[ SECRET POST #5630 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5630 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 35 secrets from Secret Submission Post #806.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I softly disagree only because the makers are constrained by the sandbox they're in. And if they blow up the sandbox, is it really the same IP or is it something actually new that they just pasted on the same name?

[(Anonymous)]

I hate it when they badge-engineer a franchise. Either commit to the franchise, or start your own IP right from the off. Just don't take an IP and then sub in an unrelated script or characters with the same names. That is a 00s trend I won't be missing.

[philstar22]

This. See: most recent Fantastic Four movie where the writer had a movie planned, then he was asked to write a Fantastic Four movie. He just took his original script and stuck Fantastic Four names over the top. It has nothing to do with the actual Fantastic Four and is also really terrible.

[(Anonymous)]

He'd been trying to get Chronicle 2 made for years, but nobody was funding that. He just took his script and slapped the Fan4stic name on it. It was so infuriating. It was like Gareth Edwards who'd tried for years to get a new Monsters sequel funded, and was picked for Godzilla and slapped his bored soldier movie into a Godzilla movie. I'm glad the studio system is coming back and stopping these sort of auteur shenanigans. The industry needs more work-to-the-brief guys in it.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't like Edwards or Trank. But IMO a lot of the fault has to lie with the executives and studio-side people in charge of the projects. They're the ones who hired Edwards and Trank, despite the fact that they had limited experience as directors outside of indie films with far smaller budgets - Edwards went from a movie with a $500k budget to a movie with a $160 million budget - and they're the ones who presumably listened to and accepted Trank's and Edward's pitches.

And that's also why I don't agree that the problem is too much auteurism and we need the studio system coming back and directors who work to briefs. The studio system *can* work in principle but it doesn't work in 2022 because the whole cinema industry is just too weird and unbalanced. And having directors work to briefs isn't automatically a bad thing but in practice, at the moment, what that would mean is directors doing whatever development execs tell them to do. And that's not an improvement because, as noted, the development execs apparently don't have any fucking idea what they're doing.

[(Anonymous)]

I had no idea this was becoming increasingly common because apparently Michael Waldron did something like this too and his original story suddenly became parts of the Loki series.

[(Anonymous)]

IDK I don't think the constraints imposed by the nature of the franchise are really that overwhelmingly strict in any of the cases that OP mentioned

[(Anonymous)]

It depends on the franchise, the MCU in the first couple of phases was really strict about maintaining continuity and a similar narrative voice throughout the movies until they were on a solid enough footing. The DCEU just said fuck that and threw everything at the wall at once. Some franchises are stricter than others. Star Wars is super strict, to the point that just one slightly diverging movie tanked the whole big screen franchise for the following movies. .

[(Anonymous)]

Right but those are creative, or I guess more likely corporate, decisions that the people in charge of those franchises have made. They're not an inherent part of the franchise.

Star Wars is a good case in point actually, because in fact for a long time Star Wars was a franchise where people could do anything and it could be wild and unpredictable and throw anything against a wall. So there's no absolute creative necessity for Star Wars to be restrained and care a lot about franchise continuity. Like, it's not something about the setting sandbox that requires Star Wars to be that way. It's just the way that Disney approaches everything.

[(Anonymous)]

Star Wars was that for like five minutes before Empire came out and the only game in town was Marvel comics and West End Games, after that it was very Skywalker-Solo/Light Side/Dark Side focused. Lucasfilm always held a tight rein.

[(Anonymous)]

What you say is true to some extent but I still think that the overall attitude towards Star Wars as a franchise was significantly different under Lucasfilm than Disney, and much less concerned with brand continuity. Yes, the EU books are mostly still about the Skywalkers and the Force and the Jedi, but there was a wide range of stories under that umbrella. You could have stuff like Children of the Jedi, Planet of Twilight, The Crystal Star, the whole Yuuzhan Vong series, The Truce At Bakura, you could have stuff set in the distant past - that's a much broader range than Disney has allowed. And even in the films themselves, the prequel trilogy had a much broader scope and departed more from the original series than the sequel trilogy did. Admittedly, this was not always for the better, but still, it was a broader range (and Disney's approach doesn't exactly have a 100% hit rate either).

[philstar22]

I think there is a difference between maintaining continuity and having different voices and styles. You can keep the general overarching story consistent while still allowing each individual piece of media to be its own thing too. Some directors really want to do their own thing and don't do well in a shared universe. Other times things come out way too samey. There is a happy medium, though.

[(Anonymous)]

Depends on the sandbox. Something with a very integrated/ongoing continuity and/or strict creator control, sure. But then you have stuff like Batman where people can just do whatever and it doesn't affect the comics (which have rebooted multiple times anyway and if the thing in question *is* a comic just call it an elseworlds) and doesn't retroactively affect any of the existing movies or shows. It also doesn't stop someone else from coming along a few years later and doing something else with the IP.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think any makers within the properties I mentioned are constrained by the properties enough that they can't do anything interesting, and I think that's true even for the properties I didn't mention. I think most properties have a core silhouette, and if you get that, that's enough, so it's pretty hard, imo, to truly blow up the sandbox if you know that core silhouette.

But I'm also a real big fan of media in conversation with other media, so that does color my "is this the same or not" stance.