I just hope they don't get Zack Snyder to replace him.
P>S; Dr Horrible's Sing A Long Blog was awesome.
P>S; Dr Horrible's Sing A Long Blog was awesome.
Joss Whedon Officially Quits the Marvel Cinematic Universe
- Thread starter JaredJones
- Start date
So is this gonna be like him quitting the Buffy universe again and then coming back with Angel? Or what about quitting Firefly and then coming back for Serenity when he was given a blank check? Or is he actually going to stick to what he's saying this time around?
Not to discredit the guy, but he sorta has the emotional range of a five-year old in these situations.
Not to discredit the guy, but he sorta has the emotional range of a five-year old in these situations.
Why? Marvel is a soul sucking company to work for. There's no artistic freedom whatsoever, and they routinely fire people who don't adhere to their very narrow vision. Multiple directors have said that they sit you down and tell you what the film is about, and what scenes they want in the movie. All of their films are films by committee, made to hit as wide an audience as possible. They're fun movies, sometimes, but if you have any kind of artistic integrity whatsoever, or have any kind of real ambition, then Marvel is possibly the worst company to work for. I don't blame Whedon for leaving. I'm just surprised he stayed so long.valium said:
Does this mean he might go back to working at Pixar? Because for all the amazing things they've done, I'd always felt like the original Toy Story had a certain quality that they'd never been able to recreate (this is especially apparent in Toy Story 2, which even at the time felt kind of shallow and "sequel-y").
...Right? That's the story I'd always heard, unless the entire Internet lied to me.
Uh, Warner Bros. already owns that. It's not like Disney is some unstoppable juggernaut that's big enough to swallow up all other media; Marvel, Lucasfilm, and Jim Henson Productions were basically the last three big-name creator-driven studios that were, for lack of a better word, "indie". Pretty much everyone else was and is already owned by one of the other five media giants - Time Warner, Viacom/CBS, Sony, Fox, and Universal.Ukomba said:
Well see that was his first mistake, assuming there are any companies left that care about anything but money.Ukomba said:
Wait. He didn't "quit" Firefly; Fox canceled it and then greedily hung onto the rights rather than sell it off to another network, but Whedon was able to make his movie because of some legal loophole.Redryhno said:
...Right? That's the story I'd always heard, unless the entire Internet lied to me.
Well, if he's free from MAHVEL I imagine he can go on to do other things.
I'm not entirely sure what to say about this; he spouts a lot of what we already know about the Marvel movies. But I just... I'm not really a fan of his stuff. Granted, I haven't seen Buffy and Dr. Horrible was pretty good, but I couldn't bring myself to finish Firefly and Avengers was very... middle of the road.
His scripts have too much... 'snark'? I do need to get around to watching Cabin in the Woods though.
I'm not entirely sure what to say about this; he spouts a lot of what we already know about the Marvel movies. But I just... I'm not really a fan of his stuff. Granted, I haven't seen Buffy and Dr. Horrible was pretty good, but I couldn't bring myself to finish Firefly and Avengers was very... middle of the road.
His scripts have too much... 'snark'? I do need to get around to watching Cabin in the Woods though.
Most of it, yeah. Difference is that he didn't even try to replicate alot of what made it good until way later. Space Westerns are one of those niches that people will sit down and watch(at least in the nerd-ish community). I fully understand Fox dicking around with him(even if he somewhat dicked around with them as well so I consider it a mutual dicking of sorts to a point) and that making him reluctant to work with them again, but as creative as people talk him up to be, you'd think he'd be known for more than a campy vampire series(don't get me wrong, I like it), failed space western, and Marvel.Steve the Pocket said:
I dunno, I just don't like when people make these kinds of declarations when they have a history of not holding themselves to it is all.
The Editing Bias is strong with this one.
That aside... I know Whedon did and said some bad things, but I pity him a little more than I pity Lucas. Lucas made a choice to, in his own words, Sell his Children. He knew what he was getting into, and got 4 Billion, was it, for his troubles? I don't think he would have had too much difficulty starting Star Wars 7 himself if he so wanted to; the name alone probably accounted for 1/4th of the movie's glory at the moment.
Whedon... I think anyone would kill for the chance to be able to say "Yo, I helped lead the freaking Avengers", but it sounds like a hard process to be part off, and while I wouldn't condone certain comments, he didn't have nearly the same level of control throughout the process and definitely came out the worse for it.
That aside... I know Whedon did and said some bad things, but I pity him a little more than I pity Lucas. Lucas made a choice to, in his own words, Sell his Children. He knew what he was getting into, and got 4 Billion, was it, for his troubles? I don't think he would have had too much difficulty starting Star Wars 7 himself if he so wanted to; the name alone probably accounted for 1/4th of the movie's glory at the moment.
Whedon... I think anyone would kill for the chance to be able to say "Yo, I helped lead the freaking Avengers", but it sounds like a hard process to be part off, and while I wouldn't condone certain comments, he didn't have nearly the same level of control throughout the process and definitely came out the worse for it.
I don't really know why... it seems like it was a tremendous amount of pressure to produce those films considering the fan base and I don't think being open about how he felt is the same as whining... As far as lashing out, I don't recall any particularly big melt downs or fights, a best just sarcastically dismissing things. But even so, Age of Ultron must have been a hugely stressful film to work on given that he essentially had to push around a bunch of smaller projects in order to make sure everything arrived on point for his movie to take place. In a way that kind of forces him to boss around other directors and do the very things that he in turn hates being done to him, all the while receiving not just little to no sympathy from fans, but disdain and nitpicks for every little problem there after? I'm amazed it was only 8 months in the fetal position. Besides, I'm looking forward to seeing some other directors take a crack at the big avengers team ups.valium said:
So, er, who's surprised by this? Forget where I read it, but I think the phrase (paraphrased) sums it up; that MCU films are where the vision of the producer takes place over the vision of the director. I'm not that enamored of Joss Whedon, but I can imagine how it might feel to be constantly stifled when making a movie, or commencing any kind of artistic endeavor. Yes, these things happen, there's usually some level of studio interferance, but as stated, Marvel is where studio interferance is the de facto state of affairs.
Since Lucas has been brought into this, these are different scenarios, but it TFA is almost certainly another case of where the producer's vision takes place over the director's (though I don't think I could call JJ "visionary" - competent, certainly, but not "visionary"); we know that he sold Star Wars off willingly, and know that Disney didn't use his ideas. What I don't know is whether those ideas were pitched before selling it, and whether a gentlemen's agreement existed beforehand. Because while I rank TFA above Clone and Phantom, I also rank it below Sith and Hope. The lack of George Lucas in Star Wars is hardly an inherent positive in my eyes (though isn't necessarily an inherent negative either).
But I can certainly sympathize with him, especially if a gentlemen's agreement was ever made.
Since Lucas has been brought into this, these are different scenarios, but it TFA is almost certainly another case of where the producer's vision takes place over the director's (though I don't think I could call JJ "visionary" - competent, certainly, but not "visionary"); we know that he sold Star Wars off willingly, and know that Disney didn't use his ideas. What I don't know is whether those ideas were pitched before selling it, and whether a gentlemen's agreement existed beforehand. Because while I rank TFA above Clone and Phantom, I also rank it below Sith and Hope. The lack of George Lucas in Star Wars is hardly an inherent positive in my eyes (though isn't necessarily an inherent negative either).
But I can certainly sympathize with him, especially if a gentlemen's agreement was ever made.
When do you start offering up examples of Mr. Nuffy offering up something pro-woman?Silentpony said:
I really wonder when people will get used to social media "hate". It's always been there. It's always been pretty open, too. Just, and the dictionary says this is the correct translation, called "Bitching about someone". It just was behind their back.
Now, it's just easier to write it down and have the feeling of talking bad behind somebody's back. But criticism? Often confused with internet-hate?
Get a grip. It's been there since the dawn of mankind. Thanks to the internet, the only difference now is that you might know about it.
Some decades ago, critics being lucky drawing enough attention to getting published on paper were the only place you'd really hear about your works. Now, you simply have a better chance to listen to real opinions.
Now, it's just easier to write it down and have the feeling of talking bad behind somebody's back. But criticism? Often confused with internet-hate?
Get a grip. It's been there since the dawn of mankind. Thanks to the internet, the only difference now is that you might know about it.
Some decades ago, critics being lucky drawing enough attention to getting published on paper were the only place you'd really hear about your works. Now, you simply have a better chance to listen to real opinions.
He's an Abrams-esque hack who can't make anything new or innovative, but can easily make something functional/solid.
Unlike Abrams though, his direction isn't quite as solid, but his fanbase is far more rabid.
He shouldn't have been put in charge in the first place, but now that he's leaving halfway in it's going to be problematic.
Unlike Abrams though, his direction isn't quite as solid, but his fanbase is far more rabid.
He shouldn't have been put in charge in the first place, but now that he's leaving halfway in it's going to be problematic.
On the one hand, I can see where he's coming from but on the other, I agree that he's coming off as whiny. Maybe it's the overuse of ellipsis (something I can't stand).
That being said, I haven't really paid attention to the past few Marvel movies and he's already a lot richer than I am for doing that sort of thing sooooo maybe suck some of it up, buttercup? Originality is dead, anyway.
That being said, I haven't really paid attention to the past few Marvel movies and he's already a lot richer than I am for doing that sort of thing sooooo maybe suck some of it up, buttercup? Originality is dead, anyway.
Is this projection going on here, or is there actually some evidence towards it? Honestly I am actually asking, as I don't know. Did I miss something, and some of those changes bothered him?RatGouf said:
I just got the feeling from the article that it was things like "We need X number of characters with Y amount of screen-time to set up for Z film" that got to him, as opposed to anything about the characters themselves.
Probably the best for everyone. Whedon's a talented storyteller, but he's not great at killing his darlings, which is part of the job description when it comes to work-for-hire. When you're not holding the purse strings, the client's say-so comes before your artistic vision. Sucks, but that's reality.
Given how filming Age of Ultron was apparently very bad for his health and sanity towards the end his leaving is a good idea. Now I thought this was a done deal last year but this is still news somehow.
Thing is, when there are as many directors and movies going simultaneously with this franchise, expecting full creative control is a little much. Sometimes you have to dial it back a notch and chill. Whedon does not seem like the kind of guy to do that though.
Maybe we can get another long running TV series out of him that starts off with a great premise, then starts to turn sour as the soap opera tropes start to pile up.
Thing is, when there are as many directors and movies going simultaneously with this franchise, expecting full creative control is a little much. Sometimes you have to dial it back a notch and chill. Whedon does not seem like the kind of guy to do that though.
Maybe we can get another long running TV series out of him that starts off with a great premise, then starts to turn sour as the soap opera tropes start to pile up.