Directors who stopped participating in Special Features

[Rizor]

Not a single director, but the extras on the Marvel films have sorely gone down to the point where it's essentially a very short featurette, a few minutes of deleted scenes, and a new short film. Starting with The Avengers, they also stopped including their trailers. Must be a Disney thing.

Originally Posted by buck135

I can't understand why there isn't a single Zack Snyder blu-ray that contains a trailer for the film. From Dawn of the Dead to Watchmen to Man of Steel. Nothing. The trailers for his films due to the editing set to great music are amazing. What a loss.

As a big fan of trailers, I've noticed new releases from WB and Universal rarely ever include the trailers for the film. I think it's director request thing though. Christopher Nolan's movies always include the trailers. With Universal, I've noticed Edgar Wright's films have trailers on them too.

[Gamma_Winstead]

Yeah, the marvel films have been very upsetting. The bonus features on the two Iron Man films, and Incredible Hulk were fantastic. Thor was pretty much just decent. Not great, but serviceable. I don't remember Cap 1.

Avengers and on have just had practically nothing worthwhile. It's why I don't own any of them. I'm hoping the phase two set will be loaded, because 20 bucks for a flick with no features two years after it's release is just.... No.

[punking]

Not a director, but a writer.

However, I don't think Harlan Ellison will be doing many extras

http://youtu.be/mj5IV23g-fE

[jlk5844]

Originally Posted by mikesncc1701

I agree about Rodriguez, after Sin City he pretty much just did whatever and let the studio take over which is a shame because he has some of the special features around.

I've noticed this trend with directors, in particular Robert Rodriguez, who used to be awesome with his extras and for that reason he was one of the first directors to open my eyes to the moviemaking process (Spielberg too). I would say after Grindhouse though, because that movie is jam-packed with extras. I was very disappointed when Machete arrived on Blu-ray and there was hardly anything. Hopefully with Sin City 2 he resurrects his fantastic extras.

[natureboy]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Stopped implies they started, so Allen doesn't count.

It's like the old "gotcha"... "when did you stop beating your wife?" Or in the case of Woody Allen, "when did you stop molesting your children?"













too soon?

[Feiereisel]

I'm still getting over the fact that he stopped making feature films.

(That said, I would argue his interviews on the Criterion edition of King of the Hill are as or more insightful than any feature commentary would be.)

[octagon]

Originally Posted by natureboy

too soon?

Well, the allegations are over twenty years old so...

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by swaseem

Interesting thread. Just for my understanding, are directors offered compensation to prepare a commentary for their films or is it usually just volunteered?

I concur it'd would be a real treat to hear their most fondest thoughts and feedback from them, but if a director objects to doing it free, then I can understand.

My understanding is that it is a bit of both. If it is a big movie, the studio may pay them something decent to do it but otherwise the pay is very little if anything.

Nolan seems to be kind of one. He did a commentary for Momento I think but for most since, you will see him in some interviews but no commentary. He hasn't totally cut out but he certainly doesn't do a ton of stuff.

I have no issue with the idea "the movie should speak for itself" but the point of a commentary isn't to tell the people what is going on, it is to share insight into the movie. They can tell where they came up with the idea, changes they made for whatever reason, etc. If they don't want to do anything, that's fine but I think anyone who goes with the idea "my movies speak for themselves" is a bit of an ass.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by natureboy

It's like the old "gotcha"... "when did you stop beating your wife?" Or in the case of Woody Allen, "when did you stop molesting your children?"













too soon?

welcome to Hollywood where having some name value lets you get away with things that us regular dumb smucks would get arrested for. When you are worth $65 million, what's a couple million dollars to have someone shut-up about things?

[disneywildcat]

Originally Posted by Gamma_Winstead

Yeah, the marvel films have been very upsetting. The bonus features on the two Iron Man films, and Incredible Hulk were fantastic. Thor was pretty much just decent. Not great, but serviceable. I don't remember Cap 1.

Avengers and on have just had practically nothing worthwhile. It's why I don't own any of them. I'm hoping the phase two set will be loaded, because 20 bucks for a flick with no features two years after it's release is just.... No.

Compared to Disney's other newer non Pixar releases, the Marvel releases still have a decent bonus feature selection, including commentaries, although Thor 2 probably had a better bonus feature set than The Avengers and Iron Man 3. I haven't seen CA:TWS, but I hope Marvel continues to include commentaries in future releases.

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

My understanding is that it is a bit of both. If it is a big movie, the studio may pay them something decent to do it but otherwise the pay is very little if anything.

I have no issue with the idea "the movie should speak for itself" but the point of a commentary isn't to tell the people what is going on, it is to share insight into the movie. They can tell where they came up with the idea, changes they made for whatever reason, etc. If they don't want to do anything, that's fine but I think anyone who goes with the idea "my movies speak for themselves" is a bit of an ass.

I think, actually, talent gets paid a reasonable amount these days to participate in exclusive extras, but I could be wrong.

What you say about commentaries bugs me too. Take David Lynch, for example. It's not like he has to explain what's going on in his movies. He could make a commentary that was as experimental as the film itself, and it might be fascinating! Some people would possibly be upset because they want their commentaries to fall within a certain narrow definition of what a supplement like that is meant to do, but forget them.

Even weirder are the people who argue that the artistic sanctity of the film is somehow violated if you watch it with something playing over it (something I believe Spielberg says). Obviously, people can mentally differentiate between WATCHING a movie vs. listening to a commentary.

[Aclea]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

I think, actually, talent gets paid a reasonable amount these days to participate in exclusive extras, but I could be wrong.

Very few do - at least as far as major studio releases go, though some indie labels may pay. Warners has a policy not to pay for audio commentaries and most other studios put their foot down after Arnie got paid a small fortune for his disappointing Total Recall commentary because they were terrified of it setting a precedent. In a few cases they've not paid for a commentary per se but included doing a commentary in deals they strike with talent to promote back-catalog titles through interviews, signings and other publicity events (though this is most often used for films where that talent doesn't get royalties from the film itself and needs to be motivated). In many cases now studios aren't doing audio commentaries on anything they think is a marginal title even when filmmakers want to because of the cost of recording and editing them.

[Aclea]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

Yup.
I'm almost more disappointed with the gaps from people who were big extras folk but never got the chance for certain films. Like no Raimi Darkman commentary

I'd have been surprised if he did do a Darkman commentary: it was a particularly difficult experience for him between his fights with the studio and other problems, and he does seem to adopt an old school "If you don't have anything nice to say about someone, don't say anything at all" approach.

[demonknight]

Originally Posted by joltman

I was really disappointed when Drag Me to Hell didn't have a Raimi commentary.

I was really disappointed Raimi didn't make Drag Me to Hell good.

[Bk_Tan]

Originally Posted by Gamma_Winstead

Yeah, the marvel films have been very upsetting. The bonus features on the two Iron Man films, and Incredible Hulk were fantastic. Thor was pretty much just decent. Not great, but serviceable. I don't remember Cap 1.

Avengers and on have just had practically nothing worthwhile. It's why I don't own any of them. I'm hoping the phase two set will be loaded, because 20 bucks for a flick with no features two years after it's release is just.... No.

When Disney buys you over, it all goes to shit.

[Socko]

I was thinking it, you were saying it.

Pixar and Marval have been cut down on bonus features.
In the US Pixar gets an extra disc, but in Europe we get stripped down extras.

With Marval every disc is similar.
Gagreel
Deleted scenes
One shot movie
Making of (that runs about 20-30 minutes)
And a commentary if you are lucky.

Gone are the two hours of bonus features from the Iron Man 1&2 era.

[martydmc12]

There's been a couple of different mentions of compensation. That is definitely part of it. I've heard from a number of filmmakers and the people who create the special features, that a lot of them won't participate, simply because the studio wants them to do it for free. The studio's are making money of off the disc, the people putting the special features together are getting paid, so why not the people being interviewed and/or doing audio commentaries?

It even goes further these days, with rules with the actors, directors and writers guilds, citing that talent must be compensated for appearing in interviews and/or commentaries. Ever wonder why the behind-the-scenes documentaries are alway split into five or six different separate featurettes, rather than one long 90 minute one? Because if they kept it as one long entire 90 minute doc, they would have to pay the talent for appearing in what is assumed to be a feature length documentary, whereas they can get away doing a 20 minute version by editing them, thereby paying the talent less. The many featurettes on Tim Burton's 1989 Batman disc comes to mind; something like four or five featurettes, but are really just one 90 minute behind-the-scenes doc.

It's also I believe because with DVD and Blu-ray sales not being as lucrative as they used to be, studios don't want to spend more money creating new content.

But as this thread implies, I think for the most part, a lot of filmmakers are getting tired of the commentary process. What more can be said, especially with modern films. Talking about the special effects are somewhat boring these days; everything's done on a computer. No puppeteers or models; nothing insightful or interesting that could probably be said there.

That being said, I would hope that some filmmakers would go back and do some recordings before they leave us, especially on some of their classic titles. Spielberg is a definite one. Could you imagine the insight on JAWS? Regardless of the amount of documentaries that have been done to death on the film, getting a scene specific commentary would surely be something new and eye opening. RAIDERS, CEOT3K, E.T. - freakin' DUEL; my head would explode if he did one for DUEL!

Zemeckis. How I would love for him to go back and do an actual screen specific commentary on the BACK TO THE FUTURE trilogy. All that's available now is a Q&A from a screening slapped on, and the only actually commentary is from Bob Gale and producer Neil Canton. It's a shame for Part III, because Bob G. wasn't even on the set half the time on Part III, as he was back at Universal supervising the sound mix for Part II, so there really isn't a lot of insight devoted to Part III. But I'm just rambling now. Back to Zemeckis - if DEATH BECOMES HER is ever released on Blu, please, please Zemeckis, do a commentary!

Woody Allen. What could we really learn from Woody on a commentary? As much as I love the man's work, isn't the whole point of a commentary to learn about the filmmaking process, especially the technical side of things for the most part? I'm really getting awfully bored with the praising of actors especially in commentaries, and since Woody's films are so actor driven, what else would we get other than the praising of actors? Not that I'm saying that's what Woody would do, but with not much, if any, special effects, what else could he really say that would keep us interested?

As an independent filmmaker myself, I'm not interested in recording commentaries for my films either. Not because I want to get paid for it, or that I'm think I'm too good for it either. It's because nobody gives a shit about some independent film and what the filmmaker has to say. There's nothing that special about me or my work that requires that I need to babble on about it for 120 minutes. If I made something that became important and loved and adored by millions, then yes, sure as hell I'd record one if it was asked of me. What I'm saying is, I think we've become so overwhelmed with commentaries and special features in the last twenty years, that there's nothing special about them anymore. And I think guys like Scorsese and Chris Nolan have figured that out. However I see Nolan going back and doing a commentary on the Dark Knight trilogy, maybe in 20 years or so. That way there's a fresh and different perspective, not only by the audience, but probably by him as well.

That's my two cents on the subject.

[WilsonBros]

Originally Posted by Rizor

With Universal, I've noticed Edgar Wright's films have trailers on them too.

Have had the pleasure of working with Edgar a few times (see avatar to the left...) and you'd be hard-pushed to find a more passionate/enthusiastic filmmaker than he, and his extras reflect this. Where trailers for the Universal movies they are on are certainly no guarantee, you can bet that Edgar absolutely insists on putting them on his releases, so as to give the buyer the full experience. Makes you wonder what kind of extras will be found on the eventual Blu edition of Ant-Man...

With regard to Rodriguez, then the extras found on Machete look almost deluxe compared to those on the sequel, which probably reflects either his sapped enthusiasm for it or a lack of willing funding when the movie tanked the way it did. One of us had the weird pleasure of being the only person watching Machete Kills in the entire auditorium. This wasn't even at a multiplex- it was a local 3-screen cinema!

[Buzz201]

Originally Posted by Gamma_Winstead

Yeah, the marvel films have been very upsetting. The bonus features on the two Iron Man films, and Incredible Hulk were fantastic. Thor was pretty much just decent. Not great, but serviceable. I don't remember Cap 1.

Avengers and on have just had practically nothing worthwhile. It's why I don't own any of them. I'm hoping the phase two set will be loaded, because 20 bucks for a flick with no features two years after it's release is just.... No.

The retailer exclusive version of Avengers had a 95 minute documentary about the build up to the Avengers (although apparently some of it was taken from previously released footage), maybe Disney will do a similar thing with Avengers 2...

[swaseem]

I'd love to hear Woody Allen's insight behind developing the story-lines he does, his inspiration behind all the characters he's had in his writing, and all those slapstick moments in sleeper & take the money and run. There're a lotta writers (myself included) who'd appreciate that kind of reflection.