Ten Directors Who Faced Challenges in Maintaining Creative Control Over Their Films

What was once unthinkable in the late 1970s has now become a frequent occurrence in today’s movie industry. As the clout of individual movie stars declines and branded content reigns supreme, directors are increasingly viewed as replaceable. Consequently, Hollywood executives are more willing to intervene and redirect films away from their original creators. The reasons for such creative upheavals vary widely. Some films grapple with story issues that the original director fails to resolve, while others face studios pushing for dramatic shifts in creative vision. There are also instances where executives undermine directors by withholding the trust and support necessary for success.

These films serve as examples of what can happen when directors lose control over their cherished projects. Michael Cimino can consider himself fortunate that “Heaven’s Gate” wasn’t made in today’s climate of frequent directorial change.

Pixar is known for creating original films that often spring from deeply personal inspirations, and “Brave” was no different. Director Brenda Chapman drew from her own experiences with her daughter and her Scottish roots to craft this unique fairy tale. Her background as a story artist on animated classics such as “The Little Mermaid” and “Beauty and the Beast” also informed her vision for a princess story centered on a mother-daughter relationship. However, by the end of 2010, Chapman was removed from the project, with Mark Andrews and Steve Purcell stepping in as director and co-director, although Chapman retained a “Directed By” credit on the finished film.

Many original Pixar features come from profoundly personal places. “Brave” was no exception, as director Brenda Chapman drew upon both her relationship with her daughter and Scottish heritage to craft this fairy tale. Chapman’s extensive experience as a story artist on animated films like “The Little Mermaid” and “Beauty and the Beast” also lent specificity to her desire to craft a princess story focused on a mother/daughter dynamic. By the end of 2010, though, Chapman had been let go from this title. Mark Andrews and Steve Purcell took over as director and co-director, respectively (Chapman retained a “Directed By” credit on the final film).

Given how much of herself had gone into “Brave’s” core concept, Chapman found her firing incredibly “distressing,” especially since her passion project had been handed over to an all-male creative team. She was also puzzled by how many of her initial ideas ended up getting folded back into “Brave” after her firing. What was the point of her exodus then? Though Chapman remains proud of “Brave’s” final cut, it’s no surprise she left Pixar Animation Studios just weeks after the film’s theatrical debut.

“Brave” scored positive reviews and even won an Oscar for best animated feature, but some critics found that its attempts at “women empowerment” storytelling left something to be desired. Perhaps if Chapman had been kept around, “Brave” could’ve been a more cohesive project that lived up to its potential.

Filmmaker Paul Schrader is no stranger to getting a movie taken away during post-production. In the mid-2000s, his initial cut of “Exorcist: The Beginning” was jettisoned by studio executives and overhauled by a separate creative team led by Renny Harlin (Schrader later released his own cut, “Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist,” in 2005). This situation occurred once more for Schrader roughly a decade later with the Nicolas Cage thriller “Dying of the Light.” Following a dementia-ridden former CIA agent’s quest for revenge, Schrader revealed in October 2014 that he had no control over the post-production process. Once cameras stopped rolling, “Light” ceased to be a Paul Schrader movie. 

Compounding the anguish was that Schrader, Cage, and fellow “Light” star Anton Yelchin had “non-disparagement” clauses in their contracts preventing them from publicly lambasting what had happened to “Dying of the Light.” To get around this, the trio posted photos online of themselves wearing T-shirts containing their “non-disparagement” clauses. Despite their efforts, the memorable protest didn’t stop the butchered version of “Dying of the Light” from getting released in December 2014 to disastrous reviews.

Like his “Exorcist” prequel, though, Schrader eventually got some artistic closure on “Dying of the Light” by cobbling together a new cut that somewhat approximated his original vision. No non-disparagement clause could stop Schrader from executing his artistic ambitions.

The 2000 sci-fi horror film “Supernova” really isn’t all that memorable. The story to bring it to the big screen, on the other hand, is tremendously involving. Walter Hill, a go-to journeyman filmmaker behind “The Warriors,” “48 Hrs.,”and “Streets of Fire,” was the original helmer of this project, which starred James Spader and Angela Bassett. Apparently a last-minute replacement for filmmaker Geoffery Wright, Hill had just weeks to get ready to shoot “Supernova,” much of which was spent doing rewrites. Constant problems plagued the movie from there, including budget slashes and MGM’s insistence on test screening the film without any finished visual effects work.

After that, Hill left the project, and years of post-production problems followed. Two more directors, Jack Sholder and Francis Ford Coppola, tried getting the feature into shape, to no avail. Finally, “Supernova” was released to theaters in its final form in January 2000. Unsurprisingly, reviews were abysmal, and the film quickly faded away. On that final cut, the only name credited as director is Thomas Lee, an alias Hill picked out to distance himself from the beleaguered production.

Walter Hill’s career is expansive enough that it could easily withstand a turkey like “Supernova.” However, even the veteran filmmaker had never been through something as arduous as this cursed sci-fi horror film.

The H.G. Wells novel “The Island of Dr. Moreau” had always fascinated director Richard Stanley. Once he became a filmmaker, the concept of turning this saga into a major motion picture was too enticing to ignore. Thus, he was hired to helm an adaptation for New Line Cinema that would star Marlon Brando. What should’ve been a dream come true, though, quickly devolved into a nightmare.

Part of the production’s endless problems came from the late Val Kilmer, who was set to play one of the film’s leading roles. Stanley recalled how Kilmer was endlessly confrontational, much to the feature’s detriment. Between this and the deluge of bad weather plaguing the shoot, New Line Cinema fired Stanley just three days into principal photography. After that, John Frankenheimer came in to take over directorial duties, but kept running into further issues, including problems in corralling Marlon Brando and his eccentric tendencies.

As for Stanley, he eventually made his way back to the “Dr. Moreau” set in a most unusual way, sneaking back onto the set as an extra playing one of the mutant animal/human hybrids. That’s an appropriately bizarre capper to the “Island of Dr. Moreau” saga, a Richard Stanley passion project that spiraled far out of control.

David Ayer has never made his regrets about directing 2016’s “Suicide Squad” a secret. What led to all this chaos? Initially, during principal photography, things seemed to be moving smoothly for the Will Smith and Margot Robbie-starring project. Trouble began brewing, though, when “Suicide Squad” reached the editing bay. It was here that alternate cuts of the film made without Ayer’s input began emerging.

Meanwhile, responses to early 2016 superhero films like “Deadpool” and “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” influenced radical reshoots based on material penned by Geoff Johns. Ayer was not responsible for these new sequences, with the filmmaker claiming that his darker, thematically complex vision for “Suicide Squad” alienated studio executives. Thus, Warner Bros. opted to take the production in a much lighter direction that clearly harkened back to “Guardians of the Galaxy” and “Deadpool” rather than Ayer’s typical grimy sensibilities. 

Despite being heavily retooled by studio interference, this compromised incarnation of “Suicide Squad” proved a hefty moneymaker. But that didn’t mitigate the pain Ayer felt over this tortured production, with the filmmaker dubbing the feature his “biggest Hollywood heartbreak” (via The Hollywood Reporter) as late as 2023.

Arguably the most infamous case of a passion project movie being taken away from a director is 1942’s “The Magnificent Ambersons,” which hailed from none other than writer-director Orson Welles, his sophomore effort following the previous year’s groundbreaking “Citizen Kane.” Essentially, during post-production, RKO Radio Pictures executives got cold feet over the initial 131-minute cut of “Ambersons” Welles presented. Without the filmmaker’s blessing, RKO chopped up 40+ minutes and concocted a new ending. Given how specific Welles’ creative visions always were, this was a travesty.

In particular, RKO’s overhauling diluted the initially grim “Magnificent Ambersons” atmosphere in favor of something more commercial and upbeat. Despite these compromises, the final cut of “The Magnificent Ambersons” was still critically acclaimed and remains widely-praised to this day. A far less happy outcome for “The Magnificent Ambersons,” though, is that all the deleted footage comprising Welles’ original vision has been lost. The material RKO plucked out has become infamous lore in film geek circles.

This outcome is the ultimate insult to injury for Orson Welles. Not only was his feature taken away from him, but there’s (as of this writing) no hope of his initial artistic intent being restored. And yet, it says a lot of Welles’ mastery that even the compromised “Magnificent Ambersons” is considered another monumental masterpiece within his filmography.

During a childhood visit to the World’s Fair, Pixar filmmaker Bob Peterson was awestruck by the many dinosaur animatronics. Granted, every kid is fixated on dinosaurs, but these particular creations made beings of the past come to life in an especially vibrant, tangible way. It was from this experience that Peterson’s passion for dinosaurs was established, which would eventually inspire the creation of “The Good Dinosaur.” Peterson’s passion project intended to bring the thrill of those animatronics to the next level. 

By August 2013, Peterson’s “Good Dinosaur” project looked to be on track for a May 2014 date. This is when a star-studded cast was announced, which included Lucas Neff voicing lead character Arlo. Despite the initial excitement, “The Good Dinosaur” became yet another Pixar movie that lost its original director mid-production. Eventually, story artist and voice actor Peter Sohn took over the film, and drastic alterations were brought on, including making the protagonist a child.

That World’s Fair encounter had a monumental impact on Peterson. Unfortunately, he never got to stick around and translate that passion into “The Good Dinosaur’s” final incarnation.

Witnessing a Xenomorph emerge from someone’s chest is a terrifying experience. Just as grueling, however, was the process of bringing “Alien 3” to the big screen. The feature-length directorial debut of David Fincher, “Alien 3” almost never got released thanks to constant production woes. Among the most egregious transgressions this film’s producers committed was not fully supporting Fincher, with even Sigourney Weaver chastising 20th Century Fox executives for failing to give Fincher the room he needed.

Fincher originally envisioned a more reserved thriller harkening back to the text of Edgar Allan Poe. However, Fincher’s audacious ideas were hindered by problems ingrained into “Alien 3” from the get-go, including a script that was finished days before principal photography commenced. To boot, Fincher’s lack of experience made it difficult to coerce studio executives to trust his vision. All of this made for a miserable creative experience that, ironically, followed up Fincher’s life-long love for the “Alien” world.

His dreams of making a Xenomorph-centric feature curdled into a nightmare that didn’t reflect Fincher’s initial artistic intent. That makes it quite understandable why Fincher spent the years since reassuring the world that he hates the film more than anyone else.

Nicole Kidman’s vast filmography illustrates her willingness to tackle challenging roles and unique genres that stretch her talents. Unfortunately, 2007’s “The Invasion,” a loose remake of the classic sci-fi horror film “Invasion of the Body Snatchers,” isn’t among her more exquisite credits. The project, which co-starred Daniel Craig, was initially helmed by Oliver Hirschbiegel, a French filmmaker who was previously acclaimed for directing the 2004 Oscar-nominated World War II drama “Downfall.”

The hope was that he could deliver a mainstream thriller that scared audiences while also making them think. The initial shoot began in 2005, but during post-production, Warner Bros. began fretting over the film’s lack of spectacle. The Wachowski sisters were brought in to bolster the script while “V For Vendetta” director James McTeague took over the reshoots. At the time, stunt coordinator Keith Adam expressed frustration that Hirschbiegel’s “unconventional, but … great” (via Entertainment Weekly) filmmaking choices had been tossed out for these heavy reshoots.

Neither these reshoots nor its release less than a year after Craig’s first 007 film helped “Invasion” at the box office, where it flopped spectacularly. Since then, Hirschbiegel has stuck to European films and various prestigious TV shows. Kidman, meanwhile, has continued to anchor vastly superior films that have rendered “The Invasion” a distant memory.

Once, it seemed like 20th Century Fox was ecstatic about Josh Trank helming the 2015 reboot “Fantastic Four.” After his hit directorial debut “Chronicle,” Trank’s grounded and dark vision seemed just what Fox needed for a unique “Fantastic Four” film. However, from the get-go, Trank had varying levels of interest in the “Fantastic Four” mythology and didn’t gravitate towards the more sensational aspects of the characters. To boot, the script for “Fantastic Four” wasn’t finished when shooting began, while Trank struggled during principal photography getting along with crew members who had more experience with tentpoles.

All that was a preamble to when Fox executives finally saw Trank’s “Fantastic Four.” Frustrated that the film wasn’t more of a crowdpleaser, various portions, including the third act, were subsequently overhauled in reshoots without Trank’s input. The end result was a movie that didn’t work as either a spiritual sequel to “Chronicle” or a traditional “Avengers-“style superhero film. Nobody won here, least of all Trank. After 2015’s “Fantastic Four” bombed at the box office, the director became a temporary recluse and struggled to figure out his career trajectory.

Eventually, both Trank and the Fantastic Four characters moved on to new avenues. All that turmoil is hard to forget, though, especially given Fox’s initial confidence in Trank.