Tuesday, July 20, 2004
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
TWill,
While I agree with your general comments about Coppola, you should know that he made a lot of crap movies during the 1980s and 1990s because he bankrupted himself when he made "One From the Heart" (1982). Therefore, he became a director-for-hire, making whatever movie was being offered to him so that he could get back on sound financial grounds. It's actually even fair to say that he didn't care how his movies turned out, as long as he was getting a paycheck (he was considered box-office poison and difficult for a long time, and most people still have reservations about working with him).
Eddie
While I agree with your general comments about Coppola, you should know that he made a lot of crap movies during the 1980s and 1990s because he bankrupted himself when he made "One From the Heart" (1982). Therefore, he became a director-for-hire, making whatever movie was being offered to him so that he could get back on sound financial grounds. It's actually even fair to say that he didn't care how his movies turned out, as long as he was getting a paycheck (he was considered box-office poison and difficult for a long time, and most people still have reservations about working with him).
Eddie
Tuesday, July 20, 2004
Member since:
December 2003
December 2003
The king of comedy... how could I have forgotten Chaplin?!!
Tuesday, July 20, 2004
Member since:
November 2003
November 2003
Guy Ritchie made some decent films in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, and Snatch. Dunno how his other films turned out though.
Other notable directors:
- Roman Polanski
- Krzysztof Kieslowski
- David Lean
Other notable directors:
- Roman Polanski
- Krzysztof Kieslowski
- David Lean
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
Member since:
January 2003
January 2003
Tony,
Definitely with you on Fearless. Great, underrated flick that deserves a REAL DVD release, not the junky fullscreen 2.0 version we have now.
The movie itself is definitely worth the price of admission, though!
Sean (admission that the DVD stinks if nothing else!...)
Definitely with you on Fearless. Great, underrated flick that deserves a REAL DVD release, not the junky fullscreen 2.0 version we have now.
The movie itself is definitely worth the price of admission, though!
Sean (admission that the DVD stinks if nothing else!...)
Thursday, July 22, 2004
Member since:
September 2002
September 2002
1. Alfred Hitchcock.
2. Akira Kurosawa
3. Martin Scorcese
4. David Lean
5. Steven Spielberg
6. N Night Shyamalan and Tim Burton
No one mentioned Hitchcock?:)
2. Akira Kurosawa
3. Martin Scorcese
4. David Lean
5. Steven Spielberg
6. N Night Shyamalan and Tim Burton
No one mentioned Hitchcock?:)
Friday, July 23, 2004
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
Loved "Red Rock West." Liked the noir aspect of "The Last Seduction." Not sure if that would be enough to put Dahl on my own list of "best" directors, though. Now, how about Roth?
John
John
Friday, July 23, 2004
Member since:
December 2002
December 2002
Two excellent early John Dahl movies= Red Rock West and The Last Seduction
Friday, July 23, 2004
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
Contraband,
Most of your choices are self-evident, but you might want to help us understand your inclusion of Eli Roth and John Dahl. "Cabin Fever"? "Rounders"?
John
Most of your choices are self-evident, but you might want to help us understand your inclusion of Eli Roth and John Dahl. "Cabin Fever"? "Rounders"?
John
Friday, July 23, 2004
Member since:
July 2004
July 2004
I think the best directors at the moment are:
Eli Roth
John Dahl
Steven Spielberg
M. Night Shyamalan
Tim Burton
Robert Zemeckis
Peter Jackson
Sam Raimi
Steven Soderbergh
Ridley Scott
Quentin Tarantino
Eli Roth
John Dahl
Steven Spielberg
M. Night Shyamalan
Tim Burton
Robert Zemeckis
Peter Jackson
Sam Raimi
Steven Soderbergh
Ridley Scott
Quentin Tarantino
Saturday, July 24, 2004
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
Josh,
If by "unique" you mean making the same clever, cynical, violent movies over and over, then Tarnantino is certainly unique; and I love him for it. But when I think of unique, I think of someone who experiments with different things, yet puts his personal stamp on all of them. Spielberg is unique in that regard; my aforementioned Curtiz was unique; and above all, Kubrick was unique. Kubrick never made the same kind of movie twice, and all his films were truly "unique."
I liked Dahl's "Rounders" and "Red Rock West," and I can understand his being some people's personal favorite director. But I didn't like Eli Roth's "Cabin Fever" a bit--bloody, gruesome, deriviative of "Night of the Living Dead," right unto the ending, and filled totally with idiot characters, from the idiot kids to the idiot local folk to the idiot police. Was it supposed to be a black comedy? The ending with the old man and the rifle was cute. Otherwise, "Morons in the Woods" would be my title for it.
John
If by "unique" you mean making the same clever, cynical, violent movies over and over, then Tarnantino is certainly unique; and I love him for it. But when I think of unique, I think of someone who experiments with different things, yet puts his personal stamp on all of them. Spielberg is unique in that regard; my aforementioned Curtiz was unique; and above all, Kubrick was unique. Kubrick never made the same kind of movie twice, and all his films were truly "unique."
I liked Dahl's "Rounders" and "Red Rock West," and I can understand his being some people's personal favorite director. But I didn't like Eli Roth's "Cabin Fever" a bit--bloody, gruesome, deriviative of "Night of the Living Dead," right unto the ending, and filled totally with idiot characters, from the idiot kids to the idiot local folk to the idiot police. Was it supposed to be a black comedy? The ending with the old man and the rifle was cute. Otherwise, "Morons in the Woods" would be my title for it.
John
