Firstly, I don't know that he's the "wrong writer". Yes, he's been attached to some movies that may not have been great, but there are several of them were commercial successes (the first Pirates of the Caribbean, Aladdin, Shrek...none of the sequels, I noted).
Second, how many movies only have one writer?urthermore, they're always going to deal with directors, executives, and sometimes even actors insisting on their own ideas making it into the film, regardless of if it makes sense or fits the narrative.
Third, a friend of mine mentioned some time ago that studios can tell if a movie is going to bomb before they release it; the example he used was Green Lantern. According to him, they'll screen the movie, fully aware of how bad it is, and send it to nationwide theatres anyway. Why? I'm not sure. One theory I have is that, depending on the property, they probably know there's an eager fanbase waiting and willing to see the film just to see it. And/Or, it's a way to recoup what they spent on MAKING the film on the first place. After all, if you spend $10 million making a movie, but you project making only $5 million releasing it, isn't making half back better than nothing from not releasing it?
I'm not saying Roccio is the perfect choice, or that I like/have seen all the movies he's worked on. I'm just saying that he doesn't seem to be so consistently bad that it means he's the sole reason a MotU flick will/could fail.
It will fail or languish in development hell as it has for fourteen years. Because all who join the project come to the same realization. You can never top perfection: