Quote:
|
Originally Posted by evollove
Maybe we should start a simpler directors thread, w/out the gushing or pics. I feel bad inserting commentaries into dedications. (but not bad enough not to do it, I guess).
Because this is an interesting point. It seems that any director who makes more than, say, five movies is bound to have a real dud in there. I'd like to suggest that filmmaking is extrodinarily difficult and is often made by commitee. It seems that 10,000 things can (and often do) go wrong in the production, things that are out of the director's control. Also, we all have a bad year, and it's unfortunate that a director's bad year might be etched onto a film forever.
Maybe we should judge directors not by how many good ones they made, but by how few bad ones they made. In which case Fellini, Godard, Woody Allen and a host of others wouldn't make the cut. Bergman, tho, would still be standing strong, who's made maybe 5 or 6 crap movies out of, like, 40 something.
|
I'll add one more person to that. Spieldberg. And yes I do mean that. Anyone who pretty much diagrees should really get his head out of his arse as he's proven himself to be one hell of a director and able to make a movie, big or small. His bad films are probably 1941, Empire of the sun was not one I enjoyed and Hook is another one.
Kubrick is another guy whose list of bad films are minimal. Although I will say that I've not seen any of his films made before Spartacus. His films fom Spartacus onwards rarely dip below brilliant.