The Avengers The Avengers: News and Speculation - Part 27A sub-se - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 49

[DyeLorean]

Cap looks awesome in that banner.

 

[marvel_freshman]

New Black Widow image in there?

And Maria Hill too.

EDIT: never mind

 

[Hurm...]

Is it sad that I can't tell on who they're trying to emphasize in this poster?lol

The MOTHAF***ING PLANE COMING STRAIGHT AT EM!

 

[flickchick85]

I think she resigned, and if you read this article on John Carter:
http://www.vulture.com/2012/03/john-carter-doomed-by-first-trailer.html

It's kind of hard to blame her

Yeah, I've already read that article, and I don't necessarily blame her, but when Deadline reported her exit, they said Disney wanted her to go after a particularly negative article about her in the NY Times, so I didn't get the impression she had much of a choice. Being pressured into resigning is akin to firing to me.

 

[Mysteryman]

Is it sad that I can't tell on who they're trying to emphasize in this poster?lol

I focused on Hawkeye.

 

[Quasimod0]

Who wouldve thought that we'd ever have captain america, iron man, thor, the hulk, the black widow, hawkeye, nick fury, maria hill, the quinjet, and stark tower in one poster?!?!

 

[Hurm...]

I think she resigned, and if you read this article on John Carter:
http://www.vulture.com/2012/03/john-carter-doomed-by-first-trailer.html

It's kind of hard to blame her

Great article

 

[darkslayer101]

Just switched it there.

I don't know how much more of this I can take. ICarly almost gave me an aneurism.

lol i remember last year that i watched an entire episode of ICarly, just to catch the first tv spot of thor spinning the mjolnir...

 

[darkslayer101]

People got antsy during those flicks, trust me. Maybe it was just the circles I was in.

thats is very true, i actually slept through my first viewing of LOTR...but after i read the books...i immediately breezed through the trilogy

 

[Xeno]

The F***ING PLANE COMING STRAIGHT AT EM!

But they're so badass they're not even looking. Cool guys don't.

 

[Herolee10]

Well after looking back at all of the spoilers that we've had thus far for the film; I'm starting to wonder if like MOST of the HOLY *****_HUGE SCALE moments take place in the NYC Climax battle.

I mean prior before that, I would argue that the fight between Thor and Captain America/Iron Man, along with Thor vs Hulk would be the next top contenders for some Epic Moments.

But when it comes to Villains vs Heroes type of moments that are HUGE in scale, it seems like it might all take place in the NYC battle since there hasn't been ANY indication that the Avengers will come into conflict with any of Loki's forces prior to that battle.

I also hope that they make the cube give more reasons at the beginning of the film of why Fury thinks that Loki having the cube, when he doesn't even know on what the cube can supposedly do, let alone Loki for that matter, is so dangerous that he needs to get the Avengers together when most of the heroes have somewhat confronted known threats that appeared bigger than the thought of someone having stolen the cube alone.

 

[Xeno]

I focused on Hawkeye.

So did I. More specifically, I focused on Jeremy Renner's arms.

 

[darkslayer101]

is anyone still catching these trailers??
so i can stop luking for it...

 

[Wadjet]

So did I. More specifically, I focused on Jeremy Renner's arms.

There's something else in that poster?


I caught the trailer earlier on Nick @ Nite and geeked out so hard I had to call my dad just to verbally flail at him.

 

[TheVileOne]

I think these new banner posters are cool and the best we've seen from the production so far.

 

[Chewy]

Yeah, I've already read that article, and I don't necessarily blame her, but when Deadline reported her exit, they said Disney wanted her to go after a particularly negative article about her in the NY Times, so I didn't get the impression she had much of a choice. Being pressured into resigning is akin to firing to me.

Ah, I see. I guess it makes sense they'd want her gone if no one was particularly seeing eye to eye

 

[craigdbfan]

That explains a lot. Sad really. Its what happens when fanboys run rampant.


Glad Joss has a better handle on things.

I was the only one defending her back in January in the John Carter thread and saying how people were being way to harsh with her and rushing to conclusions.

I knew the entire marketing debacle wasn't her fault seeing as she had quite a few marketing successes under her belt.

and yes it's unfortunate when fanboys like Stanton act like intolerant tyrants to its marketing team and brings them to the brink of tears. I still think he's a very talented director and story teller but that doesn't excuse his behavior along with all the blind fools on the internet who were quick to jump at Carney's neck for the marketing failure behind John Carter.

One word comes to mind when I think about the entire Carney situation: Scapegoat. She deserved better and this industry can sometimes (often times) be a cruel beast.

 

[flickchick85]

Ah, I see. I guess it makes sense they'd want her gone if no one was particularly seeing eye to eye

Yeah, and it does seem clear that she had been unhappy there for a while already. It may be that it was simply the best move for everyone.

 

[craigdbfan]

It wasn't that she wasn't seeing eye to eye. She was representing Disney's best interest when she approached Stanton for her marketing ideas and was shot down in a reprehensible manner by him.

Stanton wouldn't give in and had Disney on a leash because Lasseter had insured this from Cook at the time. As time went on and the marketing Stanton wanted began to surface and the tracking began to show dismal interest, Disney had to find someone to pin this foreseeable flop on someone so they picked Carney who more or less had no strong bearings in the industry so they saw her as a dispensable asset and used her as a scapegoat.

That's pretty much all there is to it.

 

[Chewy]

Nothing's ever that cut and dry, especially in Hollywood

 

[Xeno]

Ah, I see. I guess it makes sense they'd want her gone if no one was particularly seeing eye to eye

The vulture piece was interesting in the way that it exposed the infighting and attempts to save reputations that always happen after a bomb like Carter. All of the quotes from anonymous sources were from Carney's supporters, who are obviously trying to salvage her reputation from the disaster. Even though she appears to be out of Hollywood, she'd probably like to remain marketable there. Being tagged with helping to sink a $250 million would-be blockbuster is a sure way to permanent outsider status, so she's spinning like a top to spread the blame.


That's not to say that I think that the picture painted of Stanton's involvement in the marketing fiasco is entirely unfair. He made it clear that he was trading off his and Pixar's standing within Disney to get the leverage to do the film the way he saw fit. The man stated flatly, "They’re too afraid of me – they want me happy at Pixar." He and Lasseter knew that they had the Mouse by the short hairs and they used that power for all they could get. And all they could get was over a third of a billion dollars and one of the biggest box office failures of all time.


In the end, Disney's execs have themselves (and the former studio chief) to blame for John Carter's failure. They needed someone with the balls to say "NO" to a couple of men with inflated egos who were completely out of their depth in the live action field.

 

[craigdbfan]

@Chewy You're right and the initial story had barely one source putting all the blame on Carney and now through several different people who are part of the Disney marketing team are now saying that Stanton was very much in complete control of the marketing which is in line with the interviews he's been conducting over the past few weeks where he says he was completely in charge.

Once the dust settles the truth becomes clearer and I'm certain Carney wasn't to blame for the colossal marketing failure behind John Carter.

@Xeno

Um Carney didn't have the strongest support base in LA so I don't know where you're getting that info from. That's the main reason she was thrown out and pinned as scapegoat early on regardless of her other well executed marketing campaigns.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Seems like calling Stanton a tyrant with nothing more to go on than what a third party article states isn't so different from crucifying Carney for poor marketing with basically the same sort of evidence. But that's the internet for you. Next week there'll be an article blaming Donald Duck and everybody can jump on that bandwagon.

 

[flickchick85]

It wasn't that she wasn't seeing eye to eye. She was representing Disney's best interest when she approached Stanton for her marketing ideas and was shot down in a reprehensible manner by him.

Stanton wouldn't give in and had Disney on a leash because Lasseter had insured this from Cook at the time. As time went on and the marketing Stanton wanted began to surface and the tracking began to show dismal interest, Disney had to find someone to pin this foreseeable flop on someone so they picked Carney who more or less had no strong bearings in the industry so they saw her as a dispensable asset and used her as a scapegoat.

That's pretty much all there is to it.

According to that article, yes, that's all there is to it. But I feel like no one is taking into account* that that article is ONE SIDE of the story. The people giving the Vulture their story are all "Disney marketing insiders," aka, the very people who are currently being blamed for the JC debacle. Of course they would throw the blame elsewhere.

I'm not saying it's untrue - I'm sure a lot of it is very true. It seems clear that Stanton's inexperience in this arena was a major detriment to the campaign. But MT Carney was basically as new to promoting live-action Hollywood blockbusters as Andrew Stanton was to making them. I'm just saying if you get Stanton, Cook, and Rich Ross's side of things, the truth would probably be somewhere in between the two stories.

*EDIT: ok, apparently some people are taking it into account, lol.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

According to that article, yes, that's all there is to it. But I feel like no one is taking into account that that article is ONE SIDE of the story. The people giving the Vulture their story are all "Disney marketing insiders," aka, the very people who are currently being blamed for the JC debacle. Of course they would throw the blame elsewhere.

Exactly, thank you.