https://static1.colliderimages.com/w...&h=250&dpr=1.5
After seeing the comparison with Nolan, how does Fincher stack up against one of the best blockbuster directors? I feel Cameron's filmography is more consistent, but in terms of technical aspects and details Fincher is way better. Fincher makes more cerebral movies but Cameron's are enjoyable as much as Fincher's. I gotta go with Cameron since T2 is the best out the bunch and his movies have more rewatchability but Fincher's pretty great too. |
Re: Better Director: James Cameron vs David Fincher
Fincher by a country mile.
|
Re: Better Director: James Cameron vs David Fincher
Fincher and it's not even close
|
Re: Better Director: James Cameron vs David Fincher
Both are exceptional in their own ways, but I am more of a fan of Fincher by quite a large margin.
|
Not even a contest. Fincher is special.
|
Originally Posted by Sedai (Post 2171185)
Both are exceptional in their own ways, but I am more of a fan of Fincher by quite a large margin.
Meanwhile Cameron's content is always fun and interesting, mostly because he goes into action and technology and they are intended to be for the masses.
Originally Posted by ScarletLion (Post 2171183)
Fincher by a country mile.
Originally Posted by Derek Vinyard (Post 2171184)
Fincher and it's not even close
Originally Posted by WrinkledMind (Post 2171186)
Not even a contest. Fincher is special.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by Ezrangel (Post 2171187)
I think Fincher is the better director, the way he gets performances out actors and his use of CGI is amazing especially his visual storytelling of Zodiac and Se7en (my favorite thriller) but Alien 3, Panic Room and Mank hurts his filmography a bit, since even at his worst a Cameron film is better than those 3.
Meanwhile Cameron's content is always fun and interesting, mostly because he goes into action and technology and they are intended to be for the masses. Throwing out Cameron's low-budget debut he has directed only eight features: The Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, True Lies, Titanic, and Avatar - with a slew of Avatar sequels coming. Plus a couple of documentaries. But eight narrative features in thirty-seven years. With Mank Fincher now has ten in twenty-five years, also discounting his debut. Whichever of those ten one wants to label Fincher's "worst" according to their own taste, be it The Game, Panic Room, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Mank or any of them that don't float your boat, I would ecstatically watch that Fincher movie on a loop for three days before being forced to watch Titanic, Avatar, or The Abyss again. |
Re: Better Director: James Cameron vs David Fincher
You can probably put Fincher up against any other director today, so putting him up against Cameron is almost unfair. Cameron's more of a technocrat than a filmmaker sometimes, using a feint at narrative as an excuse to advance industry tech.
The only question I'd have to think about is how I'd compare the best stuff Cameron has ever done with some of Fincher's lesser works. |
Baring the first Terminator, all of Cameron's movies are formulaic blockbusters. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy them but they aren't really pushing the boundaries.
Fincher on the other hand has done that (and continues to do that). Even in some of his ordinary movies like Benjamin Button, which didn't work for me, I appreciated his willingness to do something different. Add to that his work on projects like Mindhunter and that's why he is far better.
Originally Posted by Ezrangel (Post 2171187)
Would be a Cameron vs Nolan comparison be closer in your opinion?
I have off late been disappointed with Nolan (TDKR, Dunkirk, and Tenet), but I still appreciate his willingness to explore different ideas and present them in somewhat complex ways. This is my opinion and others can disagree. But Cameron can be compared to Spielberg for his ability to churn out blockbusters. But even here Spielberg is a far superior director, who has experimented with different ideas or even stories. So that leaves me with an even more controversial opinion which I am about to present. The better comparison would be with Michael Bay. Cameron is a far, far superior and smarter version of Bay and knows how to use slow-motion, action sequences, sound, etc discreetly and in a better manner than Bay (who just overloads your senses). |
Originally Posted by Holden Pike (Post 2171204)
I'm just checking, but you are holding Fincher's debut Alien³ against him but forgiving Cameron's Piranha II: The Spawning?
Throwing out Cameron's low-budget debut he has directed only eight features: The Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, True Lies, Titanic, and Avatar - with a slew of Avatar sequels coming. Plus a couple of documentaries. But eight narrative features in thirty-seven years. With Mank Fincher now has ten in twenty-five years, also discounting his debut. Whichever of those ten one wants to label Fincher's "worst" according to their own taste, be it The Game, Panic Room, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Mank or any of them that don't float your boat, I would ecstatically watch that Fincher movie on a loop for three days before being forced to watch Titanic, Avatar, or The Abyss again. Fincher is a better director due to being more talented in visual storytelling, but since he had Alien 3: studio interference and problems behind production, it was kinda lackluster compared to his standards. Panic Room: this is an ok movie but far, far weaker than Fight Club mostly because it was like "Insomnia" a movie that the production wanted him to do. And Mank: I personally enjoy The Game and Benjamin Button, no complains about them. But Mank (id put it above Avatar) was just good, and the third act disappointed me. Piranha isn’t listed in AFI and sight and sound profile and he left before the film ended so I am not counting that, but if I did I would give the edge to Fincher because that movie was lackluster. I don’t think quantity is important, I mean Malick directed 5 movies in 38 years right? And then went and did 3 lackluster movies that were poorly received, I doubt anyone expected that. Here's my ratings T2 ***** Aliens **** T1 *** 1/2 True Lies *** 1/2 Titanic *** 1/2 The Abyss *** Avatar ** 1/2 Se7en ***** The Social Network **** Gone Girl *** 1/2 Zodiac *** 1/2 The Game *** 1/2 Millennium *** 1/2 Fight Club *** 1\2 Benjamin Button *** Mank *** Alien 2 ** Panic Room ** As I said, by an hair..
Originally Posted by Yoda (Post 2171207)
You can probably put Fincher up against any other director today, so putting him up against Cameron is almost unfair. Cameron's more of a technocrat than a filmmaker sometimes, using a feint at narrative as an excuse to advance industry tech.
The only question I'd have to think about is how I'd compare the best stuff Cameron has ever done with some of Fincher's lesser works. I think Fincher is one of the best directors working today, besides Marty and Spielberg he’s my favorite alongside Nolan, but do you think a comparison between him and Coppola, Hitchcock and Kurosawa would be fair? As much as I love Fincher, I would still put Coppola above him. |
Originally Posted by WrinkledMind (Post 2171225)
Baring the first Terminator, all of Cameron's movies are formulaic blockbusters. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy them but they aren't really pushing the boundaries.
Fincher on the other hand has done that (and continues to do that). Even in some of his ordinary movies like Benjamin Button, which didn't work for me, I appreciated his willingness to do something different. Add to that his work on projects like Mindhunter and that's why he is far better. I have off late been disappointed with Nolan (TDKR, Dunkirk, and Tenet), but I still appreciate his willingness to explore different ideas and present them in somewhat complex ways. This is my opinion and others can disagree. But Cameron can be compared to Spielberg for his ability to churn out blockbusters. But even here Spielberg is a far superior director, who has experimented with different ideas or even stories. So that leaves me with an even more controversial opinion which I am about to present. The better comparison would be with Michael Bay. Cameron is a far, far superior and smarter version of Bay and knows how to use slow-motion, action sequences, sound, etc discreetly and in a better manner than Bay (who just overloads your senses). Regarding Nolan, i honestly get your criticism. I rate 00s Nolan above 10s Nolan but not by a big margin. Inception and TDKR were perfect. I mean, if you go until Inception, i feel that Nolan vs Fincher would be really close, putting my preference aside (I prefer Nolan) but Gone Girl (for example) was a better film than Dunkirk and something I would like to see more times and that besides Mank, Fincher remained pretty consistent meanwhile after TDKR, Nolan got worse. I think the gap between Spielberg and Cameron and Bay, is wide in both cases so it’s not comparable I guess. Yeah, I also like the style and directing of Fincher in House of Cards. |
I have nothing but good things to say about his (and his company's) contribution to tech development.
But I was only commenting on his movies. |
Originally Posted by WrinkledMind (Post 2171238)
I have nothing but good things to say about his (and his company's) contribution to tech development.
But I was only commenting on his movies. Cameron has also imagination and talent, especially in his sequels and can do action and romance too. Wouldn't say that him and Spielberg are only "popcorn directors", films like T2, Schindler's List, Raiders, Jurassic Park are well made and praised for the directing too. In 20 years, Spielberg's filmography had more quality films than anyone minus Scorsese. |
Originally Posted by Ezrangel (Post 2171229)
Zodiac *** 1/2
The Game *** 1/2 Millennium *** 1/2 Fight Club *** 1\2 I definitely don't agree there. Zodiac might just be Fincher's best film, or it is at least in the running in that regard. |
Originally Posted by Ezrangel (Post 2171187)
Would be a Cameron vs Nolan comparison be closer in your opinion? |
Originally Posted by Sedai (Post 2171247)
Zodiac and Fight Club rated the same as The Game?
I definitely don't agree there. Zodiac might just be Fincher's best film, or it is at least in the running in that regard. The Game, despite having a lot of rushed moments (which I don’t care) is just thrilling to start to finish and represent the change over someone psyche and the ego of Nicholas Van Orton, I usually rewatch that, Gone Girl and Se7en. Same issue with Fight Club, it’s a great film but the first two acts are far stronger than the third. I honestly like Gone Girl (I would give it a 9/10 in terms of ratings) and social network more because the relationship between the characters and third acts are stronger than Fight Club and Zodiac.
Originally Posted by ScarletLion (Post 2171248)
Not by much. I don't really rate Cameron. One dimensional and as Yoda said, more of a tech advancer than a meticulous technical master like Fincher is. Nolan is ok but is a touch ambitious for his own good.
I think that Inception works well, even the exposition and narrative have hold up. |
Re: Better Director: James Cameron vs David Fincher
Fincher, but it's closer than I would think... so ranking time!
I still haven't seen Mank or Piranha II. I would also take my ranking of The Abyss with a grain of salt, cause I haven't seen that film in a long, long time; easily 20 years. Finally, the 2-3-4 ranking is a toss-up. I could really swap any of those. |
Originally Posted by Ezrangel (Post 2171250)
I understand your position but would say that Interstellar, Tenet and Dunkirk are definitely ambitious but Pre-TDKR Nolan films seemed very polished in terms of script, spectacle and characters. (I really like TDKR and even Interstellar) I think that Inception works well, even the exposition and narrative have hold up. |
Originally Posted by Ezrangel (Post 2171242)
Oh no problem. I'd agree that Fincher has a better eye for detail, composition etc and his movies have more substance but there's nothing wrong with spectacle films. A regular blockbuster would be Godzilla vs Kong but not Aliens, in my opinion.
Cameron has also imagination and talent, especially in his sequels and can do action and romance too. Wouldn't say that him and Spielberg are only "popcorn directors", films like T2, Schindler's List, Raiders, Jurassic Park are well made and praised for the directing too. In 20 years, Spielberg's filmography had more quality films than anyone minus Scorsese. I will never call Spielberg a popcorn director. I didn't mean that. I was just highlighting his ability to churn out blockbusters and adding that Cameron has that, as well. I think it's an admirable quality and there's nothing wrong in that. I am definitely not snobbish about enjoying blockbusters. But I also added that Spielberg has a far wider range, but Cameron doesn't, which is a point you also seem to agree upon. |
Originally Posted by WrinkledMind (Post 2171257)
I will never call Spielberg a popcorn director. I didn't mean that. I was just highlighting his ability to churn out blockbusters and adding that Cameron has that, as well. I think it's an admirable quality and there's nothing wrong in that. I am definitely not snobbish about enjoying blockbusters. But I also added that Spielberg has a far wider range, but Cameron doesn't, which is a point you also seem to agree upon.
He got a bit worse recently but whatever miss he had, his large catalog of great films ensures he'll be one of the best directors ever.
Originally Posted by ScarletLion (Post 2171255)
TDKR was a huge disappointment for me. Inception is a good blockbuster. Insomnia and following are good too, I've yet to see the original Insomnia, big gap for me. Nolan is a very decent Hollywood director but not exactly a benchmark for cinema.
Not a benchmark like Scorsese or Cronenberg but I’d say he compares to other blockbuster directors such as (current) Ridley Scott, Del Toro, Jackson, Mendes, Cameron etc. I think TDKR criticism did hurt Nolan, I personally really liked it because Batman is my favorite character but I remember that back in the day 2010-2012 Nolan's work was rated higher than it is now. |
All times are GMT -3. The time now is 08:30 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright, ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Movie Forums