• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Seems like Nolan got the better deal than Whedon on superhero movies

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sephzilla

Member
-Batman manages to rig most of Gotham's cell phones with bat-sonar in a comically short amount of time.
-Batman can somehow get real-time 3D sonar images transmitted to his cowl over 3G cell phone signals but he can't send a message to the cops across the street that Joker's goons are disguised as scientists.
-Batman has to deliver a cool response line to "you know how i got these scars" before taking out Joker.
-Joker doesn't rig both boats to automatically blow up at midnight, despite him clearly wanting them to die right at midnight if they don't make up their mind. Seems like a really huge oversight considering Joker had backup plans for seemingly everything else the entire movie.
-Gordon/Batman make really halfass attempts to try and talk Harvey down. Why not remind Dent that they tried to save Rachel and it was entirely the Joker's fault that Rachel died.
-Batman spends the whole movie proving to Joker that he can't kill only to kill Dent at the end, and the movie kind of glosses over this in order to go straight to Gordon's cheesy final speech.
-Just blame Dent's murders on Joker!

I like Dark Knight, it's a good movie. But Dark Knight's ending gets just as eye-rolling as your typical Marvel finale.
 
A

antonz

Member
Sephzilla said:
*my 2 cents*

Whedon seems salty that Marvel didn't give him 100% free reign.
Click to expand...

Which is honestly probably for the best. He was pretty open his view on the movies was he is making a movie for the people who saw Avengers 1 none of the other movies.

Marvel's It's All Connected stopped at what he did. Marvel was free to mention his movies in other projects but he wasn't going to worry about linking the other movies to his. This stands in complete opposition to everything Marvel has been setting out to do. Its one big Unified Universe not one you cherry pick from.
 
T

TheGreatDirector

Banned
It’s Summer 2008,

I just saw a trailer for a movie. It featured a superhero I had never heard of. Interested, I went with my mom to the theater with no expectations. Lo and behold I was completely amazed by the film and ended up loving every minute of it. It was only until after I’d watched through the credits that I realized it’s importance. A familiar face to film stepped on the screen said these words “You’ve become part of a bigger universe”. The man was right, something big was happening. The film was Iron Man and it was the world’s introduction in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Fast Forward 7 years and we are now coming into a whole new generation of comic book films. With the sequel to the first Avengers film having just come out and Ant-man only two months away, the world has stepped into an entirely new kind of Hollywood. Next year, DC will be put out Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, the first live action movie featuring Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman in the same film. From then on, DC will be launching superhero as fast as Marvel following up with the Suicide Squad that same year. Yet with all these comic book movies in the future questions of fatigue and the future have appeared. Is Hollywood and cinema forever changed? Has the success of Marvel created a new system of blockbusters, one where you don’t pay once for a film but for an issue in a series?

Many people are wondering if the success of superhero films are beginning to consume the minds of Hollywood and TV alike in a quest to have success. Fox recently announced that they would be using Valiant Comics and the Harbringer series to create their own cinematic universe. Mark Millar, famed comic book writer, has been creating stories for the sole purpose of movie adaptations. It’s working, and Fox has picked them up one after another creating a mini “Millarverse”. The Hobbit which was originally envisioned as one movie, became three films and many are speculating that future Tolkien movies are in store for the Tolkeinverse. Star Wars: The Force Awakens comes out this December and after that, a Star Wars movie will come out every year. Is the age of cinema stand-alone blockbusters dead? Are franchises built for universe the only option now?

There are still plenty of directors who seem intent on creating original movie content year after year. However for every one of those, isn’t there another Transformers movie on the way? Sequels after sequels and crossovers after crossovers are not only present in film anymore. Television has begun to become a place for universes to be developed. The Arrowverse on CW, aptly named for the hit superhero series Arrow, now contains the hit series Flash and the future spin-off superhero show Legends with the upcoming Supergirl show on CBS potentially crossing over. Just recently on T.V. I saw an ad for a Law and Order S.V.U. crossover with Chicago P.D. and Chicago F.D. Spinoffs of C.S.I. and N.C.I.S. are prevalent on network channels. Spin-offs are more popular than ever and it is impossible to get the full story for one character unless you watch them all.

The ideas for cinematic universe are not original to Marvel however. They’ve existed as far back as the Hammer horror movies, when Dracula fought Frankenstein for the first time on film. Decades ago people saw King Kong fight Godzilla and more recently watched Jason take on Freddy. Yet these crossovers and universe were more “events” and less the everyday norm.

Marvel formula to success has worked. The MCU franchise is the highest grossing film franchise in the world and has turned what once could have been considered B to C list comic-book characters into A-list pop culture icons. General audiences seem to enjoy the films, with some of my own friends even mentioning how they’d rate the second Avengers as one of their top ten favorite films of all time. Creativity wise, Marvel seems comfortable at experimenting. Last year they turned the obscure comic book title Guardians of the Galaxy into one of their most profitable and beloved titles. In their next Phase of movies alone they’ll be introducing 4 new potential franchise series on film. This year they debuted their Netflix series Daredevil which has already been renewed for a 2nd season.

It’s clear that Marvel still has a treasure trove of ideas to pull from. Yet is this creativity in its greatest form? There are complaints that many of the films fall on similar beats, with setpieces, villains, and music all blending together. Directors on the films seem to be second wheel to the executive producer, Kevin Feige’s vision of the universe. This lack of creative freedom seems to take out some of the shine that would make each project unique on their own. The director of Thor: The Dark World talked about how edited and changed his vision for the film was once Marvel got their hands on it. Reshoots and cuts led to a completely different film and one that fans of the MCU feel is little more than filler, which leads to the biggest problem of all. Are MCU fans little more than filler to the finale of Phase 3? Is this definite conclusion, this climax, to most of the franchise’s original characters holding back the potential of the MCU as a whole? Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy creatively felt unique on its own. Having no need to acknowledge or make mention of other DC franchises, the story told by the trilogy was fully realized and every movie felt contained and less pandering. Yet one worries what Batman v. Superman will do now that WB has announced their plans for a DC cinematic universe. Will the film be all set up and no delivery?

It’s tough to say what will happen. Hollywood will always follow the popular and superhero films and cinematic universes are all the rage today. Will this end up hurting creativity down the line? Will filmmakers be forced to heed only to a producer’s vision and not their own? Only time will tell , "you just don't know it yet".
 
S

Sephzilla

Member
antonz said:
Which is honestly probably for the best. He was pretty open his view on the movies was he is making a movie for the people who saw Avengers 1 none of the other movies.

Marvel's It's All Connected stopped at what he did. Marvel was free to mention his movies in other projects but he wasn't going to worry about linking the other movies to his. This stands in complete opposition to everything Marvel has been setting out to do. Its one big Unified Universe not one you cherry pick from.
Click to expand...

When put that way it sounds like Whedon didn't really want to play ball with what Marvel has been doing. That's entirely on him then.
 
R

Renekton

Member
Credit to Whedon. He had to help make a whole connected universe with full continuity having Avengers at the epicenter. Seeing Hawkeye-Renner alongside Rocket-Cooper and Daredevil-Cox together is not a pipe dream.

Nolan just needs to make a self-contained 3 parter, as the article said.
 
TheRedSnifit

TheRedSnifit

Member
Scullibundo said:
Hold the fuck up. Why is OP trying to paint Batman Begins as Nolan's first studio foray?

Nolan made Insomnia for Warner Bros with fucking Al Pacino and Robin Williams on a $46m budget in 2002 money. This was after Memento.

Nolan is a more accomplished filmmaker than Whedon, because he's a better, more talented filmmaker than Whedon - no matter how much the quality of Nolan's films has slid in the past 7 years

Whedon's AoU was a step up from the first Avengers and his direction was much, much better, but his 'failures' ultimately boil down to him not being as talented as Nolan. Whedon's biggest failure is his inability to take responsibility for his failures. If he just accepted that he's a decent gun for hire director with a penchant for generic but marketable tentpole sluglines, then he might be able to sleep better.
Click to expand...

Scullibundo said:
Damn Marvel for tying Whedon's artistic, savant-like hands. If it weren't for them we could have gotten a film as well-written and directed as that one Whedon film/script that everybody remembers.

Dude made a modern-day Shakespeare indie in black and white. Obviously the sky is the artistic limit when Marvel isn't involved.
Click to expand...

This pretty much sums it up.
 
H

HoJu

Member
Cuburt said:
What about side stories in films that don't have much to do with the main plot. Often developing a character's backstory may serve no purpose to the story besides letting the audience in on a few details that let you in on who that person is.

What about JGL's character who figured out Bruce Wayne is Batman when he visited his orphanage and he later reveals his real name is Robin and discover's the Batcave? Couldn't that be seen as an underdeveloped character just put in there to set up a sequel if that was in the context of the MCU or rather DCCU?

It's all about perspective, if someone that doesn't get something in AoU that hasn't seen many Marvel movies, they assume it's a reference to the comics or other movies. If people who have seen some of the movies don't understand something it must be some sort of set up for a sequel. If it happens in other movies it may be a unresolved thread, a plot hole, or just taken for granted as world building.

Like if you see a fantasy film or a sci-fi film and people refer to events and locations that you don't know, it doesn't have to directly tie into the plot. It doesn't have to be set up for a sequel.
Click to expand...

if the side stories are done right, then they tie in to some way with the themes of the film. with JGL it was literally the birth of the next batman. that's why he was the last shot of the film and rose up or whatever. a film can have a cliffhanger and still be satisfying, like the end of Master & Commander.
Marvel just hasn't given a reason to care about the world building for future films.
 
Rookje

Rookje

Member
Fanboy Tier:
X-Men
X2
X-Men Days of Future Past
Guardians of the Galaxy
Spider-Man (2002)
Spider-Man 2
Iron Man
Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Worth watching once or twice Tier:
X-Men First Class
Thor
Captain America
The Avengers
Iron Man 2

Shovelware Tier:
Elektra
The Wolverine
The Avengers: Age of Ultron
Ghost Rider
Spider-Man 3
Thor: The Dark World
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
Fantastic Four (all of them)
The Incredible Hulk (2008)
Hulk (2003)
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
X-Men The Last Stand
Captain America: The First Avenger
Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance
The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)
Iron Man 3
 
E

Erevador

Member
TheSadRanger said:
Maybe Whedon can get to work on a sequel for this now?

Serenity_One_Sheet.jpg


let me dream ;_;
Click to expand...
Browncoats have never given Joss anything but love. I'm sure he misses them.

The Marvel fans don't deserve him.
 
S

Sean

Banned
Blader said:
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Was their low price tag probably an allure for Marvel? Yes. Did Feige and co. throw darts at a board of names and decide to hand over one of their biggest properties to whoever it randomly landed on? Fuck no. They made a pitch -- by their account, several pitches with storyboards -- about why their sensibilities fit, and had a track record of accomplished TV credit that covered both comedy and action.

And I'm quite sure "if they fuck up, who cares?" has never once been a part of the thought process. Marvel is frequently touted as a well-oiled machine that churns out one successful $200+ million dollar movie every six-ish months. You don't achieve that level of productivity and that level of success by not giving a fuck about who you're hiring or what kind of job they're doing. That kind of mindset very quickly backfires and throws a hell of a wrench into the well-oiled machine. There's nothing coincidental about it.
Click to expand...

I stand by my comments, from everything I've read Marvel is stingy as fuck. As much as I'd like to believe that heartwarming story about Feige watching an episode of a cult comedy series, seeing something special, and then deciding to give the unknown director duo their big break, in reality I'm fairly sure it simply boils down to the Russos offering to do it cheaper than anyone else.

As for the quality thing, Thor 2 was a garbage ass completely forgettable movie and it still cleaned up at the box office, 700 million or something crazy. That movie proves Marvel can shit out a complete dud and people will still see it in droves.
 
P

Phat Michael

Banned
Bluekaveli said:
Nolan the GOAT
Click to expand...

Did you actually read that interview in 1 minute and still post? Because the interview was really good and it really gives an insight into what Whedon does and his mind set for undertaking such a massive project. Something tells me you didnt read it at all in order to win the race to get the "first post"
 
B

Bold One

Member
Whedon was perfect for Avengers

and Nolan was perfect for Batman

both achieved the heights and reverence of their perspective goals

While tonally different, TDK and Avengers will be looked upon as tent-poles of the genre
 
T

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
The climactic sequence of Age of Ultron was simultaneously probably the best they could make something like that work again while still disappointing in its structure, especially with the potential promise of a more intimate Whedon-esque final conflict
 
R

Regret Upon Approval

Member
Avengers was entertaining, good for some laughs and was a visual spectacle.
But that had the unfortunate side result of bad guys being jokes and not really threatening, thus I felt no actual tension or being on-edge that Nolan's trilogy delivered handily.

So both are entertaining sets of movies, but Avengers gets carried away with aiming to be funny and full of quips that I can't take it seriously.
 
P

PhoncipleBone

Banned
The Technomancer said:
The climactic sequence of Age of Ultron was simultaneously probably the best they could make something like that work again while still disappointing in its structure, especially with the potential promise of a more intimate Whedon-esque final conflict
Click to expand...
I was half expecting them to
evacuate everyone, take on the drone army, then have a big finish of ultimate Ultron fighting the entire team at once.
 
D

Discotheque

Banned
Regret Upon Approval said:
Avengers was entertaining, good for some laughs and was a visual spectacle.
But that had the unfortunate side result of bad guys being jokes and not really threatening, thus I felt no actual tension or being on-edge that Nolan's trilogy delivered handily.

So both are entertaining sets of movies, but Avengers gets carried away with aiming to be funny and full of quips that I can't take it seriously.
Click to expand...

nothing in avengers...or anything really (although there's a few comic book movies i like more) can match the tension of the interrogation room scene. when the joker switched the addresses on batman at the last second...

..that sly devil
 
A

Alex_Mexico

Member
If Age of Ultron spent half the time on character development it spent setting up stuff for innumerable sequels and spin offs I would've liked it more.

I'm a nerd that goes to GAF and IGN daily and I've watched almost every MCU movie and more than once I was feeling lost during this film over how bloated and overblown it was.

Too much shit going on for its own good.
 
X

Xpike

Unconfirmed Member
Ahasverus said:
Prove it to me with any super hero movie that ends with the defeated widowed hero after a 20mins philosohpical standoff.
Click to expand...

And then what sequel inmediately takes away all the consequences of that sacrifice by just saying "lol nevermind it didn't matter cuz he retired as Batman anyway, they just made a law that apparently is 100% fool proof and has 100% efficiency in courts."

If Dark Knight is one of the how-tos of superhero movies, Dark Knight Rises is one of the how to not of movie sequels
 
J

jett

D-Member
That was nicely written OP.

Whedon did do the best he could to inject the first Avengers with his personality. The second one felt a bit more factory-made to me.
 
R

roflwaffles

Member
The actual ending of the Dark Knight is a bit silly, but the last few seconds of it were a great close-out that makes you kind of forget that Batman just killed someone.
 
O

orochi91

Member
Won't the same thing happen to the Russo guys?

What's to prevent Marvel execs from meddling with the Civil/Infinity War films like they did with Whedon?
 
G

Game4life

Banned
guek said:
You keep making these kinds of snarky comments like they're universally accepted when they're not. Repeating your opinion over and over again doesn't somehow make it widely accepted fact.
Click to expand...

It is my opinion obviously. Do I need to put an IMO after every post.I never said it was a fact. I am sorry if your delicate feelings are hurt but I will repeat them as many times I want.

guek said:
Absolutely, but saying AoU was generic and unambitious is a pretty lazy criticism when the film's biggest shortcomings are a product of unchecked ambition creating an overstuffed film. You can't start a discussion by building on questionable statements like they're facts.
Click to expand...

Stop repeating your opinion again and again. It does not make it a fact! Am I doing it right?
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
takriel said:
Jeez yes, it's maybe one of the most overrated endings ever. People say they get goosebumps from the ending, and I'm like whaaaat?
Click to expand...

Yeah, Dent (the most interesting character in the damn thing) dies by falling off a pile of dirt. It deflated me entirely. I was like that killed him?

Say what you will about Bane's death in TDKR but at least it was a missile.
 
G

gnarlyxcharlie

Member
excelsiorlef said:
Yeah, Dent (the most interesting character in the damn thing) dies by falling off a pile of dirt. It deflated me entirely. I was like that killed him?

Say what you will about Bane's death in TDKR but at least it was a missile.
Click to expand...


He fell several stories from a building what the shit are you talking about.
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
This is why while Marvel might have the better superhero universe of movies the best superhero movie will stay with DC for the foreseeable future.
 
K

Ke0

Member
I hope the director's cut Blu-Ray packs in all the stuff Whedon had to leave out....we're totally only getting like 15mins of extra footage T_T
 
P

Prine

Banned
DoFP is far more compelling universe imo, but that maybe because Xmen just have so many characters that have more to them then the MCU hero's (Xavier/Magneto dynamic is fucking great to watch). Plus i prefer grounded nature of Nolan/Singer films, when it goes too crazy like Avengers i switch off.

Both Nolan/Singer > Joss. Superman was terrible though, but Singer more than made up for it with DoFP.
 
F

Foggy

Member
Sephzilla said:
*my 2 cents*

Whedon seems salty that Marvel didn't give him 100% free reign.
Click to expand...

That's the movie-making business in a nutshell. Why anyone would want to support squeezing out signature creativity to make room for more max-profit potential is beyond me.

Honestly though, who knows how much of it is actually the case of the big, bad studio putting their foot down on the little director that could. Joss has always struck me as a guy that was never savvy enough to navigate Hollywood's waters. Either way, I'm not the biggest fan of his writing or his work, but I'm hoping he can find relative comfort doing something small again.
 
Sorcerer

Sorcerer

Member
Sephzilla said:
-Batman manages to rig most of Gotham's cell phones with bat-sonar in a comically short amount of time.
-Batman can somehow get real-time 3D sonar images transmitted to his cowl over 3G cell phone signals but he can't send a message to the cops across the street that Joker's goons are disguised as scientists.
-Batman has to deliver a cool response line to "you know how i got these scars" before taking out Joker.
-Joker doesn't rig both boats to automatically blow up at midnight, despite him clearly wanting them to die right at midnight if they don't make up their mind. Seems like a really huge oversight considering Joker had backup plans for seemingly everything else the entire movie.
-Gordon/Batman make really halfass attempts to try and talk Harvey down. Why not remind Dent that they tried to save Rachel and it was entirely the Joker's fault that Rachel died.
-Batman spends the whole movie proving to Joker that he can't kill only to kill Dent at the end, and the movie kind of glosses over this in order to go straight to Gordon's cheesy final speech.
-Just blame Dent's murders on Joker!

I like Dark Knight, it's a good movie. But Dark Knight's ending gets just as eye-rolling as your typical Marvel finale.
Click to expand...

One further point. Why did no one think to take off Joker's makeup during his interrogation?

We want to nail this guy and figure out who he is, yet we never thought to wipe his makeup?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Nicolas Winding Refn returning to filmmaking with Tokyo-set movie
29
2K
Giallo Corsa replied
Your favorite directors of the past decade-ish
14
771
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt replied
Wolverine Co-Creator: "There’s no such thing as “superhero film fatigue”"
2
68
3K
jason10mm replied
Quentin Tarantino on why movies are better than TV
2
66
3K
Zelduh replied
You got 10 sequel points to give sequels to 10 movies that you wish would've gotten sequels.
37
1K
bitbydeath replied
Top Bottom