Who would you most want to direct a Star Wars or Marvel film?

[ScourgiousJinx]

I didn't know who the Russo Brothers were by name. Wikipedia tells me they're the second most commercially successful directors behind Spielberg which makes sense given their past Marvel work. Go Russos.

*Apparently Extraction was successful enough to warrant a sequel . They also did Arrested Development, truly great show.

 

[HMSwolfe]

I didn't know who the Russo Brothers were by name. Wikipedia tells me they're the second most commercially successful directors behind Spielberg which makes sense given their past Marvel work. Go Russos.

*Apparently Extraction was successful enough to warrant a sequel . They also did Arrested Development, truly great show.

Sure, didn’t you see their Easter egg in Infinity War?

Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s actually David Cross, but still.

 

[Mottrex]

Maybe not so much a director but the way a movie is shot these days.
I love those sweeping vistas created by say David Lean, think Lawrence of Arabia mixed with the frenetic pace of William Friedkins The French connection and a dose of Spielberg who Could tie it all together nicely.

Nice long lense Panovision soft lenses mixed with unashambled Up too close Bergmann profile shots
I strongly believe CGI can be the downfall of many a movie.
Sometimes it feels the Creative team ? are welding it like a Builders trowel less an Artists brush..
An bad story can prevale on quality visuals but a good story really can struggle poor..

 

[renaissance_man]

I think with the right character, Michel Gondry would be great. I think he would make a great director for Dr Strange.

 

[bwayne64]

Tarantino for a Marvel movie.

 

[renaissance_man]

Tarantino for a Marvel movie.

All of the Punisher on Netflix was borderline Tarantino.

 

[bwayne64]

All of the Punisher on Netflix was borderline Tarantino.

This is true, but I think he would bring in stuff that would blow people's minds, and not in the way Jar Jar did, lol.

 

[dascoyne]

Tony Gilroy

 

[desertsoldier22]

Dave Filoni...no questions asked.

 

[dascoyne]

I think the entire MCU needs to go underground until actual inspired creative forces emerge at Disney. It doesn't even matter if we managed to squeeze out one or two actually good films here and there. Without the drive of a compelling phase 5 or 6 storyline and cohesive character development the whole ship is doomed to disaster.

Presently the entire creative mechanism at Disney seems rotten to the core, and I don't see a way out of this downward spiral. And pumping out more films/shows to see what sticks isn't going to make it better. Up through Endgame there was at least some connective creative tissue unifying the MCU. Now there's just a chaotic .... multiverse (?) of open-ended stories. The MCU is like a giant rudderless cruise ship powered by a random assortment of tiny props.

The MCU post-credits scenes, today, seem like a bunch of Hail-Marys designed to gauge fan interest. It shouldn't surprise them that none of it is interesting. The post-credit scenes of the pre-Endgame era were exciting only because they actually alluded to an already mapped out narrative. The ship had direction.

MCU just needs to go into hibernation to weather the storm. So does Star Wars and Pixar for that matter.

 

[Cephus]

There are a lot of good directors who would be completely wasted today on Star Wars or Marvel because of the current leadership. You've got Kevin Feige, who came out at the beginning of phase 4 and said the whole thing was going to be about representation, not making good movies, and we all saw how that turned out, and Kathleen Kennedy, who has proven she doesn't care about Star Wars so long as the Force is female, will torpedo any effort. At least Kennedy is supposedly gone after she tanks Indy 5, but so long as the leadership isn't interested in making good movies that an actual paying audience wants to see, and it's clear that's what's going on based on box office takes over the past couple of years, then it doesn't matter who is in the director's seat, it's going to ultimately fail.

 

[pengbuzz]

There are a lot of good directors who would be completely wasted today on Star Wars or Marvel because of the current leadership. You've got Kevin Feige, who came out at the beginning of phase 4 and said the whole thing was going to be about representation, not making good movies, and we all saw how that turned out, and Kathleen Kennedy, who has proven she doesn't care about Star Wars so long as the Force is female, will torpedo any effort. At least Kennedy is supposedly gone after she tanks Indy 5, but so long as the leadership isn't interested in making good movies that an actual paying audience wants to see, and it's clear that's what's going on based on box office takes over the past couple of years, then it doesn't matter who is in the director's seat, it's going to ultimately fail.

Star Wars would need to come away from Disney and rest for at least a decade before they could possibly do anything with it.

I don;t say this to merely parrot other opinions, but because the damage Disney has done has poisoned people against it, and it's going to take time for that to fade at least a little bit. Then maybe with a new generation, try to bury the sodded remains of the "sequel tragedy trilogy" and start with at least a less soiled canvas than what they left for future film makers.

But...DIsney probably has a death grip on the franchise for the next trillion years, so SW is pretty much screwed.

 

[Cephus]

I wouldn't trust Disney to wipe its own ass at this point. At least I'm not the kind of person to care about a franchise, I care about good movies. It's why I figure Star Wars ended in 1983 because that's the last good movie they made. Everything since, even the stuff under Lucas, was bad fanfic. Disney can continue to make bad Star Wars and bad Marvel and I won't care because I don't have to look forward, I've got the movies I want. If nothing better ever comes out, so what? They're already on my shelf! I don't get mad at this stuff, I just laugh at it. I make fun of Disney and most of woke Hollywood these days and every single woke crusader that dares to rear their pathetic heads. These people are not worth our time. I laugh every time a Disney movie tanks at the box office, which virtually all of them do. Hollywood is going down the drain. Let it. Sooner or later, something better will rise in its place.

 

[pengbuzz]

I wouldn't trust Disney to wipe its own ass at this point.

Well... that depends...

At least I'm not the kind of person to care about a franchise, I care about good movies. It's why I figure Star Wars ended in 1983 because that's the last good movie they made. Everything since, even the stuff under Lucas, was bad fanfic. Disney can continue to make bad Star Wars and bad Marvel and I won't care because I don't have to look forward, I've got the movies I want. If nothing better ever comes out, so what? They're already on my shelf! I don't get mad at this stuff, I just laugh at it. I make fun of Disney and most of woke Hollywood these days and every single woke crusader that dares to rear their pathetic heads. These people are not worth our time. I laugh every time a Disney movie tanks at the box office, which virtually all of them do. Hollywood is going down the drain. Let it. Sooner or later, something better will rise in its place.

That's a good way to look at it all. You have what you want; they have nothing to offer you and therefore no power to harm you.

 

[Cephus]

That's a good way to look at it all. You have what you want; they have nothing to offer you and therefore no power to harm you.

They don't owe me anything, which a lot of people seem to think that these companies do, but if they want my money, they have to earn it, which these days, very few movies or TV shows do. It works out just fine that way.

 

[ScourgiousJinx]

The entire point of the thread is hypothetical in nature with the assumption that the director of choice would have a good measure of autonomy to do what they wanted with the film.

 

[pengbuzz]

*Pengbuzz pulls ejection handle. Canopy jettisons, then MK42 Martin-Baker Ejection Seat rocket motor fires.*

FWOOOOOOOOOM!!!

 

[batguy]

The entire point of the thread is hypothetical in nature with the assumption that the director of choice would have a good measure of autonomy to do what they wanted with the film.

It's hard to think that way because that kind of director autonomy isn't normal anymore. Not in big franchise shows.

 

[ScourgiousJinx]

It's hard to think that way because that kind of director autonomy isn't normal anymore. Not in big franchise shows.

I understand entirely. I get that Studios control most of how films are made and that modern large franchises are extremely heavy handed (especially Disney).

With that said it's really not that huge of a leap to hypothetically imagine if directors did have that autonomy or at least the same amount they've had for other films. I just wanted to find out others perspectives about particular directors and why they thought that director would do a good job in the Star Wars universe based on past films/work.

As much as I agree with the fact that Disney is not doing a stellar job for the most part and that they're extraordinarily difficult to work with (directors drop from their films like flies) I wasn't looking to make yet another Disney sucks thread.

 

[batguy]

Yeah I get it. It's just hard to avoid that line of thinking. Some of these franchise movies have had perfectly good directors in recent years but they weren't running the project.

Look at Indy#5. It's James Mangold directing it, and it's probably gonna be woke poop (or a disjointed rush job of re-shoots). But when I think about who I would hypothetically want to see in charge of an Indy movie, one of the big names that comes to mind is . . . James Mangold.