>>97301501A lot of people think this of marvel, but the truth is that Feige provides certain guidelines for the MCU that the directors are free to create around. That's literally it.
People need to get their heads out of their asses about this edgar wright bullshit. Wright sat on ant-man for nearly 8 years because he wanted it unrelated to the mcu. If it weren't for that, ant-man might have been made before Iron Man 1. Shitters that ignore this still operate under the delusion that marvel is a detriment to creativity wen its Marvel contracting directors to elm film projects under a set of simple guidelines.
Alternatively, Look at the entirety of the batman live-action film interpretations so far since 1989. The director creative fingerprints are one thing, but directors having no sense of direction about how to navigate the source material with their signature style.
And before any of you point at Nolan, remember tat Nolan was routinely on record for calling batman the least interesting character in his films, hence why the costume has so limited screen time and why both sequels had so little development with Bruce and why the villains ad side characters and so much stronger charisma.
Compare the nolan trilogy batman/bruce with Mask of the Pantasm and you'll find all three films come up shorter where it counts most. Its reasons like this why Feige is so highly-regarded, because he's doing what he's supposed to. If you think creativity is somehow being stifled in the MCU, Russo bros, Waititi and especially Gunn's efforts exist to prove that you are all looking at it wrong.
Directors aren't being neutered, they're being presented with task to pour their creative energies into in order to tell a compelling story. If they perform poorly, it's telling of the director's creative ability.
