Franchise – Listorati https://listorati.com Fascinating facts and lists, bizarre, wonderful, and fun Sun, 18 Jun 2023 10:02:50 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.1 https://listorati.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/listorati-512x512-1.png Franchise – Listorati https://listorati.com 32 32 215494684 Top 10 Things the Harry Potter Movie Franchise Got Wrong https://listorati.com/top-10-things-the-harry-potter-movie-franchise-got-wrong/ https://listorati.com/top-10-things-the-harry-potter-movie-franchise-got-wrong/#respond Sun, 18 Jun 2023 10:02:50 +0000 https://listorati.com/top-10-things-the-harry-potter-movie-franchise-got-wrong/

The problem with being a fan of a book-gone-movie franchise is that the movies never fully live up to the expectations the books set. This is mainly because translating pages to screen time can result in hours-long films, so scriptwriters and film editors have to make important decisions about cuts. And these cuts are based on marketing, cultural appeal, etc. It is trying to balance what will tell the story and sell the movie.

The Harry Potter franchise is entirely guilty of this. Though we love the movies for what they are, there are some significant differences that we can’t overlook. Fair warning, we’re going to be picky. Oh, and beware of the spoilers.

Here are the top 10 things the Harry Potter movie franchise got wrong.

Related: 10 Ways The ‘Jurassic Park’ Franchise Got It Wrong

10 Sneaky Snake

*Adjusts glasses* Okay, where do we begin? Oh, yes, the first movie. Harry is a Parseltongue—he can talk to snakes. Remember the scene in the movie where he first finds this out? Then dumb old Dudley comes around, and the glass to the snake pen disappears and traps Dudley in there. Anyway, the snake in The Sorcerer’s Stone is supposed to be a boa constrictor as per the book. However, the movie got a Burmese Python.

Perhaps this was to better connect him and a trapped animal raised in captivity. Burmese pythons are best known as the snakes you get as a pet when you want a big snake. Of course, they are far removed from their indigenous habitat—kind of like Harry. Both the snake and Harry should be free in their natural environment, not kept as entertainment for somebody else.

10 “He Who Shall Not Be Named” is French

The art of literature is complex, philosophical, and filled with literary criticism and opportunities to make clever connections between content and words. Understanding the author’s intent at the outset helps drive a concept home throughout any iteration of the work. In this case, we’re looking at the pronunciation of Voldemort’s name.

Let’s break up his name into two parts: volde and mort. Volde can mean a few things, but the one that I like is its Old Norse etymology meaning “to cause.” Mort is French for “death.” Put the two together, and you get “to cause death.” That said, the proper pronunciation of mort does not have a hard ‘t’ at the end—you drop that sound and allow the ‘r’ to fall in the back of the throat. Now, if you don’t speak French, you just cut the word short.

In the original audiobook of The Sorcerer’s Stone, the narrator got the pronunciation right—and JK Rowling confirmed that he was correct. However, they pronounce the ‘t’ in all the movies at the end of Voldemort’s name.

8 Your Mother’s Eyes

Harry Potter is supposed to have his mother’s eyes in the books. Lily’s eyes are green—that’s a fairly straightforward character descriptor. Daniel Radcliff does not have green eyes, and the film’s directors didn’t seem to make a big fuss over it either. Why? Health reasons.

Radcliff had colored contacts that he was supposed to wear, but he had a bad reaction to them. Hollywood had to settle on a blue-eyed Harry Potter.

7 If I Could Turn Back Time, I Wouldn’t Have a Time Turner

How the heck did Hermoine fit in so much study time? Professor McGonagall’s Time Turner! It was a complicated way to work around one of Hermione’s defining activities as a character and ultimately caused quite a few problems with the movies.

The Time Turner works by turning the small hourglass for each hour you want to go back. If the chain of the Time Turner is long enough, multiple people can travel through time (the chain has to be able to fit around their neck, too). Rectifying the pre-destination time travel rationale will be left for a different article.

Anyway, in the books, the understanding is that when you use the Time Turner, you must be especially careful that no one sees you, especially your past selves. In the movies, Hermione and Harry really don’t seem to care.

The object caused a few more issues, like where you travel back in time, and Rowling eventually destroyed them all in Order of the Phoenix.

6 A Bunch of Old Guys

Harry’s parents were in their early 20s when they had him in the book. Snape, Lupin, and Sirius were his parents’ classmates (remember, Snape loved Lily). That makes them about the same age as Lily and James (if they were still alive). Yet, in the films, these characters are all portrayed by much older actors—they do not look like they are in their mid-30s, and if they are, boy, life’s thrown them a hard decade.

This doesn’t necessarily change the fact that Alan Rickman made the best Severus Snape, but it does make you wonder how the age difference would have affected the dynamic between the characters in the movies.

5 Ginny Weasley

If you’re simply watching the Harry Potter films, you may be questioning how on Earth Harry ended up with Ginny. The scriptwriters really did a disservice to her character and depicted her as this character who is just there to be a love interest and nothing else. The books, however, do an excellent job of throwing reason after reason why Harry would fall in love with Ginny. Rowling has even stated in interviews that whoever was going to be with Harry needed to be strong, independent, and his equal.

You don’t get that from the movies too much. Ginny is just another Sakura (for those who get the Naruto reference).

4 Voldemort’s Death

It’s true. Sometimes, deaths in literature aren’t that flashy. It’s the description surrounding the death that makes the death exciting. When you translate this to a cinematic depiction, you have to work with the death visually instead of textually. That’s why Voldemort’s death in Deathly Hallows Part 2 is so different.

Instead of falling to the floor like any body falls to the floor when it dies (but a little scarier since it’s Voldemort) as described in the book, the movie shows him crumbling away painfully with quiet finality. Furthermore, in the book, it’s Voldemort’s spell that Harry throws back at him that kills Voldemort. In the movie, Harry’s spell kills Voldemort (but not after Neville totally slays that Horcrux like a gosh darn savage).

Either way, we’re glad the b–tard is dead.

3 Calm Down, Dumbledore

The internet seems to delight in Dumbledore’s cinematic approach to asking Harry if he put his name in the Goblet of Fire. Since the Goblet spits out Harry’s name, he now must compete in the infamous competition (RIP Cedric).

A little background to the movie version of Dumbledore. After the death of actor Richard Harris, who depicted a softer Dumbledore, Michael Gambon took over and showed us a grittier side to the headmaster. As the books grew darker, so did Dumbledore’s movie counterpart to the point where franchise fans started to question the new casting.

Back to the scene. After the Goblet spits out Harry’s name, in the book, Dumbledore approaches Harry “calmly” about the issue. But, in the movie, Dumbledore turns the sentence into one word; that’s how agitated he was about it. Heck, he even pushes Harry up against the wall. Cool your tiptoe wizard shoes, Dumbledore.

2 Voldemort Has…His Mother’s Eyes, Too?

Voldemort is evil, so how better to push this than to give him red eyes? In the book, specifically Goblet of Fire, Voldemort is described as being tall, skeleton-like, and pale-faced, with snake slits for nostrils and red, cat-like eyes.

But they give him white eyes in the movie. I will say that the resurrection scene is pretty hardcore, and the white eyes aren’t a dealbreaker for me. I do wish, though, as he’s caressing his head for the first time after being reborn, he showed some disappointment at being bald.

1 The Story Behind Neville’s Parents

I love Neville Longbottom. He is the supporting underdog character who is one of Harry’s bravest, fiercest, and most loyal friends. He leads Dumbledore’s Army when Harry isn’t around; he pulls the sword out of the sorting hat and charges at Voldemort with the intent to kill; he’s the one who kills Nagini, and he’s been through hell.

The movie does not expand upon one of the essential parts of his backstory—Bellatrix Lestrange torturing his parents to the point of insanity. We understand that his parents are tortured, but we don’t get to see the scene where Neville visits his parents at the asylum. It would’ve been nice to include the scene in the movie as a way to ground the character and show the connection between Neville and Harry more.

To see exactly what he’s had to overcome in his life.

Neville, like Ginny, was cut a bit short when it came to the movies, but avid lovers of the book know just how badass he is.

]]>
https://listorati.com/top-10-things-the-harry-potter-movie-franchise-got-wrong/feed/ 0 6238
10 Fast Facts About the James Bond Franchise https://listorati.com/10-fast-facts-about-the-james-bond-franchise/ https://listorati.com/10-fast-facts-about-the-james-bond-franchise/#respond Sun, 05 Mar 2023 06:36:53 +0000 https://listorati.com/10-fast-facts-about-the-james-bond-franchise/

Are you a James Bond fan? If so, we’re not surprised. There’s something simply cool and fun about a Bond movie. Not only does he save the day (and usually the entire world… secretly, of course!) but he also gets a great car, gadgets, and a beautiful woman.

While you may have stood in line for the latest Bond movie, we doubt you know everything about them. Here are some facts that even some of the most enthusiastic “007” followers may not know…

10. You have one very dedicated family to thank for the franchise

Obviously, a lot of people have been involved in the making of the Bond films over the years. But there’s one family in particular that’s been the driving force behind keeping them going for decades.

The Broccoli family has produced James Bond movies since 1975. These movies are truly a family affair – with Albert R. Broccoli who produced until 1984 when his stepson Michael G. Wilson came on board. Then in 1995, Broccoli let his daughter Barbara Broccoli take over production of the James Bond franchise. So now two generations of the Broccoli family has managed the Bond films, bringing us hours of fantastic entertainment.

9. Ian Fleming didn’t get rich on the first movie

The Bond franchise is a bit of a cash cow, clearly. That’s why they keep churning new ones out, right? But author Ian Fleming didn’t exactly rake in the dough on his first movie adaptation. Not even close, actually. But then, the first movie wasn’t exactly a blockbuster.

In 1954, CBS paid Fleming $1,000 to obtain the rights to turn his first Bond novel, Casino Royale, into a one-hour show. This was part of the series named Climax Mystery Theater. The show featured Barry Nelson as James Bond and Peter Lorre as villain Le Chiffre and was shown to TV audiences on October 21, 1954.

8. The biggest box office hit it in the franchise might not be what you think

If we asked you what the biggest smash hit (financially) in the Bond franchise is, you might immediately think of the Daniel Craig version of Casino Royale, or maybe even Goldeneye. But it’s not either of those, in fact. Casino Royale actually only ranks fourth on the list, and Goldeneye is a distant eighth.

The top earner? It’s Skyfall, which was released on November 8, 2012. The domestic box office in the USA was $304,360,277. That’s more than a hundred million more than the second highest grosser, Spectre. The international box office was truly phenomenal – more than $1 billion, at $1,110,526,981! The Bond movies have been super successful overall and have grossed $7 billion, with their international box office totals.

7. Enjoy Daniel Craig as Bond… while you can

Daniel Craig wasn’t the obvious choice when he got cast as Bond prior to Casino Royale. He didn’t have the same suave, dark-haired look of a Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan, so naturally some fans were skeptical. And then, of course, people saw him in the film and almost immediately, the debate opened up about whether he was a better Bond than Sean Connery.

However, you probably won’t be seeing him in the role much longer. The next James Bond film will be released on November 8, 2019. This is the final film, currently dubbed ‘Bond 25’, that Craig has been contracted for with them. Craig has been working on a TV show and originally was reluctant to do one last Bond movie, but it is great that he didn’t want to disappoint his enthusiastic fans.

6. That 2019 Bond film is still a total mystery

While it’s certainly great that Daniel Craig is returning to the role (at least) one last time, that’s about all we know about the film at this point. Most of the time, production companies share a plot synopsis or a few details. This time, it simply says “unknown.” This Bond movie has not been without a few bumps, though. Pregnancy bumps, that is. Production was pushed back due to Craig wanting to help his pregnant wife, Oscar winner Rachel Weisz.

Just last year they were searching hard to find a great director, and that is one piece of info that we do have. The newest Bond will be helmed by acclaimed director Danny Boyle, who was the man behind films like Trainspotting28 Days Later, and Slumdog Millionaire, and has won an Oscar. For now, we will simply have to be patient and wait.

5. Sometimes Bond’s gadgets have given us a window into the future

Many of Bond’s gadgets are pure entertainment and just add to the adventure. But a few of them seem as if they are a peek into what will be available to the rest of us one day.

The 1985 movie A View to A Kill featured a Ring Camera. Today, tiny cameras can be placed just about anywhere. But in the 1980s, the thought of that technology, being that tiny, was simply unheard of. In that same movie, there was a cute Robot Dog. Now, admittedly it did not quite look like Fido but it certainly was cute. Today you can buy all types of adorable little robot pets including cats and dogs.

In the 2008 movie Quantum of Solace, there was a Multitouch Table, similar to using a large tablet. It’s the size of a table that about 6 people can use. Now you’ll see large screens that people can move documents around with the touch of a finger – why, it’s so Bond-like!

4. Sean Connery wasn’t very “007” when it came to playing Bond

Some of the actors who played James Bond have done plenty of their own stunts. They certainly could not have done all of them, of course, for insurance reasons. One of the actors who refused to do any type of stunt at all, though, might surprise you (well, unless you read the header): Sean Connery.

As his fellow Bond, George Lazenby, noted, “Sean Connery wouldn’t step down a step without saying ‘stunt man!’” Now, let’s be fair. Some of those Bond stunts are a bit daunting. It’s easy for us to make a quick judgement from our comfy, plush movie seats while munching on buttery popcorn. Then again, you’d think the dashing guy who played Bond (and was also a Mr. Universe competitor!) would at least be up for racing a car, skiing down a hill or a few small adventures!

3. The first big-screen Bond was a real player… and not just on-screen

You may not know who George Lazenby is, but he’s the guy who briefly played Bond in exactly one movie: On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. And while he didn’t play Bond for long, he sure lived the James Bond lifestyle. He estimates that he was intimate with more than 1,000 women and during the peak of his fame he seduced an average of 5 women each day. He credits his luck with the ladies to being “a good looking Australian” and also having the confidence to approach them.

We think Lazenby was chock-filled with confidence in lots of ways. It might surprise you to know that he got the role of James Bond with absolutely zero professional acting experience! Can you imagine someone getting the lead role in a blockbuster movie like that today?

2. Can you spot the 1963 Aston Martin DB5?

Everyone knows that part of the fun of watching Bond movies is not just the adventure, but also the cars and cool gadgets that Bond has. It might surprise you to know that one Aston Martin car has popped up in six James Bond movies, making it quite unique. Typically a car or gadget appears only once. Even more amazing is the fact that its appearances have spanned decades.

The 1963 Aston Martin DB5 you’ll first see in Goldfinger (1964) and then in Thunderball (1965). It also reappeared more recently in Goldeneye (1995), Tomorrow Never Dies (1997), Casino Royale (2006), and then the super popular Skyfall (2012). So, it is easy to say that the Aston Martin is James Bond’s car. While he may drive others, this is one of his all-time favorites!

1. So… who will be the next Bond?

Many fans are hoping Daniel Craig will stay on in the role of James Bond, and it has been rumored he has been offered $150 million for another two films. But eventually, he’s going to hang up the Walther PPK, and someone else will need to step into the role. So, who could it be?

Names that have been included in entertainment magazines, on social media, and throughout internet message boards include actors like Idris Elba, Damian Lewis, Aidan Turner, Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hardy, or Jamie Bell. For now, we’re just going to have to continue to speculate and see who slides into the black tux and orders his martini… shaken, not stirred.

]]>
https://listorati.com/10-fast-facts-about-the-james-bond-franchise/feed/ 0 4179
Fast Facts About the James Bond Franchise https://listorati.com/fast-facts-about-the-james-bond-franchise/ https://listorati.com/fast-facts-about-the-james-bond-franchise/#respond Fri, 03 Mar 2023 06:00:29 +0000 https://listorati.com/fast-facts-about-the-james-bond-franchise/

Are you a James Bond fan? If so, we’re not surprised. There’s something simply cool and fun about a Bond movie. Not only does he save the day (and usually the entire world… secretly, of course!) but he also gets a great car, gadgets, and a beautiful woman. And with the latest news about the franchise, it feels like a good time to revisit everyone’s favorite secret agent.

While you may have stood in line for the latest Bond movie, we doubt you know everything about them. Here are some facts that even some of the most enthusiastic “007” followers may not know…

Read the full list!

]]>
https://listorati.com/fast-facts-about-the-james-bond-franchise/feed/ 0 4017
10 Franchise Movies That Needed a Different Director https://listorati.com/10-franchise-movies-that-needed-a-different-director/ https://listorati.com/10-franchise-movies-that-needed-a-different-director/#respond Thu, 23 Feb 2023 21:51:01 +0000 https://listorati.com/10-franchise-movies-that-needed-a-different-director/

Film directors are more than just the people who shout “action” and aim the camera. They have a hand in the visuals, story, script, and acting of every production, bringing all elements together to make something better than the constituent parts—or that’s the idea. Sometimes directors overstep their bounds, misjudge the material, and churn out pictures that don’t live up to their promise. And franchise directors can be the worst of all because they’re at the mercy of the studio, audience expectations, and every previous film.

Whether there was another name attached to the project first, someone waiting in the wings who never got their shot, or a connected talent who could have been put to good use, here are 10 franchise movies that needed a different director.

10 Alien 3

When it came to following up the immensely popular Aliens, 20th Century Fox settled for Vincent Ward directing, having failed to secure Ridley Scott. But Ward was fired from the production of Alien 3 at the eleventh hour because the producers couldn’t control him. Thus, they brought on up-and-comer David Fincher, who they wrongly assumed would be more pliable; Fincher fought studio-mandated changes throughout, which they pushed through anyway. The result is a film that satisfied no one and killed off Hicks and Newt from the second film, as producers were unable to get the actors to return.

Given James Cameron was single-handedly responsible for bringing Sigourney Weaver back for Aliens, he would likely have gotten the cast back together for 3. He made The Abyss and T2 in the interim, pushing CGI relentlessly forward. He would have brought this innovation to the third entry with something bombastic that made full use of the technology available. A serious and established presence in the director’s chair, Cameron would also have wrangled the studio and kept their interference to a minimum.[1]

9 Ant-Man

While by no means a disaster, the first Ant-Man film could have been a whole lot better. Peyton Reed’s first turn in the MCU is a safe, middling film that fails to experiment or step outside the franchise’s limited aesthetic boundaries.

The Ant-Man films have since found their own style in Reed’s care, but they could have been something radically different from the outset when Edgar Wright was attached to direct. With a writing team comprising Wright and the UK’s Joe Cornish, the film’s original treatment, which they had been working on since 2003, would have had decidedly British comic intuitions that would set it apart from its U.S.-written contemporaries.

Wright is a self-professed nerd and initially brought his passion for the comics to the position. More than this, though, he brought his signature directorial style, replete with jump cuts, niche music, Easter eggs, and all the usual hallmarks of an Edgar Wright picture. Unfortunately, this is what caused the studio to drop him because, in his words, “I don’t think [Marvel] really wanted to make an Edgar Wright movie.”[2]

8 Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

The Star Wars sequels have had a rough ride since the release of J.J. Abrams’s The Force Awakens, with both it and its sequel—Rian Johnson’s The Last Jedi—dividing audiences. Lucasfilm’s president Kathleen Kennedy was spooked by the failure of The Book of Henry by the third film’s prospective director Colin Trevorrow and brought back Abrams to set things right. Unfortunately, this resulted in trilogy-closer The Rise of Skywalker suffering from a split vision that aligned with Abrams’s first film but not the new direction Johnson was taking.

As such, the man originally tapped to write the film—Rian Johnson—should have been retained to direct it. For better or worse, Johnson had succeeded in changing the films’ direction with , making bold stylistic and character-based decisions, including killing the overarching villain, and he would have been able to lead Star Wars onto a new frontier. Though Abrams communicated with Johnson while making the film, it ultimately wasn’t enough. And the story elements didn’t line up, leaving fans in the lurch.[3]

7 Thor: Love & Thunder

After Avengers: Endgame, there were big expectations for Thor, having gone through several crises and come out the other side with the Guardians of the Galaxy in tow. But all that promise was wasted on a frankly baffling fourth solo outing that ditches the Guardians and spends the subsequent 120 minutes plying audiences with goat memes, cancer jokes, and a profoundly stupid protagonist.

Having struck gold with Thor: Ragnarok, which showed a lighter side of the space Viking, director Taika Waititi was the obvious choice for Love & Thunder, and yet he managed to take everything he had done well the first time and spoil it with a mismatched tone, mishandled characters, and a disposable villain (Christian Bale’s Gorr). By all accounts, Waititi only directed Love & Thunder because his live-action Akira was put on hold, and it, therefore, should have fallen to co-writer Jennifer Robinson to take the reigns. Not only would it have seen Marvel nurture a rising talent, but Robinson has proven with 2022’s Do Revenge that she knows how to make magic where darkness and comedy intersect.[4]

6 No Time to Die

James Bond’s swansong, No Time to Die, had all the ingredients for a perfect 007 romp—classics cars, beautiful women, and not one but two physically disfigured villains. Yet it went out with a whimper instead of a bang. Trying to subvert audience expectations by killing series antagonist Blofeld while also ultimately conforming to them in a cliched third act, Fukunaga misunderstood the appeal of the character and universe. But, given the director’s history of socially conscious dramas, it should come as no surprise that he was out of his depth.

Danny Boyle was originally attached to direct before he left in 2018 due to “creative differences.” But knowing this was Bond’s big finale, it would have made sense for producers to turn to someone who knew the character and material and had a rich history of delivering pitch-perfect Bond adventures: Martin Campbell. Campbell directed GoldenEye and Casino Royale, both of which are widely considered two of the best Bond films ever made. This would also have brought a satisfying sense of closure to the Craig series, beginning and ending with the same director. Campbell said last year that he would consider directing a new Bond, but it’s too late for Daniel Craig.[5]

5 F9

When franchises have nowhere left to go, they go to space. And that’s precisely where the Fast & Furious gang went in the positively cartoonish F9, helmed by Justin Lin and produced by star Vin Diesel. Lin has led this charge into absurdity for years, escalating the series’ action from Tokyo Drift through Furious 6, prior to his return on F9. But just because he has a history with the films doesn’t mean he knows what’s right for their narrative trajectory.

Instead of Lin, Diesel and the studio should have gone back to basics—and who better than the co-writer of the grounded first film The Fast & the Furious? David Ayer is well-known for directing tight, lower-budget action thrillers that marry urban environments, gangs, and compelling characters, such as End of Watch. As with the first Fast film, in which Ayer introduced a gritty tone, drew on real-life experiences, and fleshed out characters one-on-one with the cast, he would have brought the action back down to earth and revitalized an ailing series.[6]

4 Terminator Salvation

Terminator Salvation gave audiences the one thing they never expected from the time-traveling robot stalker series: a film without time travel and robot stalkers. Even with a stellar cast—Christian Bale, Sam Worthington, Anton Yelchin—director McG was unable to deliver the goods in the series’ fourth entry, presenting a film with a grey palette, hollow set-pieces, one-dimensional characters, and a dull script. The solution? Franchise creator James Cameron.

The lengthy production of the first Avatar would have prevented Cameron from making the film in 2009, but it would have been worth waiting a few years to continue the director’s vision from the first two films. Cameron still had an interest in the series around this time, recommending Sam Worthington to McG, but thanks to a tiff over the third film’s rights, he had been shut out of Terminator for years and wasn’t in line to direct. All may not be lost, however, as Cameron has recently mentioned talks of returning to reboot the series and scrub Salvation and its successors off the map.[7]

3 Bad Boys for Life

Directors Adil & Bilall drew straight from the Michael Bay playbook for the late third entry in the Bad Boys franchise, with endless glamour shots of Miami, soft lighting, and cameras on 360-degree dolly tracks. Yet they demonstrate none of Bay’s directing chops, with slapdash editing and a lackluster script. The resulting film strays into the same dad-joke territory that sank the fourth Indiana Jones, going over the top on all fronts and failing to strike a balance between action, comedy, and character that its predecessors managed so well.

Bay himself—director of Bad Boys I and II—would have been the better choice. While he relies heavily on clichés and hackneyed filmmaking techniques, there is no denying that he made a huge impact in the 1990s and early-2000s action-blockbuster scene, not least in making Bad Boys the global franchise it is today. Given he even directs a scene in the film, it would have made a lot of sense to have him back on board. The reason they didn’t? It took too long for the studio to put the project together, and given the 17-year gap between films, Bay had spent enough time waiting.[8]

2 Dark Phoenix

Bringing back the writer from the X-Men franchise’s worst film to make his directorial debut on the latest entry may not seem a wise decision, but that’s what Fox did in 2019. Simon Kinberg, writer of X-Men: The Last Stand, was drafted to write and direct Dark Phoenix, the fourth in the rebooted timeline that began with the exceptional First Class, and the film that sank the X-ship for good. Taking such a gamble on an unknown entity wasn’t a smart move, and Dark Phoenix failed on almost every front, with erratic pacing and weak character development.

It would have made sense to instead bring back First Class director and Days of Future Past co-writer Matthew Vaughn, an all-around comic book nut who revitalized the series and has spent the intervening years making it big with Kingsman. Vaughn would have brought a snappy pace and sense of continuity to the film, rooted in the comics. Moreover, Vaughn was originally on board to do a trilogy of character-focused X-Men films, and it was thanks to the studio ignoring him that he walked away in the first place.[9]

1 The Hobbit

Of all the bloated productions, CGI nightmares, and studio cash grabs of the 21st century, few are more egregious than Peter Jackson’s Hobbit films. Jackson hadn’t been an active filmmaker for quite some time, having made only two films since his Rings trilogy, and had lost touch with what audiences wanted, needed, and expected. The Hobbit films are sparse in character and plot, relying heavily on often sub-par computer imaging to build their world and characters. Plus, there is at least one film too many.

But The Hobbit didn’t begin life as three achingly long full-length features; it was once envisioned as a single film split into two parts by the project’s first director and co-writer, Guillermo del Toro. He sought to remain true to J.R.R. Tolkien’s slender novel of under 100,000 words, undergoing a laborious writing process, immersing himself in Tolkien’s books and lore, and seeking to use models, miniatures, paintings, and animatronics to bring it to life. The Pan’s Labyrinth director’s knack for fantasy storytelling is evident in all his work, and his knowledge of how to balance action, universal themes, and visual magic is what The Hobbit so desperately required.[10]

]]>
https://listorati.com/10-franchise-movies-that-needed-a-different-director/feed/ 0 3459