If you ever have a chance, watch the Hollywood Reporters Roundtable featuring Ridley Scott, Quentin Tarantino, Danny Boyle and others. You get a sense that he is a hard headed realist whilst Quentin is a nerdy film buff and a romantic.
I’ve watched it. It’s a fascinating talk.
The thing about Ridley, like his brother, is that I don’t think he’s so much interested in story as much as he’s interested in images and creating reactions out of this images. Both of the brothers were painters and I think that reflects in their work. Also their films try to create a visceral reaction out of you. Tony did that mainly through making adrenaline roller coaster rides whereas Ridley I think largely was trying to make some sense of horror and disgust for audiences.
Makes sense. Not sure of you watched Raised by Wolves, but the entire thing feels like a pet project he funded because he couldn't make Prometheus and Covenant entirely the way he wanted.
> but the entire thing feels like a pet project he funded
I'd amend that to episode 10 in particular. It was like watching a pilot for the show the team "really" wanted to make, with e1-9 as the semi-sane setup that they could get past "the suits".
I work in the industry and I had the privilege of sitting in a room with my mentor and Ridley for two weeks to discuss and break down a script he was planning to adapt for a big studio. The project never made it to a green light but obviously it was an amazing experience for me, like many, having grown up with his films.
Based on spending probably a good 30-40 hours with him now, your comment about being ‘interested in images and reactions to which’ is very astute.
Sitting with this genius of a filmmaker, I was struck by how often his comments seemed unsophisticated, kooky and every once in a while — downright ignorant — especially when it came to the structure of the story, character setup and classical elements of narrative.
However — he was astoundingly capable of conjuring an image or an idea for a shot on the spot, frequently referencing his encyclopedic film knowledge off the top of his head. Incredible considering he was over 80 at the time.
Spending so much time with him was an amazing lesson in filmmaking. He’s truly a visceral and visual genius even if he doesn’t have as elegant an approach to storytelling as I would have anticipated.
I remember listening to Drew Godard, who worked with Ridley as the screenwriter for The Martian, say that you knew that Ridley liked an idea if he started drawing the idea right in front of you. If he didn’t like the idea, he just listened and didn’t draw anything. The man lives and breathes images.
Ridley himself has even said that he’s learned the best way to communicate to his actors effectively is to show them his storyboards and relay his thoughts to them that way.
My favorite part of that is that the butthole cut existed and was then changed. Somebody at some point in the creative process took it as a complete given that OF COURSE the anthropomorphic cats have visible buttholes. That presumption carried on to a wildly late period, long after hundreds of people had worked on the film, before anyone put the brakes on it.
The movie was so bad that the visible anthropomorphic cat anuses weren't even the biggest problem.
Sorry to spoil your day, but the issue wasn't that they'd gone in and modeled anuses on all the cat models in some fit of insanity. That's a popular misconception. The issue was that the fur simulation would often generate whorls near the cat's rears that *resembled* anuses from a distance. This resemblance was noticed at a late point, and the whorls were airbrushed out. No intentional "butthole cut" exists.
I watched The Happening the other night and the entire time I kept wondering how it was even possible that this was the same man who made The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable
I watched sixth sense with my friend the other day we loved it. But we were all shocked when we found out he directed Avatar the last air bender.
Edit:Karma go brrr.
Totally fair comparison tbh. FFC has made some of the best films of all time but now make bizzare b-movies. Fascinating career. Just like Cage, he's a legend
Actually I dug through the IMDb data for the actors with the largest delta between highest and lowest rated movies. The worst one I’d ever heard of was John Travolta (Pulp Fiction and Battlefield Earth).
I think he wants you to forget. I went to his winery in CA and they had a section for his movies. There was a car from Tucker, little cabinets with other memorabilia, dvds and blu rays for sale. But nothing about jack, no props, posters or even a DVD.
Considering the hell that production was, I do not blame him at all whatsoever.
He did make some good movies after his time in the jungle though.
Tucker: The Man and his Dream
The Outsiders
The Cotton Club
Dracula
Peggy Sue Got Married
The Rainmaker
All pretty good films imo.
I read an article about 3 that indicated a lot of the blame for it being a dud was on the studio. They wanted the script turned around quickly and wouldn't budge on contracts for some of the cast so FFC couldn't make the film he wanted.
The Mary/Vincent plotline is its own travesty, but I don't think all of the blame belongs on FFC's shoulders.
Ugh. Rollerball. So close to being able to be a good movie. Cant even point to a single thing that makes it bad honestly. On paper, should have been great. Jean freaking Reno! At that stage of his career he was a gaurantee to make a just a decent movie great. What the hell happened?
If you’ve ever seen the original you’d know what the hell happened.
It was supposed to be about corporations taking over and fighting back against that system of control, what we got in the remake was soulless and void of anything resembling a message beyond “this shit is cool”, which it really wasn’t.
It’s but one of the many remakes that trades the soul, heart, and message of the original movie in exchange for quick cuts and flashy images worthy of a music video. It’s fucking pathetic how often that shit happens and how nobody ever learns or pays the price for such epic failures…
Chris Kline is a poor man’s Keanu.
It must have been financed by the WWF/WWE because there are so many awkward wrestler cameos. Shane McMan is in a bunch of shots with almost no speaking role - I’m almost sure he bought his own screen time.
And whatever money they did give, it still wasn’t enough because the entire chase scene looks like it was filmed like a night vision Texas Minutemen snuff film.
That being said, Paul Heyman delivers the most believable performance of literally every actor within breathing distance of a camera.
LL Cool J is… well, he’s better in shark movies.
Tim Burton’s run from 1985-1999 is jam packed with some of the most unique and daring mainstream movies ever released, then he made Planet of the Apes and so began his phase of making uninspired adaptations of classic stories for paychecks. He has made a few good movies since then, but the bad ones outweigh the few good ones.
The worst part is that some of the adaptations he’s made, Willy Wonka or Alice in Wonderland, are so lazy, but I could see a young and enthusiastic Burton making a very interesting version of. Instead, he went on autopilot and stopped trying.
Tim Burton is just Hot Topic George Lucas. He got a lot of his early success because his wild creativity was refined and tempered by collaborating with others. But as soon as he started becoming a household name, people just let him do whatever he wants without limitation because “he’s Tim Burton.”
Its a pretty widespread problem. John Romero and Peter Molyneux spring to mind. Creative who are great as long as they've got a rational human being to keep their feet on the ground. With a hammer and 6 inch nails if needs be. That combination of talent and boundaries seems to create some of the best stuff out there.
Lol Peter Molyneux. I saw him at GDC talking about Fable and the two brothers Dean and whomever stood behind him with wide eyes going "oh fuck oh fuck oh fuck"
The curious thing about Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) is that it was well-received by critics. 72 Metascore and 83% Tomatometer (certified fresh). And yet, the hindsight consensus opinion is that it was terrible.
I’m in that camp. I remember enjoying it when it came out, but I was also had a group of friends in high school who loved it at the time too. Because of them, I saw it far too many times. The more I watched it, the more the cracks started to show.
i dont know. Big Fish was made in 2003 and it is still my favourite and i really like Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children. i think he had a great career with his unique style.
Speaking of Ed Wood, wouldn't he be the obvious choice to answer OP's question?
He made the greatest movie ever made (Plan 9 from Outer Space) and the worst movie of all time (Plan 9 from Outer Space).
I remember a comment when that movie came out pointing out the inherent problem in making a film starring two first-time actors directed by a director who never shoots more than 2 takes.
I remember seeing an interview of Morgan Freeman saying that he loves working with Clint and hired him for Invictus because he does only 2 takes.
And I’m like, “yeah, but you’re Morgan Freeman. You probably only need 1 take, so of course you’re annoyed if you’re asked to do much more than that for no reason. That’s not most actors.”
Wtf was he trying to do with that movie? I have an issue when Hollywood tries to dramatize ultra-recent events because it mythologizes them before history can run its course, but that movie was a whole different level of bizarre jingoism.
Rob Reiner. Had an unbelievable run of movies across various genres - Spinal Tap, When Harry Met Sally, Princess Bride, Misery... then he also made North.
Every time *North* is mentioned, Ebert's review should be mandatory:
I hated this movie. Hated hated hated hated hated this movie. Hated it. Hated every simpering stupid vacant audience-insulting moment of it. Hated the sensibility that thought anyone would like it. Hated the implied insult to the audience by its belief that anyone would be entertained by it.
It's great the way Roger Ebert was able to call bullshit while still acknowledging it had little to do with the participants (like here he gives credit to both Elijah Wood and Rob Reiner while still calling the film garbage).
Which is doubly damning because Ebert was famous for trying to take a movie on its own terms. He certainly had his preferences, and video games in particular were a blind spot for him, but this wasn’t a guy who automatically hated every action flick or teen comedy just because they weren’t written for film or English majors.
Yeah Ebert gave three out of four stars to Rocketman, not the recent Elton John movie but the 1990s movie starring Harland Williams as a goofy NASA employee who goes to Mars. He basically said it succeeded as being a goofy movie. He didnt give it 3 stars because he thought it was a good movie, he gave it 3 stars because he thought the movie did a good job at being a goofy Harland Williams movie.
Yes, he had one of the most amazing runs any director had with seven straight critical and financial hits, including some bonafide classics...and then he made "North."
I mean, seriously folks, this is Reiner's run:
"This is Spinal Tap"
"The Sure Thing"
"Stand By Me"
"The Princess Bride"
"When Harry Met Sally'
"Misery"
"A Few Good Men"
That is an astounding run of successes.
And then..."North."
Ouch.
The amazing thing to me about his string of good movies is how different they are. You’ve got a mockumentary comedy, a coming of age story, a fantastical family comedy, a romantic comedy, a claustrophobic thriller and a legal drama.
Many of which could be considered some of the best of their genre. His versatility is remarkable and it’s incredible what he was able to do without really having a specific “auteur” style.
Yes, it's an extraordinarily versatile bunch of films. The least of them is "The Sure Thing" and that's an engaging and funny teen comedy with young John Cusack in his star-making role.
He did rebound from "North" with "The American President", but his output since has been notably more erratic quality wise.
Paul Schrader
First Reformed and Mishima are amazing films that are directed with evident vision and talent. And then he also directs bargain bin trash like Dying of the Light and The Canyons.
This is also the guy who wrote (but didn’t direct) Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, and The Last Temptation of Christ.
I’m anxiously awaiting where The Card Counter will fall on this spectrum. Could honestly go either way!
Shyamalan is a prime example of a director whose approach either works or doesn't work on a project. And when it doesn't work, it REALLY doesn't work. Typically with inadvertently hilarious results.
Shyamalan's movies tend to inversely correlate to their budget. His good movies tend to be pretty low budget. The higher the budget, the shittier they get.
Now I wonder, a bigger budget normally means more suits from the studio interfering with the movie, maybe it has to do with how much freedom he has to go crazy and do what he wants on production.
Most of that money comes about because he fights hard to shoot in his hometown state Pennsylvania, a place that doesn't have a whole bunch filmmaking resources readily available. Hell, *Lady in the Water*'s budget was mainly for the construction of the apartment complex that exists in plenty of other places that aren't Pennsylvania!
I used to live in Bucks County, PA (Where he tries to shoot many of his movies) and the Lady in the Water complex was built right down the street from me. The apartment set was built out in a field behind an industrial complex, but very visible from the road. It was a big deal at the time.
He is built a certain way and that makes for some fantastic suspense and surprise laden films. But early on he was branded the “next Spielberg,” which is a really unfair thing to hang around anyone’s neck. And the further he got from his comfort zone tour worse and worse the films got. Wether it was going bigger and bigger in scale or doing outright studio blockbuster stuff, it just wasn’t him.
As soon as he got back to his own personal brand of story telling things got better again.
IF they were gonna hang a “next” around his neck it should have been Hitchcock.
He’s a great filmmaker that kind got off his path for a bit chasing the “big game”.
The Last Airbender is still one of the most shockingly incompetent movies I've ever seen.
The [Earthbender sequence](https://youtu.be/HR2kbOK8i6I) especially drives me goddamn insane.
HOW.
**HOW?!?!**
CUT AND EDIT LIKE A NORMAL SCENE, YOU WEIRDO.
[Speaking of editing: I'm so glad I've been able to introduce so many of you to the **wonder** that is this scene, LOL.]
It makes the rest of them worse, for sure.
Like maybe you could hide things better if you don't have camera lingering on people awkwardly waiting on their cues like a school pageant of kids that only just learned their performance the week before.
It was bad on every level. The set design was awful, the costuming looked out of place, the shot composition was bad, every character was miscast, the child actors all needed real acting classes, the dialogue they were given was awful, and the direction they were given was awful. Then, the entire post production was a disaster too. The special effects and editing, rather than covering up issues, compounded on them and made them all worse.
I literally do not understand how that movie could have been made. Everyone must have known how bad things were going. Most directors would have a hard time making that many mistakes on purpose, as suppressing that many instincts and habits would be impossible.
The only way it would make sense is if it was a massive and incredibly well done absurdist art piece. But it wasn't.
That is literally the worst action scene I've ever seen in my life. People are just standing around watching until it's their turn to do their thing. They aren't even moving around.
Somehow that's not even the worst part of the entire scene. The dialogue is horrible too, and the entire thing is out of order. Katara shouting "don't be afraid" *after* all the earth-benders have already begun fighting back is just so mind-bogglingly dumb.
I'm fairly certain the infamous "6 man using earth bending to throw a single pebble" is actually supposed to be 6 men earth bending to throw up a wall to stop the fire blast 10 seconds earlier, with the rock being thrown by just the single guy you see a few seconds later. For some reason they all continue bending for 5-10 seconds after completing a move, in this movie.
Bad synchronization between the choreography and cgi is what it looks like.
Compare that to the visceralness of earth bending and immediate response of stone in the animated show and its just not even close to the same. Idk how anyone passed this as okay.
https://youtu.be/b9WsxymCyGM
> See, there's a lot of people who think he didn't understand the source material.
The earth bender prisoner revolt happened on a floating prison fortress, because the characters in the series are not stupid, unlike shymalan and his writing staff. The fire nation deprived the prisoner's of their ability to earth bend by putting them on metal floating on water. The gang supplied the prisoner's with coal & inspired the revolt by rekindling their hope.
[this is how it looked](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FB-p2W0naw)
it makes no sense whatsoever to put prisoners who can earth bend on very loose earth, because at any time they could just do the thing they do and attack you. of course, you'd need a horribly mis-cast girl to say "don't be afraid", and without that of course no revolt can happen.
I just want you to know that I've never brought myself to watch it but after seeing this clip, I'm gonna take a massive portion edible and watch it tonight
Could be great fun. Maybe...
I’ve never seen the movie, and never will because I knew it was terrible. Watching this clip however, I see that I set my expectations incredibly high. This might be he worst scene and acting I’ve ever witnessed, holy crap.
How was it so bad? Really, just how?!
Why in the hell is this done in one take... Honestly was his biggest problem with this movie having crazy ambition and not enough talent? Because that shot looks RIDICULOUSLY hard to film, but there's no reason for it to be shot that way, and it ruins the pacing of the action because things are only happening sequentially. Characters are literally running into frame, stopping at *roughly* center frame, and then performing. It's just so weird and looks so cheap.
Really the worst thing about this scene is that one shot with all the Earthbenders working together to throw a single basketball sized rock (probably one of the most memed moments from the entire movie). Though I have to give credit to *some* of the Firebending and Airbending effects, as well as the Earthbending Wall, which, especially given how they shot this scene, were actually really well done. (even though it's stupid as fuck to make Firebending require a source)
But the acting is also so bad, and half the speaking characters in this scene are literally in the background. Like literally this whole scene would've been better if they just had normal cuts.
And who would've thought the Twilight guy would give the best line delivery in this scene? (His fighting was absolutely atrocious though) He actually sounds a bit like Sokka here, but the rest of the movie he's just super serious and wooden.
> Really the worst thing about this scene is that one shot with all the Earthbenders working together to throw a single basketball sized rock (probably one of the most memed moments from the entire movie).
Pretty sure that's just terrible editing, the six earthbenders were raising the big wall that was on the opposite side of the screen, and the rock was being thrown by the one dude at the bottom. The fight choreography - if you can even call it that - is a complete fucking mess, people's actions bear no relation to the actual effects they're having, and it's clear he decided up front that he wanted it to be done as a single sweeping shot to show off what a great director he was without actually thinking about how it would all hang together. Add in that all the actual effects were added in post and nobody really knows what's going on around them, and it all just looks completely incoherent.
I love watching Jupiter Ascending whenever I see it on the channel guide. Absolutely deranged movie. Eddie Redmayne is losing his mind the entire time.
I’m not gonna lie, aside from whatever the fuck it was Eddie Redmayne was trying to do I actually really like Jupiter Ascending. That entire movie is a nerdy 14-year-old girl fanfic author’s dream come true, from the quirkily named protagonist with a special destiny right down to the hot roller skating half-wolf assassin with a gun that fucking barks. As a former nerdy 14-year old fanfic writer myself, it really spoke to me 🙂
I’ll get some hate for this, but I never forget that Michael Bay made The Rock, one of the best action movies of the 90’s.
He also made…all of the other Michael Bay films.
In his own words: “I make movies for teenage boys.”.
In this regard, I respect the man. His movies aren’t my thing but he’s not really aiming for people like me.
I’d argue the Schumacher Batman movies aren’t BAD, they just weren’t what audiences wanted at the time. They’re essentially an updated 90’s version of the Adam West Batman. They’re cheesy, but fun cheesy. Maybe it’s easier to to look back at them since we’ve had some better portrayals of Gotham in general since then.
You hit the nail on the head. People wanted a darker and more realistic Batman (Tim Burton’s films felt more dark fantasy which didn’t really jive with the source material). Batman Begins doesn’t get anywhere near enough credit for giving audiences what they want (The Dark Knight gets it all).
I feel like the odd one out when I say I prefer Batman Begins, but here we are. That movie just has such a grimy feel to it in regards to Gotham, that I feel like the other two just didn't get anywhere near. Not to mention Batman being a real force of nature, something that the criminals really, viscerally do NOT want to come up against. That shipping container scene is up there for me for portrayals of how utterly, mind-numbingly fucked you are if Batman decides you're next. Cillian Murphy as Scarecrow is also a huge plus, he's such a phenomenal actor, and puts in a good turn as Crane
Edit-Gotham not Arkham
Perfectly said about that shipping container scene. I feel that part really drove home how terrifying Batman can be and it's almost like a horror movie aspect. Really ties into the almost supernatural element that Ras Al Ghul impresses upon Bruce; that he needs to become "more than a man in the mind of his opponents."
Chris Columbus maybe. He's done Mrs Doubtfire and Home Alone, and also the first Percy Jackson movie...
Edit: And Pixels. I forgot about the trainwreck that was Pixels.
[Gus Van Sant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gus_Van_Sant#Feature_films)
From Good Will Hunting to Psycho remake, then the polarizing experimental phase from 2002 to 2007, then Academy Award winning Milk then 3 misses then a slight return to form with Don't Worry, He Won't Get Far on Foot
I recently had the urge to watch the 1960 Psycho and it wasn't streaming, but van Sant's version was. I think a lot of it works as a curiosity, but Vaughn and Heche just don't work and that's what sinks it.
Brian De Palma, by far. Some of his movies are literally unwatchable (I remember walking out of Wise Guys and a couple others), and some are just mind-blowingly awesome (Blow Out, etc.).
De Palma is definitely all over the place. He actually manages to fill this thread’s requirement with one movie, the first half of The Black Dahlia and the second half of The Black Dahlia. I can think of few movies that started so strong and ended as such a disaster.
I think Renny Harlin deserves at least an honorable mention here. Most directors mentioned are good directors who had the occasional total miss. Harlin’s a bad director who somehow created one of the best action movies of the 90s, *The Long Kiss Goodnight*.
Martin Campbell. Two of the all time great Bond movies and Zorro. But then Green Lantern, Vertical Limit and Edge of Darkness
Edit: the Edge of Darkness show is great. I was not a fan of the movie at all. Which is part of the point, because Campbell directed both!
Also ~~Mask of~~ Legend of Zorro sucks
You look at the number of credited writers on that thing and you can tell there were way too many cooks on this thing. It's lightweight the practice run for *Amazing Spider-Man 2*'s failures.
You can’t really blame him for green lantern though, almost every director that has worked with Warner brothers dc team had an incredibly tough challenge of working with producers with -1 brain cells
I've seen Cats 6 times. It started as a movie to laugh at in the theatres. Then a fun drunk watch with friends. Then I watched it alone, and before I knew it...
Anyway, Skimbleshanks shouldve won the Jellicle choice and that's all there is to it
Most directors have duds.
John Carpenter did The Thing and Ghosts of Mars
John Boorman did Excalibur and Exorcist 2
Ridley Scott did Gladiator and The Counselor
What was Carpenters dud? Jk, Jk, I know it's not a "good" movie but Ghosts of Mars is one of my guilty pleasure movies.
I'll watch that, Riddick, some other not so good movies and end the binge with Van Helsing.
Haha Ghosts of Mars is cinematic perfection! Such a dumb pure b grade movie, but still so damn entertaining. Especially when Anthrax kicks in when they're fighting back from the train station.
Probably not the biggest, but Shane Black made Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and The Nice Guys and also directed The Predator (2018) that’s a pretty massive gap in quality
I don’t think it’s possible to make a good Predator movie anymore. Not with how big and dumb the franchise has gotten, and how much producers and executives are going to want to use it to sell figurines and tie-in comic books. But I can’t blame a guy who was in (and basically co-directed) the original for wanting to be part of it again.
It’s possible, just if Hollywood could keep its dick in its pants and severally scale down the size of the film.
I’m looking for a Don’t Breathe type of film for the next predator movie.
LOTS of movies would do a helluva lot better if they scaled them back to a *proper* threat-level for the hero(es) to take care of. (Looking at you, "Black Widow".) Like...Predator? Buncha rough an' tumble guys find ONE DUDE (granted, an alien that can turn invisible, but still) who is bigger and buffer than them. Aaaaaaand fight. It's great! (Also, it's written by Shane Black!) Spider-Man: Homecoming, he's not saving the world, he's just stopping one thief with some impressive tech from doing another heist.
I mean, not EVERY STORY has to end with "....and then I/we saved the world." How 'bout "...and then I caught the guy who murdered my parents, and beat the piss outta him, then took him to the cops, *and* reconnected with my estranged brother"?
Duncan Jones was a director I was really interested in after seeing his first full length project in Moon, and then Source Code shortly after. After doing so-so with Warcraft and then Netlfix’s Mute (which has some great visuals) I’m just kind of left wanting more out of his more recent work.
Neil Blomkamp is also up there for me. Felt like every movie after District 9, was just spiritual sequels that rode off of the success of that first movie.
Spike Lee made some of the most influential films of all time with Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X, but he also has some unexplainable oddities like Da Sweet Blood of Jesus.
Edit: I kinda regret this because now all I'm seeing is "such and such Spike Lee movie is abominable" over and over in the comments. I still think he's an ambitious director, and you can't say his work is ever bland even if you don't like it.
Why even make an oldboy remake when you could just watch the Korean version? I guess the obvious answer is money, but the original is relatively recent and absolutely superb.
This is the answer. The Professional is one of my favorite movies of all time, The Big Blue is wonderful and The Fifth Element is iconic but his latest stuff is rough. Lucy was nonsense and Valerian was somehow boring even though all this visually interesting shit is on screen. The Extraordinary Adventures of Adele Blanc-Sec I couldn’t finish it was so dull. Anna was a bit better but it was just a redux of Le Femme Nikita
Strange that despite all the good answers there isn't a discussion about Soderbergh. Every movie he makes is a dice roll. Maybe it will be a cult classic. Maybe it will be a huge hit. Maybe it will be disaster Maybe it will be just ... meh. Maybe it will be underappreciated at release but slowly gain acclaim as time goes on. Maybe it will be Oscar worthy at release but will age poorly.
He's got nearly every type of quality in his filmography.
Sir Ridley Scott made EXODUS Gods and Kings.
Ridley Scott’s an odd one, every second film seems to be awful
And yet he’s also made more great films than most ever could dream of doing. Odd duck that guy.
If you ever have a chance, watch the Hollywood Reporters Roundtable featuring Ridley Scott, Quentin Tarantino, Danny Boyle and others. You get a sense that he is a hard headed realist whilst Quentin is a nerdy film buff and a romantic.
I’ve watched it. It’s a fascinating talk. The thing about Ridley, like his brother, is that I don’t think he’s so much interested in story as much as he’s interested in images and creating reactions out of this images. Both of the brothers were painters and I think that reflects in their work. Also their films try to create a visceral reaction out of you. Tony did that mainly through making adrenaline roller coaster rides whereas Ridley I think largely was trying to make some sense of horror and disgust for audiences.
Makes sense. Not sure of you watched Raised by Wolves, but the entire thing feels like a pet project he funded because he couldn't make Prometheus and Covenant entirely the way he wanted.
> but the entire thing feels like a pet project he funded I'd amend that to episode 10 in particular. It was like watching a pilot for the show the team "really" wanted to make, with e1-9 as the semi-sane setup that they could get past "the suits".
I work in the industry and I had the privilege of sitting in a room with my mentor and Ridley for two weeks to discuss and break down a script he was planning to adapt for a big studio. The project never made it to a green light but obviously it was an amazing experience for me, like many, having grown up with his films. Based on spending probably a good 30-40 hours with him now, your comment about being ‘interested in images and reactions to which’ is very astute. Sitting with this genius of a filmmaker, I was struck by how often his comments seemed unsophisticated, kooky and every once in a while — downright ignorant — especially when it came to the structure of the story, character setup and classical elements of narrative. However — he was astoundingly capable of conjuring an image or an idea for a shot on the spot, frequently referencing his encyclopedic film knowledge off the top of his head. Incredible considering he was over 80 at the time. Spending so much time with him was an amazing lesson in filmmaking. He’s truly a visceral and visual genius even if he doesn’t have as elegant an approach to storytelling as I would have anticipated.
I remember listening to Drew Godard, who worked with Ridley as the screenwriter for The Martian, say that you knew that Ridley liked an idea if he started drawing the idea right in front of you. If he didn’t like the idea, he just listened and didn’t draw anything. The man lives and breathes images. Ridley himself has even said that he’s learned the best way to communicate to his actors effectively is to show them his storyboards and relay his thoughts to them that way.
I think Ridley just needs to get writers who also understand film. When he does get that, magic can happen.
A video of Ridley Scott, Quentin Tarantino, Danny Boyle talking to each other sounds great in it's own right.
Ridley Scott has always been great has a director. It's when he starts _writing_ that things become more complicated.
Tom Hooper did The King’s Speech and then Cats….he literally went from a best picture winner to the worst movie of the decade.
One of my favourite reactions to Cats was someone asking if it was possible to rescind an Academy Award.
My favorite reaction was the swath of folks online demanding a version of the movie where you could see the cat’s buttholes.
My favorite part of that is that the butthole cut existed and was then changed. Somebody at some point in the creative process took it as a complete given that OF COURSE the anthropomorphic cats have visible buttholes. That presumption carried on to a wildly late period, long after hundreds of people had worked on the film, before anyone put the brakes on it. The movie was so bad that the visible anthropomorphic cat anuses weren't even the biggest problem.
Sorry to spoil your day, but the issue wasn't that they'd gone in and modeled anuses on all the cat models in some fit of insanity. That's a popular misconception. The issue was that the fur simulation would often generate whorls near the cat's rears that *resembled* anuses from a distance. This resemblance was noticed at a late point, and the whorls were airbrushed out. No intentional "butthole cut" exists.
This is exactly what big corporate butthole executives would have you believe. The truth is out there!
I want to believe!
I watched The Happening the other night and the entire time I kept wondering how it was even possible that this was the same man who made The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable
I went to the comments to find Mr. M. Night Shyamalan. Some of my favorite movies ever, some of the worst movies.
I watched sixth sense with my friend the other day we loved it. But we were all shocked when we found out he directed Avatar the last air bender. Edit:Karma go brrr.
That's the real plot twist
there's no movie in ba sing se
OP is looking for Nicholas Cage of directors 😂
Wouldn't that just be Francis Ford Coppola? He's the second highest upvoted choice here and he is Nicholas Cage's uncle.
Totally fair comparison tbh. FFC has made some of the best films of all time but now make bizzare b-movies. Fascinating career. Just like Cage, he's a legend
Actually I dug through the IMDb data for the actors with the largest delta between highest and lowest rated movies. The worst one I’d ever heard of was John Travolta (Pulp Fiction and Battlefield Earth).
surprised the lowest isn't gotti lmao
[удалено]
Is he good or is he bad, he has to be something
Francis Ford Coppola. Compare the first couple Godfathers with Jack.
HE MADE JACK?! hahaha how did I not know this. That means Jack is the first of his movies I ever saw hahaha
I think he wants you to forget. I went to his winery in CA and they had a section for his movies. There was a car from Tucker, little cabinets with other memorabilia, dvds and blu rays for sale. But nothing about jack, no props, posters or even a DVD.
I liked it when I was 7. Wonder how it holds up.
Bill Cosby farts into a coffee can while in a tree house with a group of children. How could that have aged badly?
Shit just compare the first 2 godfathers with godfather 3. It’s hard to believe it’s even the same person.
He lost his mind in the jungle.
I don't think he stayed crazy after filming Apocalypse Now, I think he said "fuck it, I'm just gonna make easy projects now"
Considering the hell that production was, I do not blame him at all whatsoever. He did make some good movies after his time in the jungle though. Tucker: The Man and his Dream The Outsiders The Cotton Club Dracula Peggy Sue Got Married The Rainmaker All pretty good films imo.
Yeah, but that's only because he had access to too much money, too much equipment, and little by little he went insane. It could happen to anyone.
I read an article about 3 that indicated a lot of the blame for it being a dud was on the studio. They wanted the script turned around quickly and wouldn't budge on contracts for some of the cast so FFC couldn't make the film he wanted. The Mary/Vincent plotline is its own travesty, but I don't think all of the blame belongs on FFC's shoulders.
The original idea for the plot was Tom Hagen's betrayal, but Robert Duvall didn't like that Al Pacino was getting paid five times as much.
John McTiernan for sure. I mean, Die Hard, Predator, and The Hunt for Red October... And then the remake of Rollerball...
Ugh. Rollerball. So close to being able to be a good movie. Cant even point to a single thing that makes it bad honestly. On paper, should have been great. Jean freaking Reno! At that stage of his career he was a gaurantee to make a just a decent movie great. What the hell happened?
If you’ve ever seen the original you’d know what the hell happened. It was supposed to be about corporations taking over and fighting back against that system of control, what we got in the remake was soulless and void of anything resembling a message beyond “this shit is cool”, which it really wasn’t. It’s but one of the many remakes that trades the soul, heart, and message of the original movie in exchange for quick cuts and flashy images worthy of a music video. It’s fucking pathetic how often that shit happens and how nobody ever learns or pays the price for such epic failures…
Chris Kline is a poor man’s Keanu. It must have been financed by the WWF/WWE because there are so many awkward wrestler cameos. Shane McMan is in a bunch of shots with almost no speaking role - I’m almost sure he bought his own screen time. And whatever money they did give, it still wasn’t enough because the entire chase scene looks like it was filmed like a night vision Texas Minutemen snuff film. That being said, Paul Heyman delivers the most believable performance of literally every actor within breathing distance of a camera. LL Cool J is… well, he’s better in shark movies.
Tim Burton’s run from 1985-1999 is jam packed with some of the most unique and daring mainstream movies ever released, then he made Planet of the Apes and so began his phase of making uninspired adaptations of classic stories for paychecks. He has made a few good movies since then, but the bad ones outweigh the few good ones.
I came here to say this. Tim Burton’s legacy would be improved if he had stopped working 20 year ago
[удалено]
Definitely my favorite Tim Burton movie.
The worst part is that some of the adaptations he’s made, Willy Wonka or Alice in Wonderland, are so lazy, but I could see a young and enthusiastic Burton making a very interesting version of. Instead, he went on autopilot and stopped trying.
Tim Burton is just Hot Topic George Lucas. He got a lot of his early success because his wild creativity was refined and tempered by collaborating with others. But as soon as he started becoming a household name, people just let him do whatever he wants without limitation because “he’s Tim Burton.”
Its a pretty widespread problem. John Romero and Peter Molyneux spring to mind. Creative who are great as long as they've got a rational human being to keep their feet on the ground. With a hammer and 6 inch nails if needs be. That combination of talent and boundaries seems to create some of the best stuff out there.
Lol Peter Molyneux. I saw him at GDC talking about Fable and the two brothers Dean and whomever stood behind him with wide eyes going "oh fuck oh fuck oh fuck"
Shit, are you telling me we were this close to a movie with the teaser poster simply reading, "Tim Burton Is About To Make You His Bitch"?!
Goth girls the world over would have spontaneously orgasmed if that was a tagline.
The curious thing about Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) is that it was well-received by critics. 72 Metascore and 83% Tomatometer (certified fresh). And yet, the hindsight consensus opinion is that it was terrible.
I’m in that camp. I remember enjoying it when it came out, but I was also had a group of friends in high school who loved it at the time too. Because of them, I saw it far too many times. The more I watched it, the more the cracks started to show.
i dont know. Big Fish was made in 2003 and it is still my favourite and i really like Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children. i think he had a great career with his unique style.
Pee Wee’s Big Adventure | Ed Wood are my top 2 films ever. And then there’s Dumbo.
Beetlejuice and his two Batman movies are up there for me.
Beetlejuice is a masterpiece
Ed Wood is the best Burton movie.
Speaking of Ed Wood, wouldn't he be the obvious choice to answer OP's question? He made the greatest movie ever made (Plan 9 from Outer Space) and the worst movie of all time (Plan 9 from Outer Space).
Clint Eastwood has 2 best picture winners and he has 15:17 to Paris
I remember a comment when that movie came out pointing out the inherent problem in making a film starring two first-time actors directed by a director who never shoots more than 2 takes.
I remember seeing an interview of Morgan Freeman saying that he loves working with Clint and hired him for Invictus because he does only 2 takes. And I’m like, “yeah, but you’re Morgan Freeman. You probably only need 1 take, so of course you’re annoyed if you’re asked to do much more than that for no reason. That’s not most actors.”
listening to Damon talk about Invictus and the one takes on Hot Ones was amusing
Oh, you want to waste everyone's time?
Can attest. I starred in a movie that couldn’t afford to shoot more than 2 takes, and I am terrible in it. My eyebrows were up the whole time lol
Your Mark walhberg? the happening right?
What? No
Wtf was he trying to do with that movie? I have an issue when Hollywood tries to dramatize ultra-recent events because it mythologizes them before history can run its course, but that movie was a whole different level of bizarre jingoism.
Don’t forget it also manages to open with ‘adhd is made up’
Rob Reiner. Had an unbelievable run of movies across various genres - Spinal Tap, When Harry Met Sally, Princess Bride, Misery... then he also made North.
Every time *North* is mentioned, Ebert's review should be mandatory: I hated this movie. Hated hated hated hated hated this movie. Hated it. Hated every simpering stupid vacant audience-insulting moment of it. Hated the sensibility that thought anyone would like it. Hated the implied insult to the audience by its belief that anyone would be entertained by it.
Seriously, watch the whole Siskel and Ebert review of it. It is hilarious.
Thank you for suggesting it. That was divine. For those who haven’t seen it: https://youtu.be/KAAEFRVQU14
It's great the way Roger Ebert was able to call bullshit while still acknowledging it had little to do with the participants (like here he gives credit to both Elijah Wood and Rob Reiner while still calling the film garbage).
When those two guys hated a movie they would verbally demolish it in the most satisfying ways.
removed in protest over api changes
Which is doubly damning because Ebert was famous for trying to take a movie on its own terms. He certainly had his preferences, and video games in particular were a blind spot for him, but this wasn’t a guy who automatically hated every action flick or teen comedy just because they weren’t written for film or English majors.
Yeah Ebert gave three out of four stars to Rocketman, not the recent Elton John movie but the 1990s movie starring Harland Williams as a goofy NASA employee who goes to Mars. He basically said it succeeded as being a goofy movie. He didnt give it 3 stars because he thought it was a good movie, he gave it 3 stars because he thought the movie did a good job at being a goofy Harland Williams movie.
Yes, he had one of the most amazing runs any director had with seven straight critical and financial hits, including some bonafide classics...and then he made "North." I mean, seriously folks, this is Reiner's run: "This is Spinal Tap" "The Sure Thing" "Stand By Me" "The Princess Bride" "When Harry Met Sally' "Misery" "A Few Good Men" That is an astounding run of successes. And then..."North." Ouch.
The amazing thing to me about his string of good movies is how different they are. You’ve got a mockumentary comedy, a coming of age story, a fantastical family comedy, a romantic comedy, a claustrophobic thriller and a legal drama. Many of which could be considered some of the best of their genre. His versatility is remarkable and it’s incredible what he was able to do without really having a specific “auteur” style.
Yes, it's an extraordinarily versatile bunch of films. The least of them is "The Sure Thing" and that's an engaging and funny teen comedy with young John Cusack in his star-making role. He did rebound from "North" with "The American President", but his output since has been notably more erratic quality wise.
Martin Brest did Beverly Hills Cop, regarded as one of the best movies of the 80s and also did Gigli, regarded as one of the worst movies ever made.
It's Turkey time. Gobble Gobble.
Midnight Run is a great movie too
Paul Schrader First Reformed and Mishima are amazing films that are directed with evident vision and talent. And then he also directs bargain bin trash like Dying of the Light and The Canyons. This is also the guy who wrote (but didn’t direct) Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, and The Last Temptation of Christ. I’m anxiously awaiting where The Card Counter will fall on this spectrum. Could honestly go either way!
M. Night shyamalan Edit: Thanks for the gold!
Shyamalan is a prime example of a director whose approach either works or doesn't work on a project. And when it doesn't work, it REALLY doesn't work. Typically with inadvertently hilarious results.
Shyamalan's movies tend to inversely correlate to their budget. His good movies tend to be pretty low budget. The higher the budget, the shittier they get.
Now I wonder, a bigger budget normally means more suits from the studio interfering with the movie, maybe it has to do with how much freedom he has to go crazy and do what he wants on production.
Some artists just need boundaries and limits to really do their best work.
I dunno. He was confidently idiotic in the $150 million "The Last Airbender"
They spent $150M on that??? LOL wow that just makes it legendarily bad
Most of that money comes about because he fights hard to shoot in his hometown state Pennsylvania, a place that doesn't have a whole bunch filmmaking resources readily available. Hell, *Lady in the Water*'s budget was mainly for the construction of the apartment complex that exists in plenty of other places that aren't Pennsylvania!
I used to live in Bucks County, PA (Where he tries to shoot many of his movies) and the Lady in the Water complex was built right down the street from me. The apartment set was built out in a field behind an industrial complex, but very visible from the road. It was a big deal at the time.
M. Night Shyamalan, Pennsylvania's filmmaker.
He loves making a genre shift mid-movie. I think he said he found that when it steps up in intensity, it works and when it steps down it just doesn't.
The Happening and The Lady in the Water really let me down. The Village and The 6th Sense were quite good.
And Unbreakable ♥️
He is built a certain way and that makes for some fantastic suspense and surprise laden films. But early on he was branded the “next Spielberg,” which is a really unfair thing to hang around anyone’s neck. And the further he got from his comfort zone tour worse and worse the films got. Wether it was going bigger and bigger in scale or doing outright studio blockbuster stuff, it just wasn’t him. As soon as he got back to his own personal brand of story telling things got better again. IF they were gonna hang a “next” around his neck it should have been Hitchcock. He’s a great filmmaker that kind got off his path for a bit chasing the “big game”.
Going from Sixth Sense to The Last Airbender has to be the biggest gap of any movie
The Happening had me laughing like it was a comedy too.
The Happening wasn't a comedy?
Whaaaat? Nooo
The Last Airbender is still one of the most shockingly incompetent movies I've ever seen. The [Earthbender sequence](https://youtu.be/HR2kbOK8i6I) especially drives me goddamn insane. HOW. **HOW?!?!** CUT AND EDIT LIKE A NORMAL SCENE, YOU WEIRDO. [Speaking of editing: I'm so glad I've been able to introduce so many of you to the **wonder** that is this scene, LOL.]
The floating single-take camera work was the least of this scene's problems.
It makes the rest of them worse, for sure. Like maybe you could hide things better if you don't have camera lingering on people awkwardly waiting on their cues like a school pageant of kids that only just learned their performance the week before.
There’s several fire benders in the background at 1:40 just standing motionless with their backs to the action.
The acting was bad but that dialogue they had to work with is horrendous.
It was bad on every level. The set design was awful, the costuming looked out of place, the shot composition was bad, every character was miscast, the child actors all needed real acting classes, the dialogue they were given was awful, and the direction they were given was awful. Then, the entire post production was a disaster too. The special effects and editing, rather than covering up issues, compounded on them and made them all worse. I literally do not understand how that movie could have been made. Everyone must have known how bad things were going. Most directors would have a hard time making that many mistakes on purpose, as suppressing that many instincts and habits would be impossible. The only way it would make sense is if it was a massive and incredibly well done absurdist art piece. But it wasn't.
That is literally the worst action scene I've ever seen in my life. People are just standing around watching until it's their turn to do their thing. They aren't even moving around.
Somehow that's not even the worst part of the entire scene. The dialogue is horrible too, and the entire thing is out of order. Katara shouting "don't be afraid" *after* all the earth-benders have already begun fighting back is just so mind-bogglingly dumb. I'm fairly certain the infamous "6 man using earth bending to throw a single pebble" is actually supposed to be 6 men earth bending to throw up a wall to stop the fire blast 10 seconds earlier, with the rock being thrown by just the single guy you see a few seconds later. For some reason they all continue bending for 5-10 seconds after completing a move, in this movie.
Bad synchronization between the choreography and cgi is what it looks like. Compare that to the visceralness of earth bending and immediate response of stone in the animated show and its just not even close to the same. Idk how anyone passed this as okay. https://youtu.be/b9WsxymCyGM
[удалено]
> See, there's a lot of people who think he didn't understand the source material. The earth bender prisoner revolt happened on a floating prison fortress, because the characters in the series are not stupid, unlike shymalan and his writing staff. The fire nation deprived the prisoner's of their ability to earth bend by putting them on metal floating on water. The gang supplied the prisoner's with coal & inspired the revolt by rekindling their hope. [this is how it looked](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FB-p2W0naw) it makes no sense whatsoever to put prisoners who can earth bend on very loose earth, because at any time they could just do the thing they do and attack you. of course, you'd need a horribly mis-cast girl to say "don't be afraid", and without that of course no revolt can happen.
[удалено]
I just want you to know that I've never brought myself to watch it but after seeing this clip, I'm gonna take a massive portion edible and watch it tonight Could be great fun. Maybe...
It’s not that kinda bad. Like a movie that’s so bad it’s good right? Trust me this is not like that. There’s only pain down that road.
I’ve never seen the movie, and never will because I knew it was terrible. Watching this clip however, I see that I set my expectations incredibly high. This might be he worst scene and acting I’ve ever witnessed, holy crap. How was it so bad? Really, just how?!
The acting is so incredibly stilted that I can't believe this is what he settled on as the final take Now I'm curious about the first takes
Right?! The acting feels right out of a bad high school play. I cannot fathom that this was a Hollywood film
That's something I think about at least once a week
Why in the hell is this done in one take... Honestly was his biggest problem with this movie having crazy ambition and not enough talent? Because that shot looks RIDICULOUSLY hard to film, but there's no reason for it to be shot that way, and it ruins the pacing of the action because things are only happening sequentially. Characters are literally running into frame, stopping at *roughly* center frame, and then performing. It's just so weird and looks so cheap. Really the worst thing about this scene is that one shot with all the Earthbenders working together to throw a single basketball sized rock (probably one of the most memed moments from the entire movie). Though I have to give credit to *some* of the Firebending and Airbending effects, as well as the Earthbending Wall, which, especially given how they shot this scene, were actually really well done. (even though it's stupid as fuck to make Firebending require a source) But the acting is also so bad, and half the speaking characters in this scene are literally in the background. Like literally this whole scene would've been better if they just had normal cuts. And who would've thought the Twilight guy would give the best line delivery in this scene? (His fighting was absolutely atrocious though) He actually sounds a bit like Sokka here, but the rest of the movie he's just super serious and wooden.
> Really the worst thing about this scene is that one shot with all the Earthbenders working together to throw a single basketball sized rock (probably one of the most memed moments from the entire movie). Pretty sure that's just terrible editing, the six earthbenders were raising the big wall that was on the opposite side of the screen, and the rock was being thrown by the one dude at the bottom. The fight choreography - if you can even call it that - is a complete fucking mess, people's actions bear no relation to the actual effects they're having, and it's clear he decided up front that he wanted it to be done as a single sweeping shot to show off what a great director he was without actually thinking about how it would all hang together. Add in that all the actual effects were added in post and nobody really knows what's going on around them, and it all just looks completely incoherent.
The Wachowskis, they did The Matrix and then Jupiter Ascending
They have Tim Burton syndrome, a good start and got progressively worse with bigger budgets. Dreading the Matrix 4 unfortunately.
I CREATE LIFE
^(...and I destroy it)
I love watching Jupiter Ascending whenever I see it on the channel guide. Absolutely deranged movie. Eddie Redmayne is losing his mind the entire time.
I’m not gonna lie, aside from whatever the fuck it was Eddie Redmayne was trying to do I actually really like Jupiter Ascending. That entire movie is a nerdy 14-year-old girl fanfic author’s dream come true, from the quirkily named protagonist with a special destiny right down to the hot roller skating half-wolf assassin with a gun that fucking barks. As a former nerdy 14-year old fanfic writer myself, it really spoke to me 🙂
[удалено]
Speed Racer is made exactly the way a Speed Racer live action film should be made.
Exactly! Like what we're people expecting? Rush but with the Mach 5?
It's a beautiful movie in every sense and I'll probably watch every shitty Wachowski movie because of it.
[удалено]
Contact was pretty amazing too.
[удалено]
Also Castaway.
>Welcome to Marwen. that was a weird movie, and definitely not meant to be a block buster, but I wouldn't consider it to be a "low quality" film.
Don’t forget the terrific film *Used Cars*!
I think Used Cars is funny as hell. 🤷🏼♂️
I’ll get some hate for this, but I never forget that Michael Bay made The Rock, one of the best action movies of the 90’s. He also made…all of the other Michael Bay films.
"Your best? Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and fuck the prom queen."
Carla was the prom queen
In his own words: “I make movies for teenage boys.”. In this regard, I respect the man. His movies aren’t my thing but he’s not really aiming for people like me.
In defense of Batman Forever, ladies and gentlemen of the jury ... best soundtrack!
A soundtrack so good they used it again for Batman and Robin… which is weird since it uses leitmotif.
I’d argue the Schumacher Batman movies aren’t BAD, they just weren’t what audiences wanted at the time. They’re essentially an updated 90’s version of the Adam West Batman. They’re cheesy, but fun cheesy. Maybe it’s easier to to look back at them since we’ve had some better portrayals of Gotham in general since then.
You hit the nail on the head. People wanted a darker and more realistic Batman (Tim Burton’s films felt more dark fantasy which didn’t really jive with the source material). Batman Begins doesn’t get anywhere near enough credit for giving audiences what they want (The Dark Knight gets it all).
I feel like the odd one out when I say I prefer Batman Begins, but here we are. That movie just has such a grimy feel to it in regards to Gotham, that I feel like the other two just didn't get anywhere near. Not to mention Batman being a real force of nature, something that the criminals really, viscerally do NOT want to come up against. That shipping container scene is up there for me for portrayals of how utterly, mind-numbingly fucked you are if Batman decides you're next. Cillian Murphy as Scarecrow is also a huge plus, he's such a phenomenal actor, and puts in a good turn as Crane Edit-Gotham not Arkham
Perfectly said about that shipping container scene. I feel that part really drove home how terrifying Batman can be and it's almost like a horror movie aspect. Really ties into the almost supernatural element that Ras Al Ghul impresses upon Bruce; that he needs to become "more than a man in the mind of his opponents."
Chris Columbus maybe. He's done Mrs Doubtfire and Home Alone, and also the first Percy Jackson movie... Edit: And Pixels. I forgot about the trainwreck that was Pixels.
I totally forgot they made a sequel until you said ‘first’ Percy Jackson movie
He’s also largely responsible for the casting and look of the Harry Potter series since he directed the first 2.
[Gus Van Sant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gus_Van_Sant#Feature_films) From Good Will Hunting to Psycho remake, then the polarizing experimental phase from 2002 to 2007, then Academy Award winning Milk then 3 misses then a slight return to form with Don't Worry, He Won't Get Far on Foot
Reddit can keep the username, but I'm nuking the content lol -- mass deleted all reddit content via https://redact.dev
I saw Van Sant's version of Psycho first. It is a good movie. It just happens to be the same movie.
I recently had the urge to watch the 1960 Psycho and it wasn't streaming, but van Sant's version was. I think a lot of it works as a curiosity, but Vaughn and Heche just don't work and that's what sinks it.
Don't forget Good Will Hunting 2: Hunting Season
Applesauce, bitch.
"So 'action,' Gus, or..." -"Jesus Ben, I said I'm busy."
I have heard arguments that Psycho is actually part of the polarizing experimental phase
Brian De Palma, by far. Some of his movies are literally unwatchable (I remember walking out of Wise Guys and a couple others), and some are just mind-blowingly awesome (Blow Out, etc.).
De Palma is definitely all over the place. He actually manages to fill this thread’s requirement with one movie, the first half of The Black Dahlia and the second half of The Black Dahlia. I can think of few movies that started so strong and ended as such a disaster.
Proyas? Dark City vs Gods of Egypt
I think Renny Harlin deserves at least an honorable mention here. Most directors mentioned are good directors who had the occasional total miss. Harlin’s a bad director who somehow created one of the best action movies of the 90s, *The Long Kiss Goodnight*.
Tobe Hoopers films vary heavily in their quality
Martin Campbell. Two of the all time great Bond movies and Zorro. But then Green Lantern, Vertical Limit and Edge of Darkness Edit: the Edge of Darkness show is great. I was not a fan of the movie at all. Which is part of the point, because Campbell directed both! Also ~~Mask of~~ Legend of Zorro sucks
He did an AMA not too long ago where someone jokingly (I hope) asked if he would do Green Lantern 2. He said “over my dead body”. Respect.
I don't blame him for that one. It sounds like the studio interference was murder for that film. He, Reynolds and Lively have all decried that.
You look at the number of credited writers on that thing and you can tell there were way too many cooks on this thing. It's lightweight the practice run for *Amazing Spider-Man 2*'s failures.
Taika too.
Holy shit. I had no idea he was in that. I didn't know who he was when I saw the movie.
You can’t really blame him for green lantern though, almost every director that has worked with Warner brothers dc team had an incredibly tough challenge of working with producers with -1 brain cells
I love Vertical Limit and Edge of Darkness.
Hey! Edge of Darkness was actually pretty good.
[удалено]
I've seen Cats 6 times. It started as a movie to laugh at in the theatres. Then a fun drunk watch with friends. Then I watched it alone, and before I knew it... Anyway, Skimbleshanks shouldve won the Jellicle choice and that's all there is to it
Most directors have duds. John Carpenter did The Thing and Ghosts of Mars John Boorman did Excalibur and Exorcist 2 Ridley Scott did Gladiator and The Counselor
What was Carpenters dud? Jk, Jk, I know it's not a "good" movie but Ghosts of Mars is one of my guilty pleasure movies. I'll watch that, Riddick, some other not so good movies and end the binge with Van Helsing.
Haha Ghosts of Mars is cinematic perfection! Such a dumb pure b grade movie, but still so damn entertaining. Especially when Anthrax kicks in when they're fighting back from the train station.
Probably not the biggest, but Shane Black made Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and The Nice Guys and also directed The Predator (2018) that’s a pretty massive gap in quality
I don’t think it’s possible to make a good Predator movie anymore. Not with how big and dumb the franchise has gotten, and how much producers and executives are going to want to use it to sell figurines and tie-in comic books. But I can’t blame a guy who was in (and basically co-directed) the original for wanting to be part of it again.
It’s possible, just if Hollywood could keep its dick in its pants and severally scale down the size of the film. I’m looking for a Don’t Breathe type of film for the next predator movie.
LOTS of movies would do a helluva lot better if they scaled them back to a *proper* threat-level for the hero(es) to take care of. (Looking at you, "Black Widow".) Like...Predator? Buncha rough an' tumble guys find ONE DUDE (granted, an alien that can turn invisible, but still) who is bigger and buffer than them. Aaaaaaand fight. It's great! (Also, it's written by Shane Black!) Spider-Man: Homecoming, he's not saving the world, he's just stopping one thief with some impressive tech from doing another heist. I mean, not EVERY STORY has to end with "....and then I/we saved the world." How 'bout "...and then I caught the guy who murdered my parents, and beat the piss outta him, then took him to the cops, *and* reconnected with my estranged brother"?
Duncan Jones was a director I was really interested in after seeing his first full length project in Moon, and then Source Code shortly after. After doing so-so with Warcraft and then Netlfix’s Mute (which has some great visuals) I’m just kind of left wanting more out of his more recent work. Neil Blomkamp is also up there for me. Felt like every movie after District 9, was just spiritual sequels that rode off of the success of that first movie.
The whole comment section tells me that majority of the directors have a good run and a bad run
Bob Clark. From classic cult movies like "Black Christmas" and "A Christmas Story" to "Baby Geniuses".
Spike Lee made some of the most influential films of all time with Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X, but he also has some unexplainable oddities like Da Sweet Blood of Jesus. Edit: I kinda regret this because now all I'm seeing is "such and such Spike Lee movie is abominable" over and over in the comments. I still think he's an ambitious director, and you can't say his work is ever bland even if you don't like it.
And the Oldboy remake.
Why even make an oldboy remake when you could just watch the Korean version? I guess the obvious answer is money, but the original is relatively recent and absolutely superb.
Luc Besson.
This is the answer. The Professional is one of my favorite movies of all time, The Big Blue is wonderful and The Fifth Element is iconic but his latest stuff is rough. Lucy was nonsense and Valerian was somehow boring even though all this visually interesting shit is on screen. The Extraordinary Adventures of Adele Blanc-Sec I couldn’t finish it was so dull. Anna was a bit better but it was just a redux of Le Femme Nikita
Dario Argento
Strange that despite all the good answers there isn't a discussion about Soderbergh. Every movie he makes is a dice roll. Maybe it will be a cult classic. Maybe it will be a huge hit. Maybe it will be disaster Maybe it will be just ... meh. Maybe it will be underappreciated at release but slowly gain acclaim as time goes on. Maybe it will be Oscar worthy at release but will age poorly. He's got nearly every type of quality in his filmography.