Is Marvel President Kevin Feige The Greatest Producer That’s Ever Lived?

[Castle]

Yes, but the producer does not get the nomination. The Academy does not give the best picture because they think it had the best producer. It's the director and script and acting and cinematography and... that delivers.

If you want your opinions to be taken as fact, you should at least get your facts right.

The Irving Thalberg award is giving to producers who we can say have reached legendary status. Also about 70-90% of the artists, who have won the Irving award would have won an Oscar for best picture years earlier or would have been nominated.

Also. the academy gives the award based on who they think produced the best movie. reason the producer/producers win the award for ''Best Picture''. I was factually correct in saying the producers get the nomination and the win. it is not an opinion, it was a fact. here is the fact seen on this video.



I am using this clip as a perfect example because I very much remember watching the award that year, and was surprised Scorsese did not win 2 Oscars that night until I realised that he was not a producer on the departed, so he did not get any award for best picture even though he directed the film.
As said in the clip, the award goes to the producers. Unless Jack Nicolson and Diane Keaton were not reading things correctly.

Saying Feige could be nominated for "best producer" is nonsensical. It is only the honorary Irving Thalberg Award that is for producers.

Feige is already a nominee for producing Black Panther. his nomination is listed like this.


Best Picture Nomination- Black Panther
Producer- Kevin Feige.

[Kirby101]

No you are not, the producer recieves the award for best picture. But the Academy does not vote on the producer. The give the best actor to a person, they give the best director to the individual. The best picture Oscar is for the film, NOT the for the person who produced it. There are movies that have won with multiple producers, it doesn't matter, it's the movie that wins. They are not voting on the producer.
You are confusing who accepts the award with what the Academy is voting for.

[Castle]

I actually enjoy Shakespeare in Love far more than Saving Private Ryan, so it just goes to show how complex judging things that ultimately comes down to taste actually is.

So I am not one of those massive Shakespeare in love haters and believe me there are many of them in the film fandom because it won best picture over saving private ryan. However Saving Private Ryan would have been a better fit for best picture.

saving private ryan I would argue broke the film sound barrier, and we have had many war films in the past based on world war 2, but saving private ryan was a watershed world war 2 movie. can we say the same for Shakespeare in love in terms of Shakespeare adaptions?

I have not even seen The new Macbeth movie with Denzel Washington but heck I would not be surprised if that is a better film than Shakespeare in love. however i dont think it would be as easy to make a better and more detailed war movie like saving private ryan. so it was just more deserving on that kind of analysis.

[C_Miller]

So I am not one of those massive Shakespeare in love haters and believe me there are many of them in the film fandom because it won best picture over saving private ryan. However Saving Private Ryan would have been a better fit for best picture.

saving private ryan I would argue broke the film sound barrier, and we have had many war films in the past based on world war 2, but saving private ryan was a watershed world war 2 movie. can we say the same for Shakespeare in love in terms of Shakespeare adaptions?

I have not even seen The new Macbeth movie with Denzel Washington but heck I would not be surprised if that is a better film than Shakespeare in love. however i dont think it would be as easy to make a better and more detailed war movie like saving private ryan. so it was just more deserving on that kind of analysis.

I don't even think Saving Private Ryan is the best war film set in World War II that came out in 1998. That honor goes to Terrence Malick's harrowing picture, The Thin Red Line.

[Castle]

No you are not, the producer recieves the award for best picture. But the Academy does not vote on the producer. The give the best actor to a person, they give the best director to the individual. The best picture Oscar is for the film, NOT the for the person who produced it.

the best picture Oscar is awarded to the person or peoples who produced the film.

You are saying it is for the film. but the film is not a person or individual. the film is a picture that a person/individual sometimes multiple persons/individuals made and the persons who makes the picture win the statue.

The best picture Oscar is for the film, NOT the for the person who produced it.

when Titanic won best picture, who did James Cameron, Pamela Easley and Jon Landau give the award too? if the award by what you are saying is not for the person or individual who produced it because I am pretty sure James Cameron took that award home to his million dollar mansion where it belonged.

You are confusing who accepts the award with what the Academy is voting for.

the academy votes for a selection of different people from who they nominate. the person who gets the most votes is the winner that accepts the award including best picture.

[Castle]

I don't even think Saving Private Ryan is the best war film set in World War II that came out in 1998. That honor goes to Terrence Malick's harrowing picture, The Thin Red Line.

Yes I am aware of the The Thin Red Line. However Shakespare in Love had less points on its side to Saving Private Ryan. additionally in comparsion to the red thin line, saving private ryan has more of a bigger impact of how film makers approach world war movies today.

[Noodle]

the academy votes for a selection of different people from who they nominate. the person who gets the most votes is the winner that accepts the award including best picture.

Except a picture isn't a person, so it can't accept an award, thus its accepted on its behalf by the producer. Best picture is awarded based off it's whole, and would necessitate too many people to accept, thus it's handed to the producer.

[hairys]

for making a commercially successful superhero movie template? nah. good for him for accomplishing his goals, though. but the entire MCU could disappear from the face of the earth, and film wouldn't be worse off. there needs to be more.

[Username taken]

for making a commercially successful superhero movie template? nah. good for him for accomplishing his goals, though. but the entire MCU could disappear from the face of the earth, and film wouldn't be worse off. there needs to be more.

Presently, theatres would feel it. Badly.

So no, if the MCU did “disappear off the face of the Earth” the industry will feel it,

At least for now and until other studios can step up their game.

[hairys]

Presently, theatres would feel it. Badly.

So no, if the MCU did “disappear off the face of the Earth” the industry will feel it,

At least for now and until other studios can step up their game.

already covered "commercially successful" in my post. plus, if the MCU didn't exist, some other popcorn thing would fill the vacuum. it could be straight up action movies, maybe romcoms, who knows.

[useridgoeshere]

already covered "commercially successful" in my post. plus, if the MCU didn't exist, some other popcorn thing would fill the vacuum. it could be straight up action movies, maybe romcoms, who knows.

A ton of action movies and romcoms exist and all make significantly less that any MCU movie in the US. There hasn't been a franchise like the MCU in the history of cinema with multiple top performing blockbusters every year for more than a decade. I doubt that theater owners would be as confident something else could just fill the void.

[hairys]

A ton of action movies and romcoms exist and all make significantly less that any MCU movie in the US. There hasn't been a franchise like the MCU in the history of cinema with multiple top performing blockbusters every year for more than a decade. I doubt that theater owners would be as confident something else could just fill the void.

that's because the MCU exists. no one questions that the MCU dominates the competition commercially. but it is also very doubtful that our ultra-consumerist society would not consume *something* if the MCU didn't exist. we just don't know what that would be because we don't have access to a non-MCU universe.

all of which is besides the point anyway.

[80sbaby]

that's because the MCU exists. no one questions that the MCU dominates the competition commercially. but it is also very doubtful that our ultra-consumerist society would not consume *something* if the MCU didn't exist. we just don't know what that would be because we don't have access to a non-MCU universe.

all of which is besides the point anyway.

But even prior to the MCU, there wasn't ever any franchise that guaranteed the amount of money it brings in consistently year after year. Hell, we've seen other studios try and create that same type of goodwill/consistent audience and fail. The MCU is not so easily replaced as you think.

[hairys]

But even prior to the MCU, there wasn't ever any franchise that guaranteed the amount of money it brings in consistently year after year. Hell, we've seen other studios try and create that same type of goodwill/consistent audience and fail. The MCU is not so easily replaced as you think.

yes, i agree that the vacuum-filler would likely not produce at the same level commercially as the MCU.

[Username taken]

already covered "commercially successful" in my post. plus, if the MCU didn't exist, some other popcorn thing would fill the vacuum. it could be straight up action movies, maybe romcoms, who knows.

Nothing like the MCU has existed before.

Yeah, Eternals didn't burn up the box office but nothing has guaranteed theatre owners revenue like the MCU.