"Marvel Studios' The Avengers" Pre-Release Discussion (Spoilers)

[TheVileOne]

Joss has directed one unsuccessful movie on a short-lived cult TV series. He created a few shows that had decent followings but were hardly huge shows.

 

[Shawn Hopkins]

Joss has directed one unsuccessful movie on a short-lived cult TV series. He created a view shows that had decent followings but were hardly huge shows.

What's the bar for directing a comic book movie you're setting here? Buffy and Angel propped up their respective networks for years as some of their most important tentpole shows.

Not everything else was as successful, but this is about potential. Joss is a great, experienced writer and director, with a deft feel for character, who understands Marvel superheroes better than just about anyone. His Avengers movie could be fantastic.

 

[TheVileOne]

Whedon is an experienced TV guy. He's not very well experienced working on productions like this. He's had mainly rough failed transitions into feature filmmaking.

 

[Hanshotfirst1138]

Whatever did happen to Hobbes? Mr. Happy should be here to cry softly soon.

 

[Shawn Hopkins]

Whedon is an experienced TV guy. He's not very well experienced working on productions like this. He's had mainly rough failed transitions into feature filmmaking.

He's directed one movie. It wasn't a mega hit because, yeah, based on a canceled cult TV show, but it was a good movie. Give the guy the benefit of the doubt.

He was also a well-known script doctor before he moved into TV. He's a significant part of why Toy Story is so good.

 

[TheVileOne]

He's directed one movie. It wasn't a mega hit because, yeah, based on a canceled cult TV show, but it was a good movie. Give the guy the benefit of the doubt.

Why? This is arguably the biggest and most important movie or comic book movie of all time. It could have a budget well exceeding $200 million or more.

I honestly don't hate this choice, but I'm a little concerned.

He was also a well-known script doctor before he moved into TV. He's a significant part of why Toy Story is so good.

Script doctoring is not the same as helming a gigantic comic book superhero movie.

 

[Shawn Hopkins]

Why? This is arguably the biggest and most important movie or comic book movie of all time. It could have a budget well exceeding $200 million or more.

I honestly don't hate this choice, but I'm a little concerned.



Script doctoring is not the same as helming a gigantic comic book superhero movie.

You should give him a break because there are no reasons to cast gloom and doom about at this point. Serenity was a cult, niche property, it was never going to be a mega blockbuster. You can't judge his whole potential as a director on its box office numbers. And you seem to be ignoring the actual quality of the work here.

They let guys who direct music videos and commercials helm major motion pictures all the time as first-timers. Michael Bay, who I'm using as an example solely because you seem primarily concerned with box office receipts, was making Meat Loaf videos before his first feature. Joss at least has a proven track record as a strong storyteller.

The way you've set the bar, it seems like the only director that would ease your mind would be one who has directed a successful giant Superhero team movie. In other words, it would have to be Bryan Singer because he's the only person who has done that so far. People might also try to say Zack Snyder, but Watchmen really didn't make that much compared to its astronomical budget. Okay, Tim Story's Fantastic Four did make a lot of money, but it was a bad film.

It's certainly not the most important movie of all time, anyway, not by a long shot. It won't even be the most important comic book movie, the Avengers will never be as iconic as Superman or Batman. Just having more guys doesn't make something more important.

Finally, I'm confident that he can do it. Buffy is a superhero, after all. He's written actual comic books.

 

[Wounded_Dragon]

Buffy's not that much of a comfort if you don't like seasons 6, 7, and 8(CB).

 

[Old Guy]

My only concern is Whedon's lack of experience. He's a TV guy. His only movie was like 5 years ago. Atleast JJ Abrams did Mission: Impossible III before Star Trek. Jumping from TV to a $200 million movie is one heck of a jump.

 

[Shawn Hopkins]

My only concern is Whedon's lack of experience. He's a TV guy. His only movie was like 5 years ago. Atleast JJ Abrams did Mission: Impossible III before Star Trek. Jumping from TV to a $200 million movie is one heck of a jump.

I don't know how many times I have to say it. Like you said, Joss has directed a movie. He's directed exactly as many movies as Abrams had before Star Trek. It was a cult property that was never destined to bring in as much of the almighty dollah as the third movie in a Tom Cruise series, but it was also an original vision.

And it's hard to stick the "lack of experience" label on a guy who has worked in the TV and movie business for more than 20 years, wrote several movies and created four TV shows.

At this point I'd much rather debate with the guy who was worried because he thinks Whedon writes all of his heroes like girly men. At least he was criticizing something tangible about Whedon's work instead of speculating based on nothing.

Or, here, I'll throw this one out there. With Whedon at the helm the Avengers movie will be too "talky" and cerebral to appeal to the Transformers crowd, who have been trained to accept loud and meaningless violence. That's something you can worry about.

Whedon might put female characters like the Wasp too much in the forefront, meaning the boys won't get as much screentime as they would with another writer/director. There's another one.

 

[GWOtaku]

You know, here's another guy that got going with TV work: J. Michael Straczynski. Once upon a time he wrote for 1980s cartoons. Once upon a later time he made Babylon 5. Once upon a time not so long ago, he wrote Clint Eastwood's Changeling.

Not that I'm trying to offer a direct analogy, but seriously. Don't be hatin' TV writers.

 

[Old Guy]

Joss has directed a movie.

Yes, a $39 million sci-fi movie based on a cult TV show. That's not the same as a $200 million blockbuster featuring four big superheroes. It's one heck of a jump. He could pull it off. I'm not saying he can't. It's just a big leap. It's like if Sam Raimi had directed Spider-Man right after Evil Dead.

Don't be hatin' TV writers.

I never was.

 

[wonderfly]

For all this talk of Whedon, has it actually been confirmed yet that he's directing the Avengers? Or is it still a rumor at this stage?

 

[Shawn Hopkins]

Yes, a $39 million sci-fi movie based on a cult TV show. That's not the same as a $200 million blockbuster featuring four big superheroes. It's one heck of a jump. He could pull it off. I'm not saying he can't. It's just a big leap. It's like if Sam Raimi had directed Spider-Man right after Evil Dead.

It's exactly nothing like that. Putting aside how early in Sam's career that was and how late in Joss's this one is and the fact that Evil Dead was a microbudget independent production and Serenity was a multi-million-dollar special effects movie, are you really trying to argue that TV experience absolutely doesn't count? That the only things Joss has learned about visual storytelling are what he's learned in those times he was working on feature films, and that all of the experience working on TV was just simply wasted time?

You're also aware that before Raimi came back to mainly feature films he produced a metric ton of sci-fi and fantasy genre television in the 90s and early aughts, right?

 

[Old Guy]

For all this talk of Whedon, has it actually been confirmed yet that he's directing the Avengers? Or is it still a rumor at this stage?

He's in final talks. In other words, putting the final details into the contract before signing it.

are you really trying to argue that TV experience absolutely doesn't count?

I'm just saying it's a big jump. TV and movies are different ballparks. The scope of the Avengers is huge. He's never done anything like this before. He can pull it off. I'm not saying he can't. But it does raise some questions.

 

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

Joss Whedon is just as, if not more than, qualified to direct a superhero movie as Jon Favreau was before he directed Iron Man.

If anything, Whedon has more experience in the science fiction/fantasy genre than Mr. Favreau did, who I believe only did comedies. Not to knock Favreau, who obviously loves comics, knows and respects the material, and did a great job with Iron Man, but it just goes to show you that you never can tell who's the best fit to direct a movie, until the movie is actually done -- all you can do is look at one's qualifications based on their previous work.

Having said that, if the guy who did Swingers can do decent Iron Man movie, I'd be willing to bet that the guy who did Serenity can turn out a great Avengers movie.

 

[Hanshotfirst1138]

Leterrier seems to be getting a lot of big projects lately. The sheer logistics of putting this together mean that putting it together and getting it into a simple cohesive story is going to be a titanci task.

I really hope this follows through and Whedon is officially named director.

I don't see it as very likely. The fact that he's only directed T.V. work and a film that is almost legendary as a bomb, I don't know if he'll be considered commercially viable.

Do you just not know that Whedon wrote one of the best X-men arcs in the last 10 years? He can do superheroes.

Must depend on who you talk to....

Joss has directed a movie, though. And four TV shows. I think he's set. Here's a guy that has talent as a filmmaker and writer who also has a deep understanding of superheroes. Sounds good to me.

Whedon is the sort of guy who lots of people outside of the fanbase love to criticize, insisting that his group of fans aren't literate of the very things he's playing with (and indeed, I can't help but question how many "Once More, with feeling fans have actually seen any other musicals). But he's also a very literate guy; listening to his commentaries and hearing him reference things like Shakespeare, Nosferatu, and Anthony Mann to name a few (things I seriously doubt that Brett Ratner has even read or seen or heard of), and Whedon always has actual things to say other than "explosions are fun" and "special effects are cool." I do question whether or not he's got enough skill to work on a film production of this scale, and think that he's better suited to T.V., but he's clearly more than a hack for hire, and he's showed even in directing episodes of T.V. that he really has a good eye for technique, for composition, and working with actors, as well as a sense of timing and staging set pieces.

They let guys who direct music videos and commercials helm major motion pictures all the time as first-timers. Michael Bay, who I'm using as an example solely because you seem primarily concerned with box office receipts, was making Meat Loaf videos before his first feature. Joss at least has a proven track record as a strong storyteller.

This I'll agree with completely. But then, with most movies being feature length music videos anyway these days, they seem to be a viable choice.

Finally, I'm confident that he can do it. Buffy is a superhero, after all. He's written actual comic books.

I think that's a line on of the very early Buffy episodes.

My only concern is Whedon's lack of experience. He's a TV guy. His only movie was like 5 years ago. Atleast JJ Abrams did Mission: Impossible III before Star Trek. Jumping from TV to a $200 million movie is one heck of a jump.

He did a feature film. A modestly budgeted one at best, and one based on a canceled T.V. series of his own, but still a feature film

He's in final talks. In other words, putting the final details into the contract before signing it.

When he tried to do that with Wonder Woman, he wound up working from the project. Let us not forget that he's had his share of trouble with T.V. studios.

 

[Shawn Hopkins]

Must depend on who you talk to....

There's always one contrarian dink who hates anything just because it's popular, and that certainly seems to be the case with this overdefensive, overconcerned with how "overhyped" Astonishing was review. If you look at the book's main page you'll see that the average customer review is 4.5 stars.

The remarkable thing about Astonishing, and the thing that's most important when we're talking about him directing a superhero movie, is that it doesn't feel at all like it's written by some big guest TV writer who comes in and changes the characters and the way they sound and act around to suit him like you got with Kevin Smith and Reginald Hudlin. They felt like themselves, like they were being written by a really good old comics pro that had a great grasp of who they were. The interplay between Wolverine and Cyclops was especially good.

I think that's a line on of the very early Buffy episodes.

Yes, Xander says it somewhere, can't remember which one.

 

[Old Guy]

Joss Whedon is just as, if not more than, qualified to direct a superhero movie as Jon Favreau was before he directed Iron Man.

Iron Man is nothing in comparison to The Avengers. Iron Man is, well, one superhero. The Avengers is four. The scope of the movie is huge! So, it makes sense to question Whedon's ability to pull that off.

 

[Palin Dromos]

I'm gonna agree with Shawn here and say that Joss as director raises no concerns with me.

The key to the Avengers is the same thing that was key to X-men juggling an ensemble cast. And Joss's major strength is character interaction. And unlike X-men, most of the character ground work will have already been laid down in the solo movies. Heck, it's not unlike guest directing a TV episode, in the respect that he'll be taking characters that others already worked on and molding them into the story he's telling.

Despite only one film on his resume, the 38 episodes of TV he's directed (IMDB) is plenty of experience. He knows how to work with a crew, with actors, and with budgets of varying size. Add to that all the producing experience he has not to mention writing. And all the comic book geek cred he's got. He's a shockingly appropriate choice. And a smart move by Marvel.

We won't know how good the film is until we see it, but this sounds pretty darn good to me.

Stuff can go any which way.
Hire a majorly respected dramatic director and you run the risk of Ang Lee's Hulk.
Hire a flavor of the month up and comer, you get Gavin Hood's Wolverine.
Hire a confessed comic geek with a lot of TV production experience, some film experience, and a rabid, niche, cult following and you get Sam Raimi's Spider-Man.

If this director choice goes through I won't be second guessing the production without serious cause.