Just finished listening, and man, that was a rollicking good time... best episode in a long time. And lately, they have been great, but this was really, really great.
Only halfway through, but I need to add my voice to the throng - this is an amazing episode. So fun. Like someone noted up-thread: you can go home again.
Not to jump on the bandwagon, but this was by far one of the best episodes in a long time. Hearing all of the geeks together again was a whole lot of fun. Practically fell out of my chair when the "Stump the Rios" music started.
This was so much fun to listen to. The whole reason I originally started to follow your show years ago. It was great to hear you guys all together again.
It really was such a nice surprise hearing everyone sound off in the introduction. Thanks to you all for making the time to get together. The resulting episode has been a blast.
Regarding Marvel Now, you guys really touched on some interesting stuff. Why not just call it Avengers, and capitalize on the brand identity? IMO, because they are trying to be all things to all people. Make it "Avengers" to get the movie people, but make it "not just Avengers" to be something new for the direct market crowd. Typically, this type of move would fail on both fronts. We'll see how this one plays out. I have high hopes for the relaunch (not reboot, gotta side with Murd on that one.) :)
That's all for now. Thanks again for the great ep, and stay safe during the storm.
What a fun episode. It really sounded like you were all enjoying yourselves. It had that eavesdropping on a group of friends chatting kind of feel to it which was great. More of this kind of thing please!
A word on why Hollywood makes ridiculous decisions, if I may....
In my admittedly limited experience, I have observed that the majority of the filmmaking decisions (what films get made, the marketing strategy, who is cast as whom, etc.) is NOT made by the filmmaker, ultimately.
These decisions, as well as all the adjustments and changes that get made, are the result of "suits."
Suits", to clarify what I mean by the term, is an executive who's livelihood is dependent upon a single movie every time a movie comes out.
This creates a form of paranoid second-guessing that leads to over-compensating with the kind of arrogance that gives you a guy with a Harvard Business degree (who has never read the comics/played the video game/been familiar with the source material the film is based on) thinking they can dictate entertainment tastes.
For an example, I would recommend the story about how Pixar showed Toy Story to Disney executives. The "suits" who watched it made all manner of self-important suggestions, which Pixar followed. During the second screening, which contained all the changes that the execs wanted and was made the way the execs wanted it, these same execs blamed Pixar for not being able to make a funny movie.
It's that old childish nonsense of the success is the result of execs' idea, but a failure is the fault of the director/cast/crew/etc.
In my dealings with the film business, I have come to understand that understanding this mentality is a key for getting anything done. Even so, it's still no guarantee.
I think I'm going to disagree on "Joss Whedon wasn't the reason Avengers made a billion dollars"
if you'd said "Joss Whedon wasn't the reason Avengers made 4 or 5 hundred million" I could agree with you. Robert Downey Junior Chris Evans and Chris Hemsworth made them that much. Then after everyone saw how good the movie was and kept going back, that was on Joss Whedon.
Also great show, they're always better when there's more
Friggin' awesome episode. Loved the feel of the show. Had me laughing along, agreeing and arguing with you. These are the shows where I think I wish I was in the room with you. Top stuff.
6/10 on the quiz for me. I loved that quiz, and totally agree with point it was making.
Funny conversations filled with Marvel Now Snarkiness.
While I understand this "here we go again" attitude from Jamie and Peter, I'm not sure what new "buzz words" marvel's marketers could use other than "It's a new direction/great jumping on point , etc." like they did with the POINT ONE initiative.
On last years Marvel Movies tanking ? Sorry but I think Peter was a little wrong .
Thor made $181,030,624 Domestic and $268,295,994 Foreign. It cost 150 million
Cap Made $176,654,505 Domestic and $191,953,858 Foreign costing 140 million
It's a treat and, of course, great fun having everyone back on. And this episode came at a perfect time for those of us who have had a rough couple of days.
(Though you do seem to be having a competition for most jaded, at least in this first hour with the Marvel NOW! talk. Oh well. Hopefully in the remainder of the episode there will be topics you are more enthusiastic about.)
Wasn't there some Hawkeye character development in the Busiek/Bagley Thunderbolts?
I thought that, too-- there is some excellent Hawkeye stuff once he takes over leadership of the Thunderbolts. In fact, some recent Secret Avengers issues, and the tension between he and Cap, when Hawkeye took over leadership of Secret Avengers felt like a replay of a lot of the same story beats as when Hawkeye was leading Thunderbolts against Cap's better judgment.
Although I think that started very late in the 90s. It may have even been in '99, so it barely counts as 90s Hawkeye. So their point about his being pretty well absent in the 90s is still true.
For an example, I would recommend the story about how Pixar showed Toy Story to Disney executives. The "suits" who watched it made all manner of self-important suggestions, which Pixar followed. During the second screening, which contained all the changes that the execs wanted and was made the way the execs wanted it, these same execs blamed Pixar for not being able to make a funny movie.
Haven't made it this far into the episode yet (my commute is too short), but I'll offer a personal anecdote to confirm Steve's premise.
I used to work on a news-magazine show. A producer and I would work a piece for a week, honing it down to as good a story as we think we can tell. Then, Executive A would come in to give his "notes." He would say make change A, change B, and change C. We would follow his notes as best we could. Then he would return with his boss, Executive B for another round of notes. Executive B would say, "I like everything except for change A, change B, and change C."
At which point, Executive A would turn to us and say, "Yeah, why'd you guys do that?"
Not only is much of the entertainment business run by people who are completely inept at storytelling, but they're also the first to throw the adept people under the bus for following their instructions.
Comments
Thanks guys,
chris
The only thing missing is an "Iron the Pants!"
The Joss Whedon rant...classic Rios.
Regarding Marvel Now, you guys really touched on some interesting stuff. Why not just call it Avengers, and capitalize on the brand identity? IMO, because they are trying to be all things to all people. Make it "Avengers" to get the movie people, but make it "not just Avengers" to be something new for the direct market crowd. Typically, this type of move would fail on both fronts. We'll see how this one plays out. I have high hopes for the relaunch (not reboot, gotta side with Murd on that one.) :)
That's all for now. Thanks again for the great ep, and stay safe during the storm.
:-?
In my admittedly limited experience, I have observed that the majority of the filmmaking decisions (what films get made, the marketing strategy, who is cast as whom, etc.) is NOT made by the filmmaker, ultimately.
These decisions, as well as all the adjustments and changes that get made, are the result of "suits."
Suits", to clarify what I mean by the term, is an executive who's livelihood is dependent upon a single movie every time a movie comes out.
This creates a form of paranoid second-guessing that leads to over-compensating with the kind of arrogance that gives you a guy with a Harvard Business degree (who has never read the comics/played the video game/been familiar with the source material the film is based on) thinking they can dictate entertainment tastes.
For an example, I would recommend the story about how Pixar showed Toy Story to Disney executives. The "suits" who watched it made all manner of self-important suggestions, which Pixar followed. During the second screening, which contained all the changes that the execs wanted and was made the way the execs wanted it, these same execs blamed Pixar for not being able to make a funny movie.
It's that old childish nonsense of the success is the result of execs' idea, but a failure is the fault of the director/cast/crew/etc.
In my dealings with the film business, I have come to understand that understanding this mentality is a key for getting anything done. Even so, it's still no guarantee.
if you'd said "Joss Whedon wasn't the reason Avengers made 4 or 5 hundred million" I could agree with you. Robert Downey Junior Chris Evans and Chris Hemsworth made them that much. Then after everyone saw how good the movie was and kept going back, that was on Joss Whedon.
Also great show, they're always better when there's more
6/10 on the quiz for me. I loved that quiz, and totally agree with point it was making.
Wishing @JamieD a truckload of strength and luck for his chemo. Stay strong!
While I understand this "here we go again" attitude from Jamie and Peter, I'm not sure what new "buzz words" marvel's marketers could use other than "It's a new direction/great jumping on point , etc." like they did with the POINT ONE initiative.
On last years Marvel Movies tanking ? Sorry but I think Peter was a little wrong .
Thor made $181,030,624 Domestic and $268,295,994 Foreign. It cost 150 million
Cap Made $176,654,505 Domestic and $191,953,858 Foreign costing 140 million
http://boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?id=summer11comicvs.htm
While they obviously werent Avengers Or Dark Knight explosinve hits those aren't failure numbers either .
Maybe Pete was thinking about 2010, when Scott Pilgrim and that crop of hero films didn't live up to expectations?
did i just step back in time?!?!?!?
time for me to be a paid subscriber again!!!
http://www.comicgeekspeak.com/donate.php
It's a treat and, of course, great fun having everyone back on. And this episode came at a perfect time for those of us who have had a rough couple of days.
(Though you do seem to be having a competition for most jaded, at least in this first hour with the Marvel NOW! talk. Oh well. Hopefully in the remainder of the episode there will be topics you are more enthusiastic about.)
Although I think that started very late in the 90s. It may have even been in '99, so it barely counts as 90s Hawkeye. So their point about his being pretty well absent in the 90s is still true.
I used to work on a news-magazine show. A producer and I would work a piece for a week, honing it down to as good a story as we think we can tell. Then, Executive A would come in to give his "notes." He would say make change A, change B, and change C. We would follow his notes as best we could. Then he would return with his boss, Executive B for another round of notes. Executive B would say, "I like everything except for change A, change B, and change C."
At which point, Executive A would turn to us and say, "Yeah, why'd you guys do that?"
Not only is much of the entertainment business run by people who are completely inept at storytelling, but they're also the first to throw the adept people under the bus for following their instructions.