|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 25, 2018 18:29:21 GMT
90% TV. What's your point? That because they turned out ok that means this one's going to turn ok too? They're different people. One doing well is no indication that the other will.
And it still doesn't answer the question. In fact, it makes me ask the question about the Russo Brothers. How are movies of this scale being given to unproven directors? What are they seeing that makes them think these people can handle these completely different and quite large projects?
Probably because it doesn't seem to matter too much. I would've expected better Thor films from Kenneth Branagh or even Alan Taylor, but those turned out quite poorly, IMO. Even Joss Whedon and Jon Favreau who were not just proven directors but proven within the MCU turned in weaker follow-ups to their previous films. Then the unproven Jon Watts gave us a pretty awesome Spider-Man film.
But looking at the MCU directors, most of them did have a previous film that would make me believe they could handle such an endeavor.
So either this will be another Jon Watts, or turn out to be a Josh Trank situation.
Whether or not they CAN handle the job is not the point. Like you said, maybe she'll turn out the very best MCU ever made!
My point is how do these unproven directors GET the jobs in the first place? What is it that makes them appealing to you as a producer/studio head if they don't have anything to SHOW you?
|
|