• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Popular Director's Who You Think SUCK

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ridley Scott and Peter Jackson are both horrible to me.

edit:
PersonaX said:
Who is a good director? Heh, my friends often ask me this and it's quite difficult for me to answer this cause almost all of my favorite movies are from different directors so there's no one that really stands out... i'm really bad at making top movies/directors lists, but i gave it a try..

Some (not all!) of my favorite movies (Not in any particular order of course):

I hope you can deduce something from this.

Lost in Translation
Memories of Murder
28 Days Later
Sunshine
Chan-Wook Park's Vengeance trilogy (Lady Vengeance, Oldboy, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance)
Collateral
Leon
The Thing
Fallen Angels
Chungking Express
Blade Runner
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Gladiator
Jaws
The Bourne Identity
Magnolia
Boogie Nights
A Bittersweet life
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
Donnie Darko
Ghost in the shell
Ghost in the shell 2: Innocence
Jin Roh: The Wolf Brigade
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
Mad Max 2
Failan
American Psycho
Carrie
Address unknown
Three... Extremes
9 Souls
Hard Boiled

There has to be a lot of movies i forgot, but maybe i update my post later if something else comes to my mind.


+ PEACE GUYS!
Let me guess, you're 17.

edit 2:
HOLY FUCK I FORGOT KEVIN SMITH! I HATE THAT GUY!
 
People don't think Scorsese is only a shell of his former self? People argue this?
I don't think anyone can take away from his excellent body of work, but his good stuff was a while back.

Shutter Island was a moist film that could have been done by just about any cookie cutter filmmaker. Raging Bull not so much.
 
BobsRevenge said:
Ridley Scott and Peter Jackson are both horrible to me.

edit:

Let me guess, you're 17.

Nope, 19.

Ummm...so i can't be any older because i happen to like pretty modern films?
 
Mr. B Natural said:
People don't think Scorsese is only a shell of his former self? People argue this?
I don't think anyone can take away from his excellent body of work, but his good stuff was a while back.

Shutter Island was a moist film that could have been done by just about any cookie cutter filmmaker. Raging Bull not so much.
Shutter Island is masterful. You might not care for the story, or whatever, but the movie was expertly done. The level of polish on every scene is staggering in comparison with what most directors put out. That's true for pretty much all of his movies. The man has excellent taste in what he brings to the screen, is very intelligent, and has lucid vision.

The only movie I've seen of his that I didn't really see this in was Gangs of New York. The Departed, The Aviator, and Shutter Island are all very tasteful and very polished. There are very few directors who can touch that level, even if they make more interesting films.

edit: @PersonaX, actually 19 fits in with the age-group that those films make sense in.

edit2: What gives it away are Leon, Hard Boiled, anime, Monty Python, Donnie Darko, and American Psycho.
 
BobsRevenge said:
Shutter Island is masterful. You might not care for the story, or whatever, but the movie was expertly done. The level of polish on every scene is staggering in comparison with what most directors put out. That's true for pretty much all of his movies. The man has excellent taste in what he brings to the screen, is very intelligent, and has lucid vision.

:lol

Cinematography was nothing special at all. He didn't even bother to try to make the dream sequences interesting. I've seen Sopranos episodes do more interesting stuff. Every depiction in that movie, from the characters to the locales were taken from other movies and have become standard fare. The story was bleh. Entirely cliche bleh. Old Scorcese wouldn't have taken a giant dump on that script it was so forgettable. Scorcese used to do edgy scripts, shutter island's script is about as edgy as a disney film starring Tim Allen.

Scorcese used to hire new actors and make them amazing. Again, Raging Bull is Pesci's first movie and Cathie Moriarty's first too. Who does Scorsese use for shutter island? DaCaprio...and he doesn't even pull the role off all that well, but he's hot in hollywood now. Wait, Scorcese cares about who's hot and who's not now? Who does he use for the uninteresting dry professor character? Freggin ben kingsley. Any hollywood hack could have picked this line-up. That's NOT Scorsese. Chalk up strike 3. Cookie cutter. Pure and simple. If you didn't know it was Scorsese, you wouldn't notice. But you did notice, and there you have it. It's "masterful."

But carry on trying to guess that poster's age. It makes you seem MUCH older than him/her.
 
Mr. B Natural said:
:lol

Cinematography was nothing special at all. He didn't even bother to try to make the dream sequences interesting. I've seen Sopranos episodes do more interesting stuff. Every depiction in that movie, from the characters to the locales were taken from other movies and have become standard fare. The story was bleh. Entirely cliche bleh. Old Scorcese wouldn't have taken a giant dump on that script it was so forgettable. Scorcese used to do edgy scripts, shutter island's script is about as edgy as a disney film starring Tim Allen.

Scorcese used to hire new actors and make them amazing. Again, Raging Bull is Pesci's first movie and Cathie Moriarty's first too. Who does Scorsese use for shutter island? DaCaprio...and he doesn't even pull the role off all that well, but he's hot in hollywood now. Wait, Scorcese cares about who's hot and who's not now? Who does he use for the uninteresting dry professor character? Freggin ben kingsley. Any hollywood hack could have picked this line-up. That's NOT Scorsese. Chalk up strike 3. Cookie cutter. Pure and simple. If you didn't know it was Scorsese, you wouldn't notice. But you did notice, and there you have it. It's "masterful."

But carry on trying to guess that poster's age. It makes you seem MUCH older than him/her.
I'm only 23 dude. It's just that he picked a bunch of movies that I liked when I was around that age, and I knew people who had similar tastes.

And honestly, your post is horrible and is trying too hard.

edit: I don't like Ridley Scott and Peter Jackson because their tastes clash with mine. They are very good at what they do, I just don't like it. At all.
 
The Interrobanger said:
"SUCK" might be too strong for a few of these, but it takes a lot for me to care about anything these guys do.

Hate:
Clint Eastwood
Martin Scorsese
Kevin Smith

Incredibly overrated:
Peter Jackson
Robert Rodriguez
Ridley Scott
Wes Anderson
Quentin Tarantino
Tim Burton
Ron Howard

Brazil + 12 Monkeys + Fisher King means Gilliam has a free pass for the rest of his life.

So Pulp Fiction + Reservoir Dogs + Inglorious Basterds doesn't get QT a pass? I will agree with some of this list. Hating Scorsese just doesn't make sense.

PersonaX said:
Who is a good director? Heh, my friends often ask me this and it's quite difficult for me to answer this cause almost all of my favorite movies are from different directors so there's no one that really stands out... i'm really bad at making top movies/directors lists, but i gave it a try..

Some (not all!) of my favorite movies (Not in any particular order of course):

I hope you can deduce something from this.

Lost in Translation
Memories of Murder
28 Days Later
Sunshine
Chan-Wook Park's Vengeance trilogy (Lady Vengeance, Oldboy, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance)
Collateral
Leon
The Thing
Fallen Angels
Chungking Express
Blade Runner
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Gladiator
Jaws
The Bourne Identity
Magnolia
Boogie Nights
A Bittersweet life
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
Donnie Darko
Ghost in the shell
Ghost in the shell 2: Innocence
Jin Roh: The Wolf Brigade
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
Mad Max 2
Failan
American Psycho
Carrie
Address unknown
Three... Extremes
9 Souls
Hard Boiled

There has to be a lot of movies i forgot, but maybe i update my post later if something else comes to my mind.


+ PEACE GUYS!

Really not trying to be an asshole, but you just seem like you're a very pretentious person, just judging by some of the movies on your list. Not that you don't have a right to like the movies you do, but by saying great directors suck and putting movies like Sunshine or American Psycho on a top all time list is a little ridiculous, especially with the mess of direction that was sunshine (just IMO), Boyle is good, but definitely a messy movie.
 
Ang Lee

How can he make such depressing subjects like forbidden cowboy love and selling your body to kill a traitor BORING?
 
I definitely think Tarantino is overrated. His films are basically endless offbeat and kitschy pop culture references. I never got GAF's obsession over him or Inglorious Basterds.
 
richiek said:
His films are basically endless offbeat and kitschy pop culture references. I never got GAF's obsession over him or Inglorious Basterds.

I think you just provided the solution to your own inquiry, good sir.

Pulp Fiction made me a QT fan for life. Sorry.
 
msdstc said:
Really not trying to be an asshole, but you just seem like you're a very pretentious person, just judging by some of the movies on your list. Not that you don't have a right to like the movies you do, but by saying great directors suck and putting movies like Sunshine or American Psycho on a top all time list is a little ridiculous, especially with the mess of direction that was sunshine (just IMO), Boyle is good, but definitely a messy movie.

Well, i was just listing some movies i like. The direction wasn't the only criteria, but yeah i admit that putting American Psycho on that list was a mistake, because now when i think about it...it doesn't deserve to be on that list (it's still a nice movie), but Sunshine stays. Errr...how was i being pretentious? Just curious. Guys like Woody and Hitchcock just do not affect me the same way.
 
msdstc said:
So Pulp Fiction + Reservoir Dogs + Inglorious Basterds doesn't get QT a pass? I will agree with some of this list. Hating Scorsese just doesn't make sense.
And Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven, Alien, and Blade Runner doesn't give Scott a pass for life?
 
Dax01 said:
And Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven, Alien, and Blade Runner doesn't give Scott a pass for life?

Really didn't like Gladiator. First off, it was way too 'clean' looking. People were way too pretty and well-groomed for a supposed period piece. I realize a lot of movies suffer from that, but I recall it being especially offputting in Gladiator. And the whole 'While in captivity I befriend the helpful black man' thing was pretty stupid, and borderline offensive to me.

I only saw it once when it first came out on DVD, but I remember not reacting well to the movie as a whole.
 
Whoompthereitis said:
Really didn't like Gladiator. First off, it was way too 'clean' looking. People were way to pretty and well-groomed for a supposed period piece. I realize a lot of movies suffer from that, but I recall it being especially offputting in Gladiator. And the whole 'While in captivity I befriend the helpful black man' thing was pretty stupid, and borderline offensive to me.

Well, considering most of the main characters were high-ranking people, I expect them to be really clean. Not really sure why such a clean look is so bothersome when it comes to the characters. And how is befriending Juba offensive and stupid? He befriended many of the slaves and gladiators after his first battle in the Colosseum.
 
Dax01 said:
Well, considering most of the main characters were high-ranking people, I expect them to be really clean. And how is befriending Juba offensive and stupid? He befriended many of the slaves and gladiators after his first battle in the Colosseum.

I really don't remember enough details about the movie to debate it effectively. It's been years since I've seen it. I just remember that the movie didn't 'work' for me, and that in particular I found the scenes with the black slave stood out as kinda corny and Hollywood white guilt. Sorry- I wish I could recall more of why I didn't like it.

I do like some Ridley Scott films, but Gladiator didn't do it for me.
 
Yeah, not really sure where the idea of people being dirty mongrels prior to the invention of Irish Spring comes from.

Roman Empire of all places would be pretty spic and span and the ones who were supposed to be dirty looked dirty to me in Gladiator.

Armpits were probably ripe though since deodarant is necessary for those after a couple of hours.
 
Pretty much all the 'classic' horror directors. Craven, Romero, Raimi.......seriously, 99% of their shit sucks. The good stuff wasn't even that good.

As far as Tarantino goes, I think he's got style, but his overall 'vision' for his movies are usually kind dumb/juvenile.
 
Nerd raging here guys.


Most directors that ever dared have produced their fair amount of crap.



Ridley Scott. It took almost two decades of fail, after Blade Runner, to make Gladiator and f**king ressurect a fallen GENRE.
Black Hawk Down is the most technical competent war film ever made. Not anti war film, just a war film. Kingdom of Heaven DC, was fantastic as well. Great adventure film.
It's not that easy to do what he does. Most of your little favorite indie directors would crumble under the preasure, preparations, and magnitude of these large scale films. say what you want about the uninspired stories and cheesy hollywood clichees, but the technical things that are attatched to these massive projects, is rare indeed. Scott is a master of the scale.


Tarantino - I won't even comment on him being a ripoff or not, because it's so incredible uninteresting and irelevant. I get that perhaps he is a douchebag in real life, or that you get pissed off by the million of jocks and fratboys who adore him because he was labelled as the cool alternative rebel filmmaking in the 90s, BUT. He is obviously highly skilled. He does bring something to the table that none others do.
And he is more than cleaver mainstream pop culture dialouge too. He can do characters, he knows his film lore, and he understands what makes something entertaining. The opening of Inglorious bastards is filmmaking on a very high level. I care little that the rest of the film was not as good.
HE CAN DO MORE, than gangster film. He does evolve. He might be the ultimate DJ, who doesnt have a single innovative thought, but so what? All stories in the world that can be told have been told. We're watching the same stories over and over again, in different settings with small variations. It's how we say it. So even if he is doing stuff that has been done before, he is bringing it into a new era, for new people.
Him doing Grindhouse, opened the classic films of those times up to many many people. same thing with kung fu films with kill bill. same thing with classic war films with Bastards.


Rodriguez - I'm reading Rebel without a crew right now, and it's very interesting. Is he a good filmmaker? I don't know. A filmmaker doesnt need to have skill in a technical field. He has to make the pieces fall together. And he really made them fall together for Sin City. That film.. holy mother of god, that was just a cool film.




I can see why some people would have a problem with Lynch, but Kubrick?:O Almost all of them are outstanding if you just sit down and really give them a chance. I want to see 2001 on Blu-Ray so bad.
 
Vigilant Walrus said:
I can see why some people would have a problem with Lynch, but Kubrick?:O Almost all of them are outstanding if you just sit down and really give them a chance. I want to see 2001 on Blu-Ray so bad.
AI thread demonstrates that having to pay attention and/or possibly think as well is bad film making.

Abrams understands this. So does Bay. They know the movie doesn't even have to make sense as long as it's easy to watch.
 
Kodiak said:
rage. building.

For a Hollywood popcorn director, Abrams is making some of the most creative and entertaining stuff out there right now.

Lost
He only directed the pilot, and yeah it was a great pilot, but I think it's telling Abrams had no intention of seeing through the series to a more complete package. He was just like "I'll make these 2 hours of awesome set up, now you guys do the rest."

Cloverfield
Abrams didn't direct.

successful Star Trek reboot
Successful but flat. (I hope you're not going to argue that box office success proves greatness in a thread titled "Popular Directors you think suck."

MI3 was his weakest, but still decent
Yeah, just decent. Not worthy of all the acclaim he's getting.
 
I said it earlier in the thread, but 2001 is pretty much THE best film of all time, in every aspect.

Anybody who said Kubrick or Scorsese is crazy, by the way. The Coen Brothers people are on my list as well, as the Coens are two of the most daring and interesting filmmakers of the modern era.
 
Michael Bay obviously would be the best choice as far as modern directors are concerned, outside of The Rock I couldn't be bothered to watch any of his movies. James Cameron, only movie he has ever done I enjoyed is Aliens. Last but certaintly not least we have Ridley Scott who has been unable to pull off a movie worth sitting through since the original Alien and Blade Runner.

Tim Burton I can't agree with simply because Iv'e enjoyed all his films except for charlie and the chocolate factory. I think he just needs to get back to creating his own films.
 
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
I said it earlier in the thread, but 2001 is pretty much THE best film of all time, in every aspect.

Anybody who said Kubrick or Scorsese is crazy, by the way. The Coen Brothers people are on my list as well, as the Coens are two of the most daring and interesting filmmakers of the modern era.
I don't even think it's Kubrick best film.
 
Kodiak said:
this is a laughable post. The Departed is an absolutely great film. Insanely well edited, acted, and directed.

Shutter Island is pretty weak, for Scorsese, I'll give you that - but the cinematography was absolutely great.

Also, the Aviator kicked ass. The final shot and the plane crash scene both stand out as pretty haunting stuff.

The Departed was also pretty much a scene for scene remake of a Korean movie.

I'm surprised no one said George Lucas :lol
 
HiResDes said:
I don't even think it's Kubrick best film.

Well he's pretty much the best director ever, so one could make arguments for his other films (Paths of Glory, The Killing, Dr. Strangelove, etc.); however, 2001 is truly transcendent in just about every way and is cinema at its artistic peak, to my mind.
 
Freshmaker said:
AI thread demonstrates that having to pay attention and/or possibly think as well is bad film making.

Abrams understands this. So does Bay. They know the movie doesn't even have to make sense as long as it's easy to watch.

The CGI in Transformers 2 was so good that even blind people could see it.
 
Trojita said:
The Departed was also pretty much a scene for scene remake of a Korean movie.

I'm surprised no one said George Lucas :lol

1) Hong Kong film:)

2) Some people did say Lucas

3) Most people hate him already and think he is a fat piece of shit that "raped their childhood".
 
Whoompthereitis said:
It is now that you're here.

Do I know you?

:lol

And it is a terrible thread. For every one valid answer and explanation, theres three posts that are either flat out trolling/attention whoring, or where the person actually doesnt know what a director does.

Jason's Ultimatum said:
I'll say Martin Campbell.

Still butthurt over Casino Royale being better than all 3 Bourne's combined, eh?
 
soco said:
8 pages and no mention of say Penny Marshall. hmmmmm.
I've already defended Ron Howard, I'll stay in defense mode of the supposed mediocre.

Big is the best indentity switch movies ever and Tom Hanks was robbed at the Oscars...until he won twice.

A League of Their One was also quite decent. Again Tom Hanks ruled.
 
Well, for me there aren't many clear cut cases, my favorite directors have some duds (imo) and my least favorite have some I like. For shitty directors I'd have to say M. Night and Stone.

M. Night's shtick has gotten progressively worse, the happening or whatever the fuck it was called might be the worst thing ever released to theaters.

Stone is a nutjob, that probably affects my views somewhat, but none of his movies have done anything for me.

I've also never understood the love Tim Burton gets, his style does absolutely nothing for me. I was damn sure Alice was going to bomb though, so it shows you what I know.
 
Zeliard said:
Have you not seen the Director's Cut of Kingdom of Heaven? It's one of the greatest things I've ever watched.
I sat through half of it. While it was better than the original (which I HATED), I still couldn't sit through the whole thing. I got about half-way through before I had some shit I had to get done. Never bothered finishing. Never really cared to. Movies need to be REALLY special to hold my attention for that long, and Kingdom of Heaven wasn't that for me.

btw, anyone who doesn't like Tim Burton in this thread needs to see Big Fish before judging. That movie is incredible, and sort of grounds his other works.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom