's upset and just being told by Marvel to cover it up.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

People forget that both sides are interested in making a Marvel film together, but just not Thor 2.

 

[TheDragonator]

Indeed.

Hell, perhaps the reason she left was because she was offered a project from Marvel that she liked even more than Thor, maybe one of the 2014 movies.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

Indeed.

Hell, perhaps the reason she left was because she was offered a project from Marvel that she liked even more than Thor, maybe one of the 2014 movies.

As I stated above:

I don't let my excitement about that movie be ruined by this unfortunate department. The quote by Jenkins in my signature shows, this "creative differences" weren't that severe as some people here might think, it probably just was the "sequel" factor.

As a director, making a sequel usualy gives you less creative freedom. Especially if it's a big franchise. You have to follow the rules of the first movie, can't change the direction or the genre completely. The last time something like that happend was when Jim Cameron made a sequel to a great horror film in space and turned it to a mindless action movie. It worked then (to some, not me), but I can't remember it has happend since. Also, you have to somewhat go with the art direction of the first movie. You can't suddenly change the look of Asgard. Alfonso Cuaron went as far as he could in that aspect when he took over the Potter franchise, but he was very limited as well. And you don't have a final say in the casting as most of the characters are already cast and under contract.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

So who's gonna start the Patty Jenkins for Dr. Strange bandwagon?

 

[TheDragonator]

Ah, so it was that she felt it was strange having to go off of a previous director's style. That makes sense.

Still, hopefully she'll return in the future.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

Ah, so it was that she felt it was strange having to go off of a previous director's style. That makes sense.

Still, hopefully she'll return in the future.

That was just an assumption from my part.
but statements like "she will still work for Marvel, just not on a sequel" certainly sound like that was the problem.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

So who's gonna start the Patty Jenkins for Dr. Strange bandwagon?

There's a reason why I changed sig and avy yesterday t:

 

[kedrell]

Ah, so it was that she felt it was strange having to go off of a previous director's style. That makes sense.

Still, hopefully she'll return in the future.

While yes that does make sense in and of itself, it doesn't make sense that it took her/them this long to come to that conclusion. She had to know when she was hired that this was going to be the case. And this is where I fault Marvel. These are the kind of things that really should get taken care of behind the scenes and away from our view.

 

[ElMariachi]

I should hope Thor did, considering that a 3D movie ticket in 2011 costs a helluva lot more than your "normal" movie ticket did in '06, '05, '95, '03, '02, '07 and '06. All of those movies are at least 4.5 years old, and were made before the "3D 'revolution'" jacked ticket prices up to the point that it now costs 100 bucks for a family of four to go to the local multiplex. (And that's before overpriced concessions.)

You are assuming that everybody who saw Thor did so in 3D. Also forgetting that Thor and movies released in theaters today have handicaps compared to movies a decade ago. They didn't have the ability to pirate movies like they do now. Superhero movies were fresh and CGI was incredible. Both are commonplace now. These movies were also released when the economy was booming in the 80's, 90's, and first half of the last decade. You talk about 3D prices but obviously people are paying these prices in a terrible economy with high unemployment. That says alot about the popularity of Thor in my opinion. What's the excuse for similar movies like Immortals, Green Lantern, First Class, Super 8, Planet of the Apes, Rio, Kung Fu Panda 2, Real Steel, Battle LA, and Cowboys and Aliens making less money than Thor?

Let me show you what I'm talking about:

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic/mpaa.htm?page=PG-13&p=.htm

When you adjust for inflation, that pushes Thor all the way down to #78 all-time and Cap to #83.....and that's *just* for PG-13 movies. Taking that into consideration, it's not just Bats, Spidey, Supes and the X-Men that are ahead of Marvel Studios, but a *ton* of flicks.

That's a pretty weak argument. When you adjust ANYTHING for inflation, it looks worse and is sort of splitting hairs (for recent movies). If anything, the poor economy balances out inflation because fewer people have money to go to the movies.

And that list you showed me is top grossing movies of all time. Nobody said that Thor and Captain America were the most popular movies of all time. We said they are popular comicbook movies and that's a fact. You also seem to be forgetting the rest of planet earth. Thor cleaned up overseas and Captain America did pretty well too. As I said before, look at how well Thor has done compared to current movies. The only movies that beat Thor and Captain America worldwide this year have been big sequels (Twlight, Potter, Transformers, Pirates, Fast Five), a couple kid movies, and Planet of the Apes. There is no way of trying to diminish that Thor and Cap were popular movies. Thor would have been one of the most popular, non franchise movies the last few years as well and in the top 10.

What "demands"? Most of us, fanboy and hater alike, as well as Kevin Feige himself, just wanted to see if Marvel Studios could duplicate the success of Iron Man. They haven't; and they've missed the mark by a wide margin. That being said, it looks more and more like RDJ and Favreau can claim most of the credit for the success of IM, and *not* the studio itself, since Cap, Thor and Hulk haven't come close to Tony Stark's lofty ballpark.

They did duplicate the success of Iron Man. They created two franchises that people are excited about with Thor and Cap. Both were positively reviewed and made money. Success isn't measured in box office take alone. XMFC was considered a success because it resurrected the X-Men franchise, despite making much less money than the previous movies. Duplicating Iron Man's box office take was never going to happen for the simple fact that Thor and Cap are much more difficult sells. The same as Green Lantern wasn't going to replicate TDK or Prince of Persia wasn't going to match Pirates of the Caribbearn. As I mentioned, Thor is a character who has always been regarded as silly and Captain America as hokey. The money Captain America made around the world (a post 9/11, Bush, Iraq War world) is testament enough about how much of a success it was. You aren't giving enough credit because you are hating.

And you know as well as I do that all that stuff you wrote about Cap and Thor being "silly minor characters" is absolute and utter hogwash. Cap, Thor and Hulk have *always* been among the biggest guns in Marvel's marketing arsenal. Their recognition factor among the general public has always been *at least* equal to Iron Man's; and yet, again, their movies failed to catch the same lightning in a bottle that Favreau and RDJ did.

Being Marvel's 'big guns' means nothing. To the comic community, sure, but to the general public they mean nothing. Being recognized doesn't make something popular. Everybody knows who the Flash is but that doesn't mean they would pay to see a movie about him. Why? Because he is silly and second tier character like Thor, Cap, and Iron Man were before their film success. Nobody grew up with these characters like they did Batman, Spider-Man, X-Men, Superman, and the Hulk. I think we can all agree that those were the mainstream characters to the general public. There is a reason that those were the first major Hollywood superhero movies to be made/rebooted.

 

[ElMariachi]

That's a very logical way to look at it, dude you're on your way to becoming one of my favorite posters.

Thanks man, right back at ya!

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

While yes that does make sense in and of itself, it doesn't make sense that it took her/them this long to come to that conclusion. She had to know when she was hired that this was going to be the case. And this is where I fault Marvel. These are the kind of things that really should get taken care of behind the scenes and away from our view.

Patty had not made a movie for a decade and was now offered the chance to direct a big blockbuster movie. If you were in her position, would you think twice before you sign the contract? would the thought about your creative limits and the adaptation of Branaghs directorial style be in your mind at all?
I imagine she never thought of that until she had a couple of ideas that didn't work in that enviroment. Marvel took care of that as it seems they offered Patty another movie (Dr. Strange probably) instead, where she has more creative freedom and has not to fight against a ton of creative decisions already done before she joined the team.

At least that's how the whole story happend in my brain when I first read both the official statements from MS and the reaction from Patty.

 

[ElMariachi]

Even die hard Bat fans grudgingly accept that B&R is a faithful adaptation, the reason it sucks is the execution. I will say IM is the closest Mavel has to Begins given it was first cab off the ranks and therefore the one with the most freedom, so maybe he would have been able to make that film, but with their current philosophy there's no way TDK gets made.

I think we have to agree to disagree on that. Batman and Robin had nothing in common with the post-85 Batman comics. It was a faithful Silver Age adaptation but it didn't even mesh with the two Burton movies or the Animated Series. Mr. Freeze was serious in TAS. In B&R, he was a complete clown, Arnold playing himself basically, and nothing but terrible (but hilarious) puns. Same goes with Dent/Two Face in Forever. A great character in the show/comics, but a bufoon in the movie. The Schumacher movies were more like an updated 60's Batman with silly gadgets, laughable writing, and poor acting. The only thing that was missing was the 'boof', 'bang' and 'swish' words popping up.

Oh of course it can, you can always find a balance, you can't always apply the kids card as a way to avoid heavy topics, kids grow up eventually, in fact it could be a great way to curb a young kid away from that very path seeing their favourite superhero having to deal with such an addiction. This notion that a summer tent pole can't tackle deeper issues is nonsense, Inception proved that, lets not treat every superhero as simply the dude in the costume who saves the days, and lets not be afraid to tackle deeper problems. Personally I like the concept of a superhero having to deal with both a personal addiction and whatever threat he's up against mostly because we haven't seen that before in a superhero film.

Yes, you can apply the kid card here because it's a superhero movie and aimed at a wide audience. I understand that kids grow up fast but can't we just have some escapism? Do we really need to see Ant Man beat his wife in the film adaption? I'm there to be entertained. Tony Stark puking, not shaving, and being an unfunny tool doesn't sound entertaining. They tried this stuff in Hancock and frankly, it sucked and ruined the movie.

 

[ElMariachi]

The 'good' part is the problem though. I think they're fine but could be much better.

But hey, they make money so who gives a damn..

You can say this about any movie though. As I have said before, many times, the Marvel Studios movies are unfairly held to ridiculous standards. Yet, a movie like First Class with some terrible acting, glaring continuity holes, average CGI, mediocre box office returns, and rushed ending gets absolutely no criticism....at all. Not only that but it's considered to be one of the best comicbook movies. The same people who whine about the ending of Captain America, overlook the rushed ending/relationship of Magneto/Xavier. The same people who complain that Thor became a good person too quickly would have no problem with Magneto/Harvey Dent making quick villain turns.

 

[Crimson King]

Thank goodness I'm not the only one who thinks that way about XM:FC. I try to keep my opinions on that one to myself since most people here are fans.

 

[ElMariachi]

Well actually I think it is enough time(and remember I'm the one that was arguing that DIAB wouldn't work as a movie). The problem is that to do the subject matter any justice, THAT'S ALL YOU'D HAVE IN THE MOVIE. And these still need to be summer blockbuster, superhero action movies to boot. That's why it wouldn't work. In order to fit it all in inside a theatrical movie you'd be looking at probably a 3-4 hour movie and few would put up with that. And then the movie would tank at the box office.

You could do DIAB I suppose but you can't alot of the other fun stuff that made Iron Man great. I still don't know if a 2 hour movie is enough time to flesh it out though. 3 hours, sure, but we both know that ain't happening.

The biggest issue with it is the subject matter. Alcoholism isn't a pretty thing. People would complain that the movie doesn't take it seriously enough or that the movie is TOO serious. It's a fine line and would be a huge gamble to pull off. Kids wouldn't want to see that, parents might not want to take kids too see their kids to see a guy swigging Wild Turkey, and the box office would suffer. jmc mentioned Inception being a box office hit and while it's deeper (no pun intended) than most summer fare--dreams/sci-fi is easier to swallow than alcoholism. The theme of IM2 was deep enough, although it's not given enough credit round' these parts. They probally should have just avoided the palladium poisioning thing all together or made it the full story. Instad, they tried to combine Armor Wars and DIAB.