And exactly in the way Hollywood is a flawed masterpiece, so is Cassavetes' Killing of a Chinese Bookie.
Neither streamline their stories into irrelevance. They actually exist in the world the characters live in. In almost real time. And this is important because it is this dead time which allows us to invest in them beyond simple genre whaterverism. Just because a film defies expectations of what a genre requires, does not make these things flaws. The flaw is expecting adherence to what we want. |
Originally Posted by Thief (Post 2346053)
This will obviously vary for everybody, but as of now, Hollywood is my #3 Tarantino, behind Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill. I think it's excellent.
Sounds like the perfect top 3 for me. |
Originally Posted by Thief (Post 2346032)
Since this is entirely subjective, these are my least favorites from several well-known directors...
PTA - Magnolia (haven't seen it in 20 years, though) Bergman - The Seventh Seal (have only seen 6 films) Cameron - Piranha II Coen - Intolerable Cruelty Fincher - Mank Hitchcock - Champagne Kubrick - Fear and Desire Lynch - Wild at Heart Mann - The Last of the Mohicans (haven't seen it in 20 years either) Nolan - Interstellar Scorsese - Gangs of New York Spielberg - The Post Tarantino - The Hateful Eight Villeneuve - Arrival Bold are ones I've seen all films from them. |
Originally Posted by Gideon58 (Post 2346078)
Personally, I love Magnolia and I don't agree with your pick for Spielberg either...I have to go with The Terminal
|
Originally Posted by Thief (Post 2346032)
Since this is entirely subjective, these are my least favorites from several well-known directors...
PTA - Magnolia (haven't seen it in 20 years, though) Bergman - The Seventh Seal (have only seen 6 films) Cameron - Piranha II Coen - Intolerable Cruelty Fincher - Mank Hitchcock - Champagne Kubrick - Fear and Desire Lynch - Wild at Heart Mann - The Last of the Mohicans (haven't seen it in 20 years either) Nolan - Interstellar Scorsese - Gangs of New York Spielberg - The Post Tarantino - The Hateful Eight Villeneuve - Arrival Bold are ones I've seen all films from them. |
Re: Bad Movies by Great Directors?
Anybody ever see one of Coppola's earliest movies? Because I really hate Tonight for Sure.
|
Originally Posted by Takoma11 (Post 2346084)
I find it shocking that The Arrival would be considered a bad movie. Likewise Magnolia or The Seventh Seal.
Originally Posted by Thief (Post 2346082)
To be fair, some of these films, I don't dislike. They just happen to be the weakest from a strong batch of directors.
Magnolia is a film I had a strong reaction back when I saw it in 1999. Was loving all of it, but the climatic event pushed me out of everything and I found it hard to come back. I've been meaning to rewatch it since, but just haven't gotten around to it. Still, not a bad film at all. The Seventh Seal is another one I've been meaning to rewatch. It was my first Bergman, probably 10 years ago, and I guess I had my expectations high and the film was not what I was expecting; but again, not bad at all. For what it's worth, I've loved every single Bergman I've seen since. |
Re: Bad Movies by Great Directors?
I know the title of the thread was "Bad Movies by Great Directors", but like I prefaced on my list, those were just the ones I consider "weakest" from those directors' filmographies, which doesn't necessarily mean they're "bad".
|
Re: Bad Movies by Great Directors?
Out of all of the Bergman film's I've seen, which is probably most of them (I haven't seen a few of his earliest), Seventh Seal must be in my bottom 5 or 6. And as good as it still is, it taking so much of the shine away from so many of his other clearly better movies, has always frustrated me.
As for Magnolia, it might be my second to least favorite Anderson (Hard 8 is clearly his weakest, even if it is still pretty good), but it is still a revelation of a film. And that 'scene', for me, might be one of the great cinematic epiphanies of that decade. I've rarely been so simultaneously moved and baffled and shocked, which is pretty much the perfect reaction I'm always looking for in any movie. |
Originally Posted by Thief (Post 2346032)
Since this is entirely subjective, these are my least favorites from several well-known directors...
PTA - Magnolia (haven't seen it in 20 years, though) Bergman - The Seventh Seal (have only seen 6 films) Cameron - Piranha II Coen - Intolerable Cruelty Fincher - Mank Hitchcock - Champagne Kubrick - Fear and Desire Lynch - Wild at Heart Mann - The Last of the Mohicans (haven't seen it in 20 years either) Nolan - Interstellar Scorsese - Gangs of New York Spielberg - The Post Tarantino - The Hateful Eight Villeneuve - Arrival Bold are ones I've seen all films from them. PTA - No really bad movies Bergman - No bad movies that I've seen. Cameron - Piranha II (agreed) Coen - The Ladykillers Unnecessary and ham-fisted remake. Fincher - Alien³ Not what it was meant to be, and a sequel too far. Hitchcock - Marnie Don't get me started. Kubrick - Killer's Kiss I'm not sure of, and I haven't seen Fear and Desire. Lynch - I'll pass. His range of quality varies, but I can't find a truly bad film. Mann - Public Enemies. It's not bad bad, but it's very bland and disappointing. Nolan - None - but Tenet was a little disappointing. Scorsese - New York, New York I couldn't stand - but I'm going to revisit it one day. Spielberg - Hook, 1941, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and The Lost World: Jurassic Park Tarantino - A couple of middling films, but no outright bad films. Villeneuve - Nothing I've seen from this filmmaker has been even remotely bad. |
Originally Posted by PHOENIX74 (Post 2346100)
Hitchcock - Marnie Don't get me started.
|
Originally Posted by PHOENIX74 (Post 2346100)
I'm considering only movies I deem pretty bad - with the same list of directors, I'll go...
PTA - No really bad movies Bergman - No bad movies that I've seen. Cameron - Piranha II (agreed) Coen - The Ladykillers Unnecessary and ham-fisted remake. Fincher - Alien³ Not what it was meant to be, and a sequel too far. Hitchcock - Marnie Don't get me started. Kubrick - Killer's Kiss I'm not sure of, and I haven't seen Fear and Desire. Lynch - I'll pass. His range of quality varies, but I can't find a truly bad film. Mann - Public Enemies. It's not bad bad, but it's very bland and disappointing. Nolan - None - but Tenet was a little disappointing. Scorsese - New York, New York I couldn't stand - but I'm going to revisit it one day. Spielberg - Hook, 1941, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and The Lost World: Jurassic Park Tarantino - A couple of middling films, but no outright bad films. Villeneuve - Nothing I've seen from this filmmaker has been even remotely bad. I sort of love Marnie, even though it is a deeply unlikeable film. And ridiculous. And offensive. But I like it and consider it at the top of Hitchcock's B reel. I've started New York, New York twice, and never got through it. The only early Scorsese I've yet to see. Not even sure what I can't abide, but I clearly can't abide. As for Spielberg, it sometimes upsets me how many movies of his I think are dreadful. And then, how many I think are just nothing ass boredoms. No one as good as him should have as many completely disposable films in their filmography. He owes the universe an apology. Ladykillers is a legitimately bad film from people who never make anything that isn't at least very good. An astonishing misstep. The only film by Lynch that I think is bad is Dune. But I get why it has its defenders. And sometimes it makes me sad that I'm not one of them. Killer's Kiss would be pretty great, if it was by anyone not named Kubrick. Expectations are killer. |
Re: Bad Movies by Great Directors?
As for Tarantino, how is Death Proof considered around here? Not forum poster Death Proof of course.
|
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2346104)
As for Tarantino, how is Death Proof considered around here? Not forum poster Death Proof of course.
Grindhouse, as a double-feature, was about as much fun as I'd had in theaters in years. It did what it aimed to do. Tarantino's entry was the weaker of the two, but it was great to see Kurt Russell in a role outside of a dad in superhero high school or serious old agent man in a Fast and Furious farce. I think it's failing is that he slowly and subtly tries to turn a grindhouse slasher into a Tarantino film. The print gets cleaner the longer you go. The dialogue is a meta-commentary on the greatness of old car movies and old school movie stunts. But whatever, it was a lark. Kudos to him for doing it. I don't count this one for or against his filmography. For me Tarantino's prime spans his first three films. He is the odd director who does not get more mature with time. You like Once Upon a Time in Hollywood? Great. I thought it was OK. It's not as good as Jackie Brown, IMO, so different strokes folks. |
Re: Bad Movies by Great Directors?
Grindhouse is great.
|
Re: Bad Movies by Great Directors?
I'm a fan of Death Proof. I know it's usually considered to be Tarantino's weakest film, but I think the main issues people tend to raise for it (too talky/too slow) aren't entirely sound and don't scratch the surface of the film's strengths.
|
Originally Posted by SuperMetro (Post 2345962)
Now one for my opinion. Don’t hate me but...
Dr Strange into The Multiverse of Madness by Sam Raimi - This movie for me was pretentious nonsense like I said in another thread and then there was a weak story that I heard a million time already. Everyone I saw it with had headaches when (this?) was over. This movie only seems to have good marks because it is of the MCU. If it was of the DCEU, it would be trashed. I like the Spider Man trilogy much better than (this?). Anyway, I don't really have specific examples of my own. On a long enough timeline, the greatest directors will always produce at least one bad film (or at least bad for them). |
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2346104)
As for Tarantino, how is Death Proof considered around here? Not forum poster Death Proof of course.
|
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2346104)
As for Tarantino, how is Death Proof considered around here? Not forum poster Death Proof of course.
My two cents on the Hollywood discussion is that it's closer to top-tier Tarantino than the rest and all that, but still a pretty long ways from Pulp, KB, and Basterds. And probably Jackie Brown. And yes I've rewatched it. It's not as rewatchable as most of his stuff, which is part of why I'm saying this, because his ability to make films that delight initially and continue to delight well after the point of almost total memorization is one of his cinematic superpowers. |
Originally Posted by Iroquois (Post 2346116)
Anyway, I don't really have specific examples of my own. On a long enough timeline, the greatest directors will always produce at least one bad film (or at least bad for them).
|
All times are GMT -3. The time now is 05:45 AM. |
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