-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Before we head into Avengers: Endgame, who has been your favorite director(s) in the MCU so far?
- Thread starter Deleted member 3897
- Start date
Russo's for me.
The others who did something great (Favreau, Whedon, Gunn) really let me down on their second outings. Russo's have been consistently great.
Johnston would be a close second. Would love to see him return.
Didn't think Black Panther was particularly great. It's Coogler's only not-great movie so far. Hopefully part 2 is better.
The others who did something great (Favreau, Whedon, Gunn) really let me down on their second outings. Russo's have been consistently great.
Johnston would be a close second. Would love to see him return.
Didn't think Black Panther was particularly great. It's Coogler's only not-great movie so far. Hopefully part 2 is better.
Definitely James Gunn for me. I loved both Guardian movies, and to me both are the best in the MCU.
Though to be fair, the vast majority of MCU movies are at worst pretty good so it's not like I hate the others lol.
Though to be fair, the vast majority of MCU movies are at worst pretty good so it's not like I hate the others lol.
James Gunn, by far.
I genuinely believe Whedon was done dirty with Age of Ultron. You cannot discount what Whedon accomplished with Avengers.
Coogler's direction in Black Panther was incredibly confident and assured and that script had just about zero fat on it.
I genuinely believe Whedon was done dirty with Age of Ultron. You cannot discount what Whedon accomplished with Avengers.
Coogler's direction in Black Panther was incredibly confident and assured and that script had just about zero fat on it.
Torn between Waititi and Russos. Going with Russos for now but if Waititi can deliver one or two more amazing movies like Ragnarok it'll be him.
That's actually exactly why the Russos are on top for me. They have this uncanny ability to take 20+ characters and keep track of where everyone is at any given time while also giving them all at least one moment to shine. X-Men 3 and Amazing Spider-Man 2 both tried to juggle only a small percentage of that and collapsed from the strain.
After them for me is Gunn, and then honestly Coogler just slightly beats out Waititi. And that's mainly because I think Waititi needs to be allowed room to be as mad-cap as he wants.
It's actually a pretty common complaint from people, so that's just not true.
Again, minor complaint in the end. But it was a poor decision.
Coogler (insulting to leave him off the list), Waititi, Russo Brothers (even with IW being their weakest work yet), Favreau, Gunn.
The Russos have thoroughly taken the MCU to the next level.
I love Taika and Gunn as well, but their movies are kind of a different thing that stand on their own. The Russos have perfected the superhero epic.
EDIT: And though he's been surpassed, it can't be understated how much Whedon knocked it out of the park with the first Avengers movie. We wouldn't have three MCU entries a year if that movie wasn't as good as it was.
I love Taika and Gunn as well, but their movies are kind of a different thing that stand on their own. The Russos have perfected the superhero epic.
EDIT: And though he's been surpassed, it can't be understated how much Whedon knocked it out of the park with the first Avengers movie. We wouldn't have three MCU entries a year if that movie wasn't as good as it was.
Avengers 1 was on TV the other day and holy shit the first 15 minutes of that movie is so bad. Feels like a bad TV show and they let another director take over after that (still a pretty flat looking film but the intro is baaaad).
People are so used to the idea of the MCU by now but Joss was the one who made it work. I'm not even sure if the MCU would still be as massively successful as it is without him. Like to give some perspective, the film proceeding Avengers grossed 370 million, the Avengers grossed about 3x that basically off of his talents alone and most of the movies since have made 700 million+ since then.
That ability isn't all that uncanny tbh. It's just a result of their work mainly beijg based in tv comedy. A major part of series like Arrested Development and Community is the ability to keep track of a bigger cast of characters. It's not some sort of unique skill of the Russos. I love their AD and Community work, but their directing style in the MCU is very safe and flat.
I feel Civil War could've been directed by anyone and turned out roughly the same, while something like GotG and Ragnarok are very obviously products of James Gunn and Taika Waititi.
Russos bring the action, Gunn brings the heart, Waititi is the funniest, and Coogler is the most visually interesting
I was gonna pick the Russo brothers BUT then i remembered the sheer awesomeness that was Thor: Ragnarok so Waititi it is! It just represents all the things an actual comic book movie needs imo and i'd be fine with the MCU going in that direction in the future...
It's easily Whedon, Favreau, and Gunn as they make / made the MCU shine. Russou bros are hack frauds and others are just meh. Coogler made a good movie but he didn't influence or steer the MCU as a whole in a good direction cause he made his own good movie.
Taika Waititi did so much with so little with Thor: Ragnarok. I really didn't know how Thor's character could be salvaged after Dark World, and I was feeling a bit down on the MCU after what I thought was a very middling SpiderMan: Homecoming, but Ragnarok was so colorful, silly, and energetic. And Thor's new and different characterization in Ragnarok carried over into Infinity War and helped make that movie better.
Civil War and Infinity War were really good movies though, and the original Iron Man was pretty special. The Russos and Favreau would be runner-ups.
Civil War and Infinity War were really good movies though, and the original Iron Man was pretty special. The Russos and Favreau would be runner-ups.
The Russos are competent but their direction always feels bland. They kinda remind me of David Yates.
I picked James Gunn because Guardians of the Galaxy 1 is by far the best MCU-movie, but I could've picked Whedon or Waititi too.
Gunn and Waititi are maybe the only ones that really succeed in injecting their own style and authorship into these movies. GotG and Thor Ragnarok really stand out from the pack because of this, and are by far the most memorable in the whole series. Most other director's fall into a somewhat samey and safe style. (That's why I don't get the love for the Russo's. Even though they have some of the better MCU-movies in their name, the direction is often very safe and bland. I feel like they are more loved because they deliver the real tentpole movies of the series, than because of the quality of their work)
Whedon I would pick for the first Avengers alone, as that is still the perfect example how a shared universe can work. It's still the best cross-over movie of the bunch. Not only because it's the first one where stories really intersect (thus, it isn't bogged down by to many storylines, nor does it feel the need to shoehorn in too many character's because it only had a couple of films to work from), it also does it perfectly by focussing on the character's and generating as much conflict between the crew as possible. It's smart, funny and exciting in a way no other cross-over movie ever succeeded in again for me. Age of Ultron is a flawed sequel because it couldn't recreate that dynamic (and it feels bogged down by the need to generate future storylines in stead of focusing on the one at hand, especially in the Thor-segment)
Gunn and Waititi are maybe the only ones that really succeed in injecting their own style and authorship into these movies. GotG and Thor Ragnarok really stand out from the pack because of this, and are by far the most memorable in the whole series. Most other director's fall into a somewhat samey and safe style. (That's why I don't get the love for the Russo's. Even though they have some of the better MCU-movies in their name, the direction is often very safe and bland. I feel like they are more loved because they deliver the real tentpole movies of the series, than because of the quality of their work)
Whedon I would pick for the first Avengers alone, as that is still the perfect example how a shared universe can work. It's still the best cross-over movie of the bunch. Not only because it's the first one where stories really intersect (thus, it isn't bogged down by to many storylines, nor does it feel the need to shoehorn in too many character's because it only had a couple of films to work from), it also does it perfectly by focussing on the character's and generating as much conflict between the crew as possible. It's smart, funny and exciting in a way no other cross-over movie ever succeeded in again for me. Age of Ultron is a flawed sequel because it couldn't recreate that dynamic (and it feels bogged down by the need to generate future storylines in stead of focusing on the one at hand, especially in the Thor-segment)
OP
OP
Not to take anything away from anyone else, but the Russos are the total package.
They are the top directors in the MCU by a good margin. Great action, good direction, bold decisions, good at balancing tones, good at striking proper moods, good at finding the core of characters and the core of the stories, cares about all that nerdy comic book detail shit, have a good knowledge of film. They are just really impressive and while they may not come across as "auteurs" they for damn sure aren't hacks that just get pushed around by Disney and told what to do. Hacks don't kill half the universe and have the bad guy win and just leaves the audience to sit with that feeling through the credits.
I think they are underrated, because while many people think TWS is the best MCU film or Infinity War, many also value that auteur vision in film and the singular voice of a director being what makes a good director as opposed to a competent director that makes a great movie, but the Russos are not only 2 people, but they are also working closely with 2 writers and really embody the ethos of Marvel Studios collaborative filmmaking philosophy. Maybe that means the Russos don't have a trademark they could plaster all over their movies so people know that it was made by them (well up until IW they always had a Commmunity cast member cameo and Joe Russo playing a bit part, but they did get a blue Tobias) but I think that's fine. I think Peter Jackson similarly let the LotR trilogy be about Tolkien's world and the story rather than about the auteur mark he could leave on the film so people know it was made by him, someone that had a comedy horror background yet chose not to beat you over the head with any of that aesthetics.
They are the top directors in the MCU by a good margin. Great action, good direction, bold decisions, good at balancing tones, good at striking proper moods, good at finding the core of characters and the core of the stories, cares about all that nerdy comic book detail shit, have a good knowledge of film. They are just really impressive and while they may not come across as "auteurs" they for damn sure aren't hacks that just get pushed around by Disney and told what to do. Hacks don't kill half the universe and have the bad guy win and just leaves the audience to sit with that feeling through the credits.
I think they are underrated, because while many people think TWS is the best MCU film or Infinity War, many also value that auteur vision in film and the singular voice of a director being what makes a good director as opposed to a competent director that makes a great movie, but the Russos are not only 2 people, but they are also working closely with 2 writers and really embody the ethos of Marvel Studios collaborative filmmaking philosophy. Maybe that means the Russos don't have a trademark they could plaster all over their movies so people know that it was made by them (well up until IW they always had a Commmunity cast member cameo and Joe Russo playing a bit part, but they did get a blue Tobias) but I think that's fine. I think Peter Jackson similarly let the LotR trilogy be about Tolkien's world and the story rather than about the auteur mark he could leave on the film so people know it was made by him, someone that had a comedy horror background yet chose not to beat you over the head with any of that aesthetics.
For me, I agree it's Taika Waititi. What he did for the Thor franchise is magnificent.
James Gunn easily. Guardians movies are the best MCU movies and will stand the test of time.
Character depth in Gunn's movies shit all over Thor Ragnarok.
Character depth in Gunn's movies shit all over Thor Ragnarok.
Gunn.
The Russos are making good movies with good scripts. No denying that.
But their movies are not particularily nice to look at. It lacks clear aesthetic. I mean, Civil War was fun but am i the only one would would have wished the big battle to happen anywhere else than a bland airport made of grey concrete ? Shit's not pretty or interesting to look at.
The Russos are making good movies with good scripts. No denying that.
But their movies are not particularily nice to look at. It lacks clear aesthetic. I mean, Civil War was fun but am i the only one would would have wished the big battle to happen anywhere else than a bland airport made of grey concrete ? Shit's not pretty or interesting to look at.
