criterionforum.org

black&huge wrote: Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:57 pm

Never Cursed wrote: Sun Jul 21, 2019 2:03 am Marvel announced the following movies at SDCC today:

Black Widow (Cate Shortland), with Scarlett Johansson, David Harbour, Florence Pugh, O-T Fagbenle, and Rachel Weisz (May 2020)
The Eternals (Chloé Zhao), with Angelina Jolie, Richard Madden, Kumail Nanjiani, Lauren Ridloff, Brian Tyree Henry, and Salma Hayek (November 2020)
Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (Destin Daniel Cretton), with Simu Liu, Awkwafina and Tony Leung (!) (February 2021)
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (Scott Derrickson), with Benedict Cumberbatch and Elizabeth Olsen (May 2021)
Thor: Love and Thunder (Taika Waititi), with Chris Hemsworth, Tessa Thompson and Natalie Portman (November 2021)
Mahershala Ali as the titular character in an undated Blade reboot, alongside Black Panther, Captain Marvel, Guardians of the Galaxy, and Fantastic Four sequels/reboots

Doctor Strange title seems like they may be trying to go Lovecraft. They did say it's Marvel's first "scary movie" so I hope they go all out while still keeping a PG-13. Blade is the best news everything else is just "okay... more Marvel!".

I think I read the Dr Strange will be gothic horror.

Yes the intimation was was that Strange and Scarlet Witch will be fighting all manner of tentacled horrors and that the film would have an explicit horror angle.

DarkImbecile wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:02 am Disney strikes again, forcing out the director of the only upcoming Marvel project I would have considered seeing

I’ve never heard of this guy but apparently he has a story credit for Land of Plenty so he sounds cool to me and Armond White

Well he directed the first Doctor Strange, which was easily the most visually interesting of all the Marvel movies

When that Doctor Strange sequel was announced, he said the intent was to make it psychedelic horror, which in retrospect I should have known was not going to fly with the people who wouldn’t let Edgar Wright do “moderately zany Ant-Man”

DarkImbecile wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:13 am When that Doctor Strange sequel was announced, he said the intent was to make it psychedelic horror, which in retrospect I should have known was not going to fly with the people who wouldn’t let Edgar Wright do “moderately zany Ant-Man”

Funny, this actually came up today with a friend comparing it to Solo, when the Lego Movie/21 Jump Street directors were fired for, what, being what you'd expect?

A friend of mine showed me a copy of Moon Knight the other day, since I was one of the few people he knew who actually read it back in the day - I may not read them anymore, but he was right, I dug the look and it would be incredible if Marvel ditched their fast food franchise approach more often and did something trippy like this, letting their freak flag fly.

This is the last time I give Disney any money

Spoiler

he says while his family is on vacation at Disneyland

Derrickson's only other notable credit (for me) was probably the only (what I would call) good straight-to-video Hellraiser sequel. I have seen a handful of his other horror films and they're all pretty "meh" to "really bad." I was stunned to see they tapped him to direct it and because of that I had low expectations, but I ended up liking Doctor Strange a lot, I was looking forward to the sequel to see him mix in more of his horror visuals, which were probably the strongest aspects of his horror films. Now I'm actually disappointed he's not doing it.

DarkImbecile wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:13 am When that Doctor Strange sequel was announced, he said the intent was to make it psychedelic horror, which in retrospect I should have known was not going to fly with the people who wouldn’t let Edgar Wright do “moderately zany Ant-Man”

Hey, Wright bailing on Ant-Man means we got Baby Driver instead, so I'll accept that trade-off any day of the week.

Pity we'll never know if Derrickson's departure was Feige himself deciding Derrickson's ideas didn't sit well with him or if Mssrs Iger and Horn told him to give Derrickson the marching orders. Doctor Strange was one of the two or so Marvel films I genuinely liked, so my own interest in the sequel has now nosedived as well. They could hire someone who in theory is even better suited to the material than Derrickson but any filmmaker short of Spielberg and Cameron wouldn't stand a chance not to have Disney's choices imposed upon them or have the film taken away from them. Marvel prior to the Disney takeover weren't the boldest studio by any stretch of the imagination but under Iger they're likely to be even less adventurous. The huge success of the MCU gives Feige some leeway but it takes only two or three future MCU films to significantly underperform for the leash to be tightened swiftly. And Iger had the nerve to get offended by Scorsese's comments.

DarkImbecile wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:13 am When that Doctor Strange sequel was announced, he said the intent was to make it psychedelic horror, which in retrospect I should have known was not going to fly with the people who wouldn’t let Edgar Wright do “moderately zany Ant-Man”

IIRC, many thought as soon as this direction was announced "wow, that's surprising, and probably unlikely to stay this way". It seemed even more unlikely considering the issues Fox were having in parallel with their theorically-horror New Mutants fare.
In any case, it seems even Scott Derrickson is not enough of a Yes Man for Disney.

Of course people thought the same thing about giving the helm to Boden & Fleck but that one still worked out

Directors come and go all the time on non-franchise, non-Disney stuff too. Seems like people are jumping to conclusions here just a bit.

At any rate, the notion that Derrickson was “forced out” is not supported by the linked THR article.

Brian C wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 4:29 pm Directors come and go all the time on non-franchise, non-Disney stuff too. Seems like people are jumping to conclusions here just a bit.

At any rate, the notion that Derrickson was “forced out” is not supported by the linked THR article.

We have no idea what happened behind closed doors, but you can't really deny there's a pattern at the Mouse House lately, more so than at any other studio.

A force-out wouldn't be surprising to hear, but a passive-aggressive "we're not a right fit, Scott; we've decided to ask someone else to finish the film" is more likely. All conjecture, of course, until the inevitable tell-all autobiography about navigating the Marvel/Disney autocracy we'll hopefully see in the future. Count me as another who found Dr. Strange (2016) as one of the more interesting films in the franchise. (Although I too wouldn't have known Derrickson's name before this hoopla...)

Derrickson was by no means a brilliant filmmaker (and as much as I like Edgar Wright's films, Shaun, Hot Fuzz and Baby Driver are pretty good but nothing in Wright's filmography feels like a masterpiece to me, though I keep hoping that something eventually will) but he was one of the more interesting directors working for Marvel. According to people who've paid more attention to the film's development than me until now, Feige and Marvel have been backtracking on Derrickson's "it's going to be a horror film" comments for several weeks, and Derrickson has openly tweeted about his frustrations over having to hit a specific deadline as per Disney's schedule. In all that context, I find it even more mind-boggling that Marvel ever approached Lucrecia Martel to direct something for them (Black Widow, wasn't it?).

Finch wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 6:53 pmIn all that context, I find it even more mind-boggling that Marvel ever approached Lucrecia Martel to direct something for them (Black Widow, wasn't it?).

In that specific case, it was no doubt a "No matter who we choose, make sure it's a woman!" thing. 8-[

Sam Raimi is in talks for Doctor Strange 2.

How about that?

Is it gonna be the prankish Darkman/Spider-Man 2 Raimi, or the squashed-by-studio-meddling Spider-Man 3 Raimi?

I'd rather see him do something original again.

With it being Disney, who wants to bet against it being the latter? Raimi shouldn't be this much of a surprise as he's done that dreadful Oz film for them.

It's like Tim Burton, making his worst film with the 2010 Alice In Wonderland...then coming back a decade later for another wan live-action Disney remake (Dumbo). Remember when both filmmakers were anarchic, low-budget innovators? Do they need the money that much? Is it that hard to scrounge up $15 or $20 million to make something small, personal and from the heart?

Then again, considering how little Big Eyes and Drag Me To Hell made, maybe I shouldn't be surprised.

I didn't see it and probably never will but Dumbo looked way better than any of the other live action Disney remakes (though I'm guessing the crows didn't make it)

I actually sort of enjoyed Dumbo (it's certainly not the train wreck that Alice was), but I kept reflecting on how it should have a been a home-run perfect fit for Burton's sensibilities -- it's a movie about a freakish outsider living in a circus, for God's sake! -- and how forgettable it all turned out to be. How you fail to wring any real emotion out of re-staging one of the most heartbreaking scenes in all of Disney animation (the "Baby Mine" song), when, thirty years ago, you made audiences weep at Edward Scissorhands, is beyond me.

That's what I want to see more of from inspired lunatics from Burton and Raimi, eccentric-yet-heartfelt stuff that emits from their own creative ids, not just slapping a new gloss of paint on someone else's creation and cashing a check. You'd have to go back to Corpse Bride to find a Burton movie that was a 100% Burton Movie (even Frankenweenie was a remake of his own short film), and the only Full Raimi movie in the last twenty years was Drag Me To Hell.

It retrospect, I'm glad that Edgar Wright never made Ant-Man, or that Guillermo Del Toro never made the Hobbit movies...these are ferociously innovative and original filmmakers who should never be yoked to someone else's IP. Look at Peter Jackson, who will probably never make another modestly-budgeted original movie again.

Money kills creativity.