Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

The bigger the movie, the better.


Kubrick didn't like "Fear and Desire"

George Lucas' hate for Star Wars ended his directing career for decades.


And he never forgave us for loving it.

I never saw it :)

You've never seen Star Wars?

What a different perception! I didn't know George Lucas didn't like his creation. This is shocking, it is generally incomprehensible. We love Star Wars so much. They are brilliant! The first 6 films, the rest are not very good.

Nope.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

David Lynch's Dune, he wasn't happy with creative control but I know a lot of people who regard this as a good movie.

I don't think Hitchcock was very happy with Rope but lots of people love it now.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Fincher: Alien 3

Was his debut film, and the studio interference was so bad it's caused Fincher to flatly refuse the movie even exists.

Seems like a good time to bump this thread (especially since the opening post begins with this very example!) :)
...
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...ad.php?t=42657

Ha.. I've seen a lot of rare, old, foreign movies, ones with under 100 IMDB votes, but I have no desire for Spielberg, Lucas... I might wanna watch the movie, "Alien" though, but the title puts me off a little.

Hitchcock referred to his film Rope as a "stunt". Technically it was very innovative, but I believe he felt in hindsight that J. Stewart was not the best choice for his role. I agree. The bizarre, almost surrealistic portrayal of the strangling-- Hitchcock was to return to in Frenzy.

I think the one that really embarrassed him was Under Capricorn. It was not the least bit like a Hitchcock film-- there was no suspense. He admitted he'd been proud to have snagged Ingrid Bergman, and was too impressed with her to sufficiently guide her. He also stated that Joseph Cotten was wrong for his role. It really required someone more forceful, like Cary Grant for example.

I'd see the sun rise in the west and find it less surprising than this post. Still, I'd argue that kind of stuff is all worth one watch if only for academic purposes - Alien in particular definitely shows an artistry that few films of its ilk have matched before or since.

Another example - Michael Mann and The Keep. A visibly incomplete mess that sees him working in genres he'd never touched before and never would again, plus there's supposedly enough footage to warrant a director's cut but he never wants to think about it ever again.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

That Alan Smithee guy's sure made a few clunkers. Keeps puttin' his name on them, though.

Not sure about this

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Why?

Not many probably know this, but Katsuhiro Otomo was originally disappointed with how Akira turned out. He's said that he became increasingly depressed by the quality of the animation, so much that he left halfway through the original 1988 theatrical screening, went home, and told his wife the film was a failure.

I think Jimmy Stewart might have been wrong for the role in "The Flight of the Phoenix" -- you know he's going to do the right thing, so it's just a waiting game. Still a good movie, but I always wonder how someone more ambiguous could have pulled it off. Maybe Joseph Cotten?


I wouldn't call myself a Hitchcock fan. For me, he's a guy who makes movies I resort to when I'm in a movie slump in search of something well edited, cut, no fat.. But I did like "Rope", but I agree Stewart being the wrong choice. He was perfect for "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington" because you believe him. "You Can't Take It With You!" also..

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

James Mason instead of James Stewart in Rope. That would've made the movie.

Good choice. He always seems a little evil to me, which might have helped.

You were talking about reviewers and their styles in another thread. Maybe give me review of Rope a read. I think (or at least hope) I come across in my review in a normal, down to earth tone. See what you think
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...77#post1669177

Scott's hands-on approach to the art direction and storyboarding really helped him achieve his vision for the film, a process he refined as he worked on Blade Runner, achieving even better results there, IMO. Some might call his achievements revolutionary in some way. I would argue they were at least evolutionary in their approach, and the design was unique thanks to Moebius being on board.

That's all I have for now, unless you care to elaborate further on your very brief retort.

Are you saying the film is re-/evolutionary because Ridley Scott took an atypical hands-on approach in its production?

An evolutionary hands on approach specifically in relation to the artistic elements of the film ie the art direction, scope, atmosphere, and design, yes. As for revolutionary, I am not sure I would be one of the people that would use that term, as i am not so sure it was truly revolutionary. Some would (and have) argue that.

If you would like to address Iro's (and now my) query as to why you disagree, perhaps your stance would become a bit more clear as to why you disagree?

Vincente Minnelli was doing this in the late 30s and throughout the 40s, being frequently praised for it in press at the time for his dedication to overseeing the scripting process from the beginning, to conceptualizing musical numbers, staging choreography, set design, lighting, costumes, et. al. He was even routinely reprimanded for breaking the production studio taboo of staring through the viewfinder for extended periods of time while shooting. But he's only one of many directors since at least the 1920s who were widely known for micro-managing their vision from pencil to screen.

I didn't disagree, I just said I'm not sure about it — mainly because I have no idea what they meant by the film's "artistry" since the term is extremely broad and vague. But if they meant it like you've defined it here (a hands-on approach to art and scenario design during productuon), then yeah I'd most definitely disagree since that hasn't been significantly rare since shortly after the Ford Model T debuted.

I read it before (liked it) and read it again. I like that you put in suggestions, and I totally agree with a pre-story of them in school and being influenced. I'd add that it might make Stewart's role believable, and to see exactly how the boys got the idea of an Ubermensch. In the movie, Jimmy Stewart plays his typical straight-arrow kinda guy that you can't even believe the boys were ever influenced by him.


I did like the movie in real-time. I don't think Hitchcock was looking to scare his audience. It just seemed like a domestic hide-and-seek game. I gave it a 7/10, but I don't really remember what I liked about it. It was pretty colorful for 1948, though.


I also remember your "Network" (and read it again a few minutes ago) review.. Out of curiosity, what specific recommendations would you make? I know you felt that the social messages were like a sledgehammer, but I don't know another way considering this was the media, where an anchorman is going to be explicit by diagnosing the social ills and giving his solutions.. Same with the Ned Beatty speech, which is one of my favorites. I don't think you could allude or hint at these conversations between the many characters.

Matt, Thanks for reading my review. I wouldn't call my review of Rope my best writing, but I think it's atypical of my stuff...I like James Stewart too btw. Usually he's just perfect in the movies he's cast in, Rope being one of the few exceptions.

I wish I could give you a thoughtful reply about what didn't work in Network for me. But I've only seen it once and so long ago that I don't remember anything about it. Who knows maybe one day I'll watch it again.

Admittedly, I said it was an artistry that "few films of its ilk have matched" so the ilk I was referring to is actually other horror films more than anything else and in that regard it goes above and beyond just about anything else in the genre to become transcendent, primarily on the basis of how it develops its characters, monsters, and settings (especially considering how many horrors prior to that settled for some variation on the haunted house or any isolated location but hadn't really taken it to space the way that Alien did). If Vincente Minnelli was making movies about aliens on spaceships in the 1930s then I'd concede the point.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Honestly surprised this is on its second page and no one has mention Spielberg and Hook.

You're welcome.. Yeah, try it again.. It's in my Top 10. I'd love to re-read your review :)


Again, it's one of those movies that are more relevant today.

It's funny how Spielberg did get mentioned but only by someone who thinks he's too good for Spielberg movies.

Perhaps not disliked so much, but Orson Welles seems a little dissatisfied with the final output of Touch of Evil in this clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjwqsmcH9sk

Fair points all, and thank you for the knowledge on Minnelli, which I hadn't learned about before. That said, Minelli's achievements are more evolutionary in a directorial sense as far as technique, and maybe a bit less so as far as art direction in the way I mean. I may not be articulating my meaning well enough.

Scott elevated both science fiction and horror in a way that he achieved a level of detail and vision that hadn't previously been reached. He does owe some of this to Moebius as far as the creature and alien ship/world building is concerned, but his almost obsessive attention to tiny details really created a sense of realism that wasn't seen in the genres before. He did even more of this on Blade Runner. He achieved this by almost taking over the art direction position completely, much to the chagrin of the guy holding that position at the time. Some examples would be the complex level of detail of the interior of the Nostromo when compared to say The Discovery in 2001, or in Blade Runner, Scott insisting on having printed instructions on the parking meters, which could never be legibly read on camera.

If you have examples of people who had used these techniques before him, which may well exist, I would love to check out their work, if only to see the progression before his work, and to check out what had perhaps influenced him to attempt to elevate these concepts/approaches.

Just quickly, to illustrate that i am apparently not alone in thinking along these lines. I did a quick google search and very quickly ran across several articles on Scott, and his approach to art direction and vision in these films:

A Visual Analysis of Ridley' Scott's Alien Series

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Just reading the Scott/Alien thing going on.

You know that Alien looked the way it did because of Star Wars?
After Lucas released his monster on the world, Scott said "It's about time I did something that looks like that"... and he elaborates about how sci-fi before Star Wars was always sets made from chrome and silver foil with white moulded plastic and soft lighting.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Just had a quick search... surprised to see Guillermo del Toro say he didn't like Mimic.
Sure it's a bit hokey, but del Toro has said he almost quit making Hollywood movies because of it. Apparently he didn't like Weinstein either during the production.

It's been awhile since I read about Orson Welles and Touch of Evil...but...I remember that the studio edited the film against his wishes because he was out of the country at the time. That pissed him off! and that's what he's most likely referring to, the studio cut of his film. Luckily for us, Orson kept detailed notes about scene placement and the Touch of Evil was eventually restored to the way Orson had originally intended it to be.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Orson has a habit of changing his story, but he once said "The Trial" was the one that wasn't interfered with. At another time, he said the same thing about "Chimes at Midnight".. But he also says he had complete control over "Citizen Kane" but never got a contract even close.

I've tried watching The Trial twice and shut if off both times. Last time I made about 30 minutes into the film.

I think I gave it a 6/10.. It was very suffocating, and I never liked Anthony Perkins. He's always nervy. Quite a process to expose the problems of bureaucracy and inherent guilt.


I prefer watching an interview with Orson.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Didn't Tony Kaye want his name taken off American History X? I can't remember the details (or be bothered to look them up) but I remember it became a big thing.

He was definitely pissed because Ed Norton made changes.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

John Cassavetes didn't want his name on "Big Trouble", which I've read was a favor from Peter Falk to John's family, since he was dying.. It's an awful movie, and I've never heard of a Cassavetes even mention the movie while rating his filmography.

Brandon DiCamillio
He for some reason regrets doing the CKY videos (co-directed and wrote most of them). He shunned himself after either Minghags or Hotdog Casserole. He was probably my favourite on Viva La Bam, he was hilarious. Glad he started a family though. Did get a comment back once on his YT channel, kinda happy about that.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Joel Schumacher apologized for for batman and robin.

He didn't like The Shining either. He said it was a failed experiment.

Woody Allen apparently disliked Manhattan. He reportedly said "I just thought to myself, 'At this point in my life, if this is the best I can do, they shouldn't give me money to make movies'." This is surprising considering it's one of his best. I wish I knew more about why he thought this.

Maybe it's because it's very much like Annie Hall? Even the same Woody-Diane teaming. I also liked it very much, not as much as "Annie Hall" and the only movies I liked of his, although "Interiors" is alright for a Bergman-tribute, and "Zelig" had some funny moments. The 60s comedy stuff might have had a decent line here or there, "Play it Again, Sam" had a unique thing going with Bogart, but the movie didn't move me, or "Everything You Wanted ....".. I saw a few more.

Steven Soderbergh has publicly denounced his own film The Underneath (1995). It was his fourth film. His debut Sex, Lies, and Videotape had been a surprise indie smash, a winner at Sundance and Cannes, it garnered Golden Globe and Oscar nominations and made the 26-year-old writer/director an star overnight. His followup, Kafka, was a bigger budget stylistic experiment that split critics and his third film, King of the Hill, was beloved critically but failed to make a box office or awards impact. Enter The Underneath.

The Underneath is a remake of a classic Film Noir, Criss Cross (1949). Directed by Robert Siodmak starring Burt Lancaster, Yvonne De Carlo, and Dan Duryea it involves a man's ex-wife and her thug boyfriend convincing him to be part of an armored car robbery. The remake has the same basic plot and characters with Peter Gallagher, Alison Elliott, and William Fichtner taking the leads and a supporting cast that includes Joe Don Baker, Paul Dooley, and Elisabeth Shue. I rather like The Underneath. As a huge fan of both the original movie the genre I thought Soderbergh's modern take on the material was stylishly cool with some very good performances - especially as the first major role for Fichtner, who I have been a fan of ever since - while retaining the strengths of the original.



The critics pretty roundly hated it, finding it too emotionally withdrawn and an exercise in style rather than vibrant storytelling, and it found no box office support at all. The in-your-face stylistic choices included heavy colored filters for several segments throughout. It is a visual technique Soderbergh would return to again in later films, including most evidently in Traffic. But apparently Soderbergh himself agrees with the critical consensus on this one. And he blames nobody but himself. He was burned out and found himself going through the motions rather than enthusiastic about his process and the material. He hated the experience of filming and finishing the film so much that for his next project he went back to his extremely low budget roots to make Schizopolis, which reenergized him creatively.

The next video is Soderbergh in no uncertain terms detailing how much he doesn't like The Underneath ("It's just totally sleepy"). This self-critical video as well as the entire film itself was included as a supplement to The Criterion Collection release of King of the Hill.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4H2rbxgbQo

After the micro-budgeted Schizopolois and the filmed Spalding Gray monologue Gray's Anatomy Soderbergh returned to studio and genre filmmaking in a big way with Out of Sight and The Limey which led into his Oscar year triumphs of Traffic and Erin Brockovich. For Soderbergh The Underneath was a necessary bottoming out that he rebounded from. I still like the movie but his frankness in his struggles and mindset are unusual and refreshing.

https://youtu.be/k1U6Sb7DH8k
https://youtu.be/qf3SP8JSOo0

Wow, really? I LOVED Rope

I think it's one of his best too...I liked it way better than Annie Hall

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Happens a lot with debut films... Like someone else mentioned, Fincher and Alien3, or Kubrick and Fear and Desire. James Cameron isn't very fond of Piranha II either, but then again, he wasn't supposed to direct it. He stepped in after the director was fired.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Hong Kong director Andrew Lau, hot off the heels of his Infernal Affairs trilogy (the saga that inspired Martin Scorsese's The Departed), was approached to make his Hollywood debut on The Flock, which starred Richard Gere and Claire Danes. Lau disowned the film after producers constantly interfered with the post-production.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ockmposter.jpg

Michael Biehn experienced something similar when he was approached by a producer to make his directorial debut on a indie Hong Kong-based martial arts action film called The Blood Bond, which he also co-starred. Biehn disowned the film after the producer constantly interfered and thus, Biehn considers his horror film The Victim his "real" directorial debut. The Blood Bond would be re-titled Shadowguard and it was a complete bomb upon release.

https://screenanarchy.com/assets_c/2...auto-24124.jpg

^^ this

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

Wes Craven had nothing but disdain for The Hills Have Eyes Part II (1984).I mean the film where a dog gets flashbacks of the first film?! Production had ceased part way through due to money running out.

Re: Directors Who Disliked Their Own Movie/s
 

David Lynch is remembering with sadness about his film from 1984 Dune, a movie which almost ruined him. He was the first director who brought Frank Herbert’s science-fiction book to the big screen with his 1984 film.
I remember I did read the Dune saga and watching later the film it wasn't exactly as I imagined it.
Lynch says he didn't had final cut on that film.
He had to cut some of the greatest scenes from his script because producers refused to give him the money to film them.
So, having less money in the end he was forced to work with less therefore the visual effects were poorer and the production started to look like a cheap one.
Now Denis Villeneuve is preparing Dune 2021 - which I believe will have a greater success, because he is a skilled director, but I believe David Lynch made a much better choice for the role of Paul Atreides (Muad'Dib) by choosing Kyle MacLachlan than Denis Villeneuve choosing Timothée Chalamet who looks a bit too childish for the role imo.
https://iili.io/BHQwQt.jpg

That's true. He regarded it as a "stunt" movie. He also didn't like Under Capricorn. He said that he was so dazzled with Ingrid Bergman that he, in effect, let the movie go to hell.

Alien is a masterpiece of tension and suspense. You do want to watch it.

I liked Manhattan way more than Annie Hall

If they show it on TCM, I'll try it out.

I do too. Manhattan is more epic like. "Hall" pretty much started a women's clothes fashion.

Seems to me Allen said that he never watches his films after he is finished with their productions. He never stops writing.

They do indeed sometimes. If I see it pop up I'll try to remember to tag you.

Thanks, I appreciate it... There's a thread I started for Upcoming Movies on TV, and a few others check it out and post or look as a guide.


https://www.movieforums.com/communit...58#post2158358

Thanks! I'll post there if I see it - sounds like a valuable resource.

David Fincher's Alien 3 comes to my mind. He disowned the project and disliked it.

Lynch's Dune too.

i love the subgenre of letterboxd reviews that's just directors trashing their own flops
https://letterboxd.com/joshuatrank/film/fantastic-four/
https://letterboxd.com/aarkush/film/caddyshack-ii/

Can't blame him on Alien 3.
Talk about anti-climactic, especially after the first 2 masterpieces.
1 was a monster / horror / sci-fi / thriller followed by 2 where they upped the ante by presenting a whole horde of monsters turning it into a combat / monster / action / sci-fi... and then 3 where they went back to only one monster in a much less intense setting than the Nostromo.

I agree.