News Round Up 2020

[jlundeen]

I'm hoping (against all odds, I know) that they take this as an opportunity to re-arrange the tiering in DHS... Trying to do a touring plan for there is insane. Hope against hope that they make MMRR, SDD and the SWGE Tier 1, and dial back the RnRC, TOT, AS2 and TSM to Tier 2...

Yes.... I know.... that would be great, but more than likely not going to happen.... but hey, I can dream.

 

[mikepizzo]

NEWS

Doctor Strange sequel direction leaves role via "mutual understanding"

https://twitter.com/x/status/1215428331450953728

Interesting. Perhaps Scott Derrickson wanted to play up the horror more than Marvel wanted.

 

[jknezek]

Interesting. Perhaps Scott Derrickson wanted to play up the horror more than Marvel wanted.

It seems like this happens these days with more tentpole movies than not. I think because these are top down movies. In other words Marvel and Lucasfilm have a movie they want made and hire a director to do it vs a lot of movies which are the director has the idea and pitches it to the studio. Directors prefer one vs the other and if they aren't comfortable with the studio down approach, it seems like it falls apart fast.

 

[mikepizzo]

It seems like this happens these days with more tentpole movies than not. I think because these are top down movies. In other words Marvel and Lucasfilm have a movie they want made and hire a director to do it vs a lot of movies which are the director has the idea and pitches it to the studio. Directors prefer one vs the other and if they aren't comfortable with the studio down approach, it seems like it falls apart fast.

Yep. There are still studios that allow directors to make a movie, like A24. Think Warner Bros. would have greenlit 'The Lighthouse'?

But it begs the question. Why do big studios hire directors with a certain creative style and vision, just to end up stifling them? This is a little different situation since it's the same director as Dr. Strange. But look at Ant-Man. They hire Edgar Wright who has a very distinct style, and then when he wants to make the movie he wants to make (in his style) the studio ends up butting heads.

And of course I'm not saying this is exactly what happened in this situation. But you hear about studio meddling all the time. Let the filmmakers make film and the bean counters count beans. Which I know is easier said than done when, literally, hundreds of millions of dollars are on the line.

 

[Firebird060]

Sadly i feel the days of Tim Burton type Super Hero movies are at a end for awhile. DC has always been a bit more darker than Marvel but even then some of the newer DC movies that try to have a darker character portrayal still are more brightly shot and dont heavily lean on the background and scenery to portray that darkness everywhere. Marvel has some material they could do that with, but Marvel seems to be about, either lets make the movies fun and light hearted with amazing CGI and not focus on the duality between good and evil.

I am curious to see what they do now that they own Deadpool. I suspect it will still have alot of the same light hearted wall breaking tounge and cheek humor and violence but I also wouldnt be surprised if we hear about some things not getting the green light that it would have post Disneys acquisition.

What i would like to see which i doubt I would, is that since Disney or Marvel Studios owns the rights to the Blade Series that we get a newer anti hero Blade movie made but allow it to have a darker tone. I dont care of Wesley Snipes is Blade or not, but I do enjoy the darker anti-heros that dont get enough love.

 

[jknezek]

Yep. There are still studios that allow directors to make a movie, like A24. Think Warner Bros. would have greenlit 'The Lighthouse'?

But it begs the question. Why do big studios hire directors with a certain creative style and vision, just to end up stifling them? This is a little different situation since it's the same director as Dr. Strange. But look at Ant-Man. They hire Edgar Wright who has a very distinct style, and then when he wants to make the movie he wants to make (in his style) the studio ends up butting heads.

And of course I'm not saying this is exactly what happened in this situation. But you hear about studio meddling all the time. Let the filmmakers make film and the bean counters count beans. Which I know is easier said than done when, literally, hundreds of millions of dollars are on the line.

Well, a lot of these tentpoles are part of a larger universe. And a good steward of that larger universe is going to aim for consistency. Consistency with the movies that came before and consistency with the broad arc that is occurring and consistency with the end goal. If the director, in his desire to make his own film, is messing with any of these three concepts, that's a problem for the studio. If it's a one off film? Yeah, who cares. But that's the point really. These tentpoles are hardly one offs anymore. They are either sequels or prequels or parts of Universes. Star Wars, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, whatever hash is being made from DC material. You just can't let directors have free reign when you are dropping 500 million, including marketing, into a film that needs to make $1B in revenue to break even.

 

[Moliphino]

Well, a lot of these tentpoles are part of a larger universe. And a good steward of that larger universe is going to aim for consistency. Consistency with the movies that came before and consistency with the broad arc that is occurring and consistency with the end goal. If the director, in his desire to make his own film, is messing with any of these three concepts, that's a problem for the studio. If it's a one off film? Yeah, who cares. But that's the point really. These tentpoles are hardly one offs anymore. They are either sequels or prequels or parts of Universes. Star Wars, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, whatever hash is being made from DC material. You just can't let directors have free reign when you are dropping 500 million, including marketing, into a film that needs to make $1B in revenue to break even.

Exactly. Some directors can work within that boundary and some don't want to. With Marvel, the directors have been allowed a good amount of freedom (James Gunn has certainly made the Guardians his own and Taika has taken Thor in a new direction) but they still need to fit into Kevin Feige's master plan.

 

[The Pho]

What i would like to see which i doubt I would, is that since Disney or Marvel Studios owns the rights to the Blade Series that we get a newer anti hero Blade movie made but allow it to have a darker tone. I dont care of Wesley Snipes is Blade or not, but I do enjoy the darker anti-heros that dont get enough love.

A new Blade has already been announced with Mahershala Ali as Blade.

 

[mtfd89]

News

https://blogmickey.com/2020/01/concept-art-released-for-flamingo-crossings-phase-one-hotel-expansion

Oh bother. So much for Western Way being the super secret entrance that all of us at Orange Lake use.

 

[Brianstl]

It seems like this happens these days with more tentpole movies than not. I think because these are top down movies. In other words Marvel and Lucasfilm have a movie they want made and hire a director to do it vs a lot of movies which are the director has the idea and pitches it to the studio. Directors prefer one vs the other and if they aren't comfortable with the studio down approach, it seems like it falls apart fast.

It does seem like this is happening more, but not sure if it is the best business decision when you consider Joker was the most profitable movie of 2019 despite having a R rating.

 

[rteetz]

News

https://blogmickey.com/2020/01/epcot-monorail-work-delayed-operating-hours-wont-be-impacted

 

[rteetz]

News

https://www.orlandoparksnews.com/2020/01/bus-load-zones-changing-at-magic.html

 

[rteetz]

News

https://blogmickey.com/2020/01/wi-fi-upgrades-coming-to-disneys-art-of-animation-resort-january-15th

 

[jknezek]

It does seem like this is happening more, but not sure if it is the best business decision when you consider Joker was the most profitable movie of 2019 despite having a R rating.

This is a good counterpoint. Though I'd say with the exception of Wonderwoman and Aquaman, DC was in such a mess they didn't have much coherent strategy and just needed a hit. The fact that it came from a surprise corner and was a breath of fresh air in a struggling R rated market definitely bolsters your argument. I suspect that it is more of a one off than anything else.

 

[Firebird060]

A new Blade has already been announced with Mahershala Ali as Blade.

Well I missed that announcement , thanks for letting me know. I suppose no director has been mentioned yet and I wonder if it will shoot for the R rating that previous Blades went for?

 

[drummerwife]

Just got evacuated from The Land. Anybody know what’s going on?

 

[evlaina]

News

https://www.orlandoparksnews.com/2020/01/bus-load-zones-changing-at-magic.html

Is there a website (even Disney's own) to find where each resort is located on each bus load zone? I've never been able to find it.

 

[skier_pete]

Well I missed that announcement , thanks for letting me know. I suppose no director has been mentioned yet and I wonder if it will shoot for the R rating that previous Blades went for?

This happened at ComicCon I think. I don't remember it happening at D23 - I think we just got the Ryan Coogler announcement of Black Panther 2.

 

[mikepizzo]

Well, a lot of these tentpoles are part of a larger universe. And a good steward of that larger universe is going to aim for consistency. Consistency with the movies that came before and consistency with the broad arc that is occurring and consistency with the end goal. If the director, in his desire to make his own film, is messing with any of these three concepts, that's a problem for the studio. If it's a one off film? Yeah, who cares. But that's the point really. These tentpoles are hardly one offs anymore. They are either sequels or prequels or parts of Universes. Star Wars, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, whatever hash is being made from DC material. You just can't let directors have free reign when you are dropping 500 million, including marketing, into a film that needs to make $1B in revenue to break even.

Oh sure, but it's the story being told vs. how the story is told. You can take a story that has to have specific things happen, but visually tell it many ways.

And I know we all know this, but all of this talk is merely speculation.

But...to the your point I made bold...isn't that what they let Rian Johnson do? I know Rian Johnson has made films in the past (which I enjoyed for the most part) but there's no arguing that Disney allowed some guy to write and direct Star Wars Episode VIII. Out of all the movies that you would think would be made by committee, that would be the first.

But we don't need to get into the boondoggle of episodes VII, VIII, and IX here

 

[jknezek]

Oh sure, but it's the story being told vs. how the story is told. You can take a story that has to have specific things happen, but visually tell it many ways.

And I know we all know this, but all of this talk is merely speculation.

But...to the your point I made bold...isn't that what they let Rian Johnson do? I know Rian Johnson has made films in the past (which I enjoyed for the most part) but there's no arguing that Disney allowed some guy to write and direct Star Wars Episode VIII. Out of all the movies that you would think would be made by committee, that would be the first.

But we don't need to get into the boondoggle of episodes VII, VIII, and IX here

I'm down that garbage disposal in the proper thread at the moment. Not going to rehash it here!