Going back to this for a moment, I'm also more confused by this the more I think about it. If they only do two shows a year but do multiple seasons, and want each season a year apart, then is it this? And we won't get a new show until Daredevil gets canceled? I actually don't see why we can't just go back to how Marvel TV used to operate. There were multiple shows, not tied into the films, and seasons came out relatively close to yearly, and it was fine. Most of the output was quality save a couple of outliers.
Can we try to stop sharing multiple excerpts from the same article? Also, I agree that making it look like Marvel films live or die by how much Feige is involved is obnoxious and insulting to the hundreds of other creatives involved in each production. Honestly, kind of feel like we should start putting a moratorium on these kinds of posts. They're not news, it's not interesting. What is there to discuss?
That’s not a defense for Feige, it’s more of a criticism of how poorly thought-out this idea was and naming the people who were responsible. Don’t get too caught up in things lol
Actually, I want to revise my previous post. I still think we need to not keep posting material from the same WSJ article, and I do think we give Feige too much attention, but I'm thinking more about this particular point about his availability, and I get why that would affect things negatively, since he is the guy in charge of approvals. Just breaking it down to a team of employees trying to get their boss to sign off on a project and not being able to get his attention for a week, I can see how that would be very frustrating, especially depending on how much he specifically has to approve. But then, I guess the main issue there is putting one man in charge rather than at least two or three. Ultimately, I think that part still circles back to how much credit Feige is given with the success of the MCU, deserved or not.
Although I guess it could also be much worse, seeing as how before Feige was given that much autonomy, he was forced to do things like, say, make the villain of Iron Man 3 Guy Pearce because "women don't sell toys".
Sounds like you’re discussing it. Lol Also didn’t even realize it was from the same source, so that was my bad. Edit: to be fair, it is WSJ, which is paywalled. Not exactly like it can be read.
Some of Marvel’s other producers have had great contributions (Nate Moore, Louis D’Esposito, & Trinh Tran come to mind). D’Esposito is even co-President. Moore is also heavily responsible for overlooking the production of the Black Panther films; more so than Feige. But bald guy with hat is who they’ve decided to be the one to speak and do presentations, so the public has identified Feige as the main guy.
The statement could just be complete bullshit that they put out themselves to make excuses for this saga. Yeah, he probably was spread thin, but one man shouldn’t be holding every project together. If he’s not an egomaniac like Josh said, it’s his fault for not setting up people that can be pillars around him to keep shit moving. I do believe Chapek really fucked them, but at the end of the day, pinning everything on your president being too busy is some pathetic shit. Stop hiring shitty writers for one.
It sounds like Disney wanted him to be, yeah. I’m sure the co-president didn’t just sit on his hands all day. The article is about Feige; however, and not D’Esposito. Half of the readers probably wouldn’t even know who D’Esposito is despite him being co-president.