Age of Ultron Phase 2: Which Avenger had the best solo film?

[StarkTheProdigy]

Captain America: The Winter Soldier easily.
I actually liked Thor: The Dark World, yeah it's one of the weaker installments of the MCU, but I had a lot of fun and was entertained.
Iron Man 3, I hated when I first saw it, but after watching again, it grew on me, and continues to.

 

[Mandon Knight]

I know it's your opinion but there is no way to know how Marvel handles their directors. Because you liked TWS you believe Marvel left the directors alone. But because you didnt like the other movies you believe Marvel nazi'd the directors. Those are some large assumptions.

Fair point, however, the amount of directors that are only directing one then leaving after an 'uncomfortable' experience is getting to common to be not considered. Branagh, Female Director (sorry can't remember her name for TDW prior to GOT guy), and Edgar Wright was treated appallingly.

Marvel treat people like meat, a conveyor belt of 'get the job done, our way', with little creative control given to said director. I think ironically Whedon who has hated the Hollywood system for years was given the most control on Avengers and heh ho, over a billion dollars later and I reckon he'll be left alone to make A2 exactly how he wants it.

 

[TeeKay]

Fair point, however, the amount of directors that are only directing one then leaving after an 'uncomfortable' experience is getting to common to be not considered. Branagh, Female Director (sorry can't remember her name for TDW prior to GOT guy), and Edgar Wright was treated appallingly.

Branagh left due to 'timing'. Jenkins, Wright and Taylor are the only directors that have had issues with Marvel. You simply have to do what Marvel says and those directors know before hand. It's the only way Marvel can keep being consistent and not end up like the X-Men franchise were it's riddled with inconsitencies, continuity errors and what not. Everything has to be kept in line.

Marvel treat people like meat, a conveyor belt of 'get the job done, our way', with little creative control given to said director. I think ironically Whedon who has hated the Hollywood system for years was given the most control on Avengers and heh ho, over a billion dollars later and I reckon he'll be left alone to make A2 exactly how he wants it.

Not gonna happen. Everything Whedon does still has to be within Marvel's vision. He just can't do whatever he likes. Somebody (can't remmeber the user's name) here over at the Ant-Man boards posted this and very much agree:

Not everybody is cut out for Marvel. They have a specific plan, and so far their plan has worked and make consistent quality films that are better than the average comic book film. They've taken risks, and still taken chances on filmmakers. But if you don't fall in line what they want, then you don't belong. It's not "Oh my God, corporate suits are intruding upon filmmakers artistic integrity! Oh, these auteurs are suffering!" *throws up in mouth* These filmmakers are facilitators. Whether you're an Edgar Wright or an Alan Taylor. And so far, as Machiavellian as it's been, it's gotten highly successful results, commercially and among the crowds and fans. Their quality control has been nothing but solid. And honestly, if anyone thought Wright leaving was completely out of the question, you are naive if you haven't look at their track record. I was worried this would happen a while ago. But I'm actually surprised it lasted as long as it did.

 

[TeeKay]

Fair point, however, the amount of directors that are only directing one then leaving after an 'uncomfortable' experience is getting to common to be not considered. Branagh, Female Director (sorry can't remember her name for TDW prior to GOT guy), and Edgar Wright was treated appallingly.

Branagh left due to 'timing'. Jenkins, Wright and Taylor are the only directors that have had issues with Marvel. You simply have to do what Marvel says and those directors know before hand. It's the only way Marvel can keep being consistent and not end up like the X-Men franchise were it's riddled with inconsitencies, continuity errors and what not. Everything has to be kept in line.

Marvel treat people like meat, a conveyor belt of 'get the job done, our way', with little creative control given to said director. I think ironically Whedon who has hated the Hollywood system for years was given the most control on Avengers and heh ho, over a billion dollars later and I reckon he'll be left alone to make A2 exactly how he wants it.

Not gonna happen. Everything Whedon does still has to be within Marvel's vision. He just can't do whatever he likes. Somebody (can't remmeber the user's name) here over at the Ant-Man boards posted this and very much agree:

Not everybody is cut out for Marvel. They have a specific plan, and so far their plan has worked and make consistent quality films that are better than the average comic book film. They've taken risks, and still taken chances on filmmakers. But if you don't fall in line what they want, then you don't belong. It's not "Oh my God, corporate suits are intruding upon filmmakers artistic integrity! Oh, these auteurs are suffering!" *throws up in mouth* These filmmakers are facilitators. Whether you're an Edgar Wright or an Alan Taylor. And so far, as Machiavellian as it's been, it's gotten highly successful results, commercially and among the crowds and fans. Their quality control has been nothing but solid. And honestly, if anyone thought Wright leaving was completely out of the question, you are naive if you haven't look at their track record. I was worried this would happen a while ago. But I'm actually surprised it lasted as long as it did.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Branagh left due to 'timing'. Jenkins, Wright and Taylor are the only directors that have had issues with Marvel. You simply have to do what Marvel says and those directors know before hand. It's the only way Marvel can keep being consistent and not end up like the X-Men franchise were it's riddled with inconsitencies, continuity errors and what not. Everything has to be kept in line.



Not gonna happen. Everything Whedon does still has to be within Marvel's vision. He just can't do whatever he likes. Somebody (can't remmeber the user's name) here over at the Ant-Man boards posted this and very much agree:

I think any studio system is the same to a degree, film makers at any level within it have to conceede something in order to get 'their' film made, it's the nature of the industry, I think Ficher's experience with Alien 3 tells us that, but I'm just saying that Marvel seem to specialise in treating their crews like ****.

 

[TeeKay]

I think any studio system is the same to a degree, film makers at any level within it have to conceede something in order to get 'their' film made, it's the nature of the industry, I think Ficher's experience with Alien 3 tells us that, but I'm just saying that Marvel seem to specialise in treating their crews like ****.

Explain treat like ****? So suddenly when they have disagreements it means they're treating their director's like ****?

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

TWS hands down. This poll is slightly skewed I see haha

 

[Mandon Knight]

Explain treat like ****? So suddenly when they have disagreements it means they're treating their director's like ****?

Poor pay to known actors and crew, no equality in pay scale, their man management of actors & crew leaves a lot to be desired as has been proven consistently, Norton, Wright, Branagh, Favereau, these are not 'isolated' cases, these are continiuos examples of Feige & co only seeing their 'vision', f**k creativity of the film maker, make $$$$ and keep 'em films rolling and me in 'clover' is KF's approach it would seem.

 

[TeeKay]

Poor pay to known actors and crew, no equality in pay scale, their man management of actors & crew leaves a lot to be desired as has been proven consistently, Norton, Wright, Branagh, Favereau, these are not 'isolated' cases, these are continiuos examples of Feige & co only seeing their 'vision', f**k creativity of the film maker, make $$$$ and keep 'em films rolling and me in 'clover' is KF's approach it would seem.

You are mixing conjecture, your own take on events you have limited context for, and an unnamed source, and taking that against the words of actual directors who've worked on the movies. I'm not sure what else to say

If the Russos, Whedon, Black and Gunn can have sway over their films, why could'nt Taylor or Wright? Have you entertained the idea that Marvel lets people have control over their movies if they Marvel likes where they're taking them? Marvel has consistently either allowed the movie to look and feel how the director wanted, or hired a director specifically to make a film look the way they wanted based on how that director normally makes films look.Again, whenever Marvel disagrees with someone there seems to be a strong contingent of people who just assume that the person Marvel is in conflict with was right, and Marvel was wrong. That's way too closed minded. We have no idea whether the cut we got of Thor TDW was a better or worse movie than Taylor's cut overall. We don't know if the Ant Man movie Edgar Wright would've made would be better than the one Marvel wanted him to make. We don't know. What we do know is that for some reason certain directors have been able to operate on their own terms more or less, while some have not. Until we know why that is, we're just throwing around meaningleess conjecture meant to fit our own views of whoever we're talking about.

Branagh left due to timing issues, Jon Favreau chose something else to direct. Let me tell you one thing, these actors and directors know exactly what they're getting themselves into with Marvel. It's their fault, Marvel has to keep everything in check. These actors sign contracts, the agree to the pay checks and everything. I'm no means defending Marvel either, no studio is perfect and they had they're fall outs. People defending Wright are just as ridiculous as people defending Marvel. By the same token where you're putting him in a positive light he had eight years to make this movie happen, he had more freedom than any director has had at Marvel to do what he wanted and Marvel sacrificed having one of the original Avengers as a part of the universe JUST so that Wright could fulfill his vision and tell his story where Hank Pym was a scientist in the 60s who eventually passes the mantle down to Scott Lang. He was behind schedule and eventually left.

Some times it for better or for worst. Whedon is like the only direct they did mess with. They even let his scrap a script and start from scratch. The thing is that Whedon was on the same page as marvel from the get go. Where as Edgar Wright had his own vision that sort of conflicted with what fans and Marvel wanted. Whedon, Gunn, The Russos, Black all had total creative control as long as their movies stayed within the Marvel's vision. Poor pay to actors and crew? What crew? Those actors signed the contracts, they know what they were getting paid. Yeah Howard got screwed over but why should he get paid more than the star of the film? Downey's deal from the get go was not to get paid up-front but have the a small percentage of the box office. That's how he gets paid by Marvel. I prefer that Marvel does keep tight reins on the vision and direction of the films. When you are creating such a vast shared universe, including television, you have to. Edward Norton is notorious for having a big ego and being difficult to work with and Terrence Howard is nothing but a fleeting thought in the wind. I was glad to see both of them go, meanwhile you have the likes of an Anthony Hopkins, Scarlet Johanssen, Glenn Close and others doing multiple films with Marvel. Marvel can't be as bad as some would like to make it out to be.

 

[StarkTheProdigy]

Does anyone prefer Phase 1 over Phase 2 so far?

 

[Shikamaru]

The amount of Edgar Wright fanboyism on these boards has gotten ridiculous. That's exactly what it is at this point, and what it's arguably always been. Pure, militant, hardcore Wright fanboyism.

Let's review two things for a sec:
1) Marvel's history with other directors/writers/actors.
2) Wright's history with Marvel.

So...Marvel's history with other people. Marvel screws Favreau with Iron Man 2, releasing the film prematurely and shoehorning in Avengers setups at the film's expense. Then some more crap happens behind closed doors with Iron Man 3, and Favreau walks as director. That's*two*films Marvel screws him over with. Then there's Norton, who Marvel fires for whatever reason and blames whatever happened on him in the media (the whole thing with him and Lettterier not getting along was blown out of proportion btw, confirmed by both). Then there's Branagh and Taylor, who both have their Thor films screwed over by Marvel to the point the final product was mediocre. The case with Howard is more debatable, but there were still rumors for a while that he also got screwed by Marvel. Whether or not that's true is a whole different story, but there were still many who jumped on the "Howard is at fault" bandwagon very early on. Then there's Shane Black who had an essential part of his film retconned away by a one-shot most people will never see. I never really cared for the Mandarin twist myself and was happy with the one-shot, but in a way, it did undo Black's vision since Black envisioned Killian as the modern Mandarin.

Overall, this isn't anywhere near the first time Marvel "screwed" someone over. Which begs the question...where were all these fans who are crying foul when those other people got screwed over? Sure there were some to an extent, but none of those cases mirrored the outrage we see now with Wright. Which is not only inconsistent, but it also doesn't make much sense, especially since most of the names I brought up got screwed over*more*than Wright.*

Which brings me to my next point...Wright's history with Marvel.

There is no one that had their ass kissed by Marvel as much as Wright did, for the past 8 years. They let him do the project from very early on. They let him go nuts with the property (until recently). They gave him almost a decade on it, letting him do other films in the meantime. They mapped the whole MCU in such way that it wouldn't contradict anything Wright was planning, including during and after they broke all box office records and had no reason to stay faithful to him anymore.They forced other directors, like Whedon, to adhere to his vision. Essentially they metaphorically sucked his private. Wright really had nothing to complain about. Marvel's put him on a pedestal to an extent they haven't put anyone else they worked with, not even Whedon (at least initially), and for some reason that still wasn't enough for both Wright and his fanbase.

Really, this is a "right for the wrong reasons" case. It's true Marvel deserves flack for its treatment in the past, but the ONLY reason you people give two ****s in this case because you're all a bunch of whiny Edgar Wright fanboys. Because they*dared*to question the Great and Almighty Edgar Wright, which will apparently lead Marvel towards oblivion.

What's even more boggling is that Wright himself, much like his loud annoying fanclub, seems to share that same mindset based on his tweet of Buster Keaton. The man sees himself as an auteur, an artist whose great vision should be immune to all mandates even if other films weren't immune to his mandates. It really gets me curious to see how he would have reacted in the shoes of someone like Favreau/Norton, or if Ant-Man was under a less risk-taking studio like WB.

If there's anything Marvel deserves flack for, it's in the fact that they put all their eggs in one basket when it comes to Ant-Man/Wright. Much like his fanbase, they were just in love with the idea of Wright making a Marvel film so much, and now that's come to bite them in the butt. If there's any lesson here going forward, it's that they shouldn't put so much blind faith in a filmmaker, not that they should've never let go of the "Lord and Saviour".

Statements like "Marvel makes childish ****** films controlled by Disney's yes men" are borderline ridiculous and are unfounded in every sense of the word. Even if that was true, it wouldn't be because of what happened with Wright.

Reposted due to relevance. It seems the excuses regarding Wright have popped up in this thread too.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Seems we got another poster who should go back to talking about Batman/Superman rather than the MCU and Marvel.

 

[MbJ]

The only Phase 2 movie I haven't liked was Thor 2. Thought it was generic cookie cutter crap.

 

[Raiden]

Here's how I'd rank Phase 2 movies:

1) TWS
2) IM3
3) TDW

Unfortunately, I think Thor 2 actually is a weaker movie than the first movie, whereas both Cap and IM improved upon their previous movie. I hope Thor 3 will fix this problem and end the trilogy on a very high note.