Worst Directors Of All Time

I'm sure this has been done to death already, but I have yet to see it myself so i'll make a thread on it.

It's been well established on Mofos that Christopher Nolan and Shane Meadows are two of the best auteurs in cinema at the moment. However, what about some of the worst? Lets face it, a film depends PURELY on the skill of the director.

Or what about directors who are so ****ing awful that you're less than likely to even give them a chance when you here of an upcoming project?

Directors who are obviously crap but are still being given these generous projects? What about these arseholes, eh?

What about the directors who have turned potential entertaing gems or masterpieces into a whole of ****? Lets exposed them right away, hmmm?

Uwe Boll (Alone In The Dark, BloodRayne)

A predictable one, sure, but it is beyond ****ing words just how truly crap this bloke is. I mean, he doesn't even TRY and produce something good. There is not an ounce of hope for him and he deserves all the criticism he gets.

Paul WS Anderson (Resident Evil, AVP, Event Horizen)

This bloke has had more than one chance to shine. First he had a chance at super commercial success with the adaptation of Mortal Kombat, which handled properly, could have been a franchise that could have rivaled Star Wars or Lord Of The bleedin' Rings. Even Horizen did not reach it's full potential, and the less said about Alien Vs Predator the better. How he managed to **** it all up, I don't know.

David S Goyer (Blade Trinity, ZigZag, )

Wow, talk about ruining a fairly entertaining franchise. He has not shown any considerable skill behind the camera whatsoever. I knew Blade Trinity would be bad, I just wasn't sure how much. Zig Zag wasn't truly AWFUL, but then it's a film that hardly stretches the talent in terms of direction. The performances of the leads made it bareable.



I'll leave the rest up to you lot.

Keenan Ivory Wayans. He's a repeat offender in my book, with Little Man, White Chicks, and the Scary Movie series. Somebody stop him, please.

__________________
If God had wanted me otherwise, He would have created me otherwise.

Johann von Goethe

Micheal Bay belongs on this list. As does Brett Ratner-even though the first two Rush Hour movies weren't half bad he's still a hack.

Brett Ratner I can understand, but the Michael Bay comment I must defend. Everybody seems to give Bay a lot of stick and I feel it is unfair. Most people know what to expect of Michael Bay.

He isn't going to do the most thought-provoking film, but he'll deliver some fairly decent action and escapism. I also consider him to be somewhat of a pioneer in regards to making films with stunts and special effects. Look at Transformers. I really enjoyed myself when I saw that! Trust me, you could do a LOT worse than Michael Bay.

Paul Verhoeven

Supposedly, some of his Dutch language films are excellent, but who would bother trying them out, given the wretched quality of his Hollywood oeuvre? He obviously would like to see himself as a subversive provocateur, but his films ultimately promote the misogyny and crypto-fascist politics he tries to critique. A complete, puerile failure.

Some more directors added:


Renny Harlin (Deep Blue Sea, Excorcist The Beginning, Cliffhanger)

I'll tell you what...I actually quite liked Cliffhanger. But the rest of his CV is quite embarrassing.


Francis Ford Coppola (Godfater trilogy, Apocolypse Now, Dracula)

Wow, this guy gets all the praise in the world but he really sucks, to be honest. Really, are the Godfather films really THAT good? This may come across as an exaggeration, but i'm gonna say what's been on my mind on this forum for a LONG
time...

The Godfather trilogy is the worst series of films I have seen in my entire life. They are truly awful and I actually feel I should have been paid to watch them all because they are so insipid. Also, Bram Stoker's Dracula lacked any depth, decent performances and consistent tone that would usually have accompanied such an ambitious film. Don't get me started on Apocolyse Now...the worst war film ever. The man has no style and should not have made movies. End Of.

Whatever you want to say about Coppola, he did make Dementia 13 in three days, so you might think better of him if you watch that. I think everybody has a right to express what they believe. I may disagree with it, but I don't have the time to get into it now.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

I'm sure dropping Coppola is looking for a rise but i won't give it to you

I actually think Event Horizon is pretty damned good from when i last saw it, and Mortal Kombat is a fair chunk of fun and i've always liked what i've seen of Verhoeven.

Surprised no-ones mentioned Ed Wood, thought he'd be the token director.

My personal choice, however, is one Mr Christopher Nolan

Wayans should probably be stopped, as should Brett Ratner mainly because his last projects could have been actually pretty GOOD films in the right hands.

Talking of hands, i disagree that a film depends PURELY on a director, i mean great directors have made stinkers which should alone prove there's far more to film making than that one creative input.

__________________

Did I watch the same films you did? Yeah I haven't seen Dracula yes or Godfather Part III, but all of Coppola's 70s work is brilliant.

The Godfather is the greatest film I have ever seen. The acting, the direction, the screenplay, the cinemotgraphy, everything is pitch perfect.
The Godfather Part II is one of the best sequels ever. It follows up the first film with an even more deeper, more emotionally powerful tale and a Oscar worthy performance from Al Pacino, who pretty much makes the film along with Robert Di Niro.
The Conversation brilliantly comments on the issue of privacy in a technological world that has made it easy to spy on us, and gives us a window into a man who by the final scene has experienced the utter limits of parnoia.
Apocalypse Now is amazing because it stretches the conventions of the war genre, going above and beyond the pale and delivering a haunting piece of cinema that has impressed me even after a second viewing. I think the Redux edition is almost its equal in many regards.

To say that the man has no style is ridiculous. Now I haven't seen any of his 80s or 90s work, but dude even if I end up hating those the fact that he made 4 masterpieces in the 1970s is insanely impressive, and stands out in my mind. Coppola is an autuer, and you have not provided any sort of actual evidence or a tangible position to argue or disprove otherwise.

Personally, I haven't liked anything John Waters has done, especially if it had Divine in it, but that doesn't make him one of the worst directors, I guess. Still, I won't be spending my money on his projects anytime soon...

I think Ed Wood was sooo bad that he has looped right back around to being good...

__________________
The Divide by Zero Foundation - Where the real world ends... and mine begins

Seems like John Waters has to be appreciated as a personality for one to like his films. He's like the epitome of self-indulgence and I think the unapologetic nature of his work is what attracts his fans the most. Short of that he's probably the most difficult director to defend. People are either going to love him or hate him and that's that.

I don't even know what to say about Coppola being mentioned in this thread. I mean, worst director EVER?? I'd even go one further and say most of the people mentioned don't deserve that. Not when people like Steven Seagal are directing movies, or whoever made this little gem:

This is a tough category to deal with, especially considering some of the names that are popping up on it that surprise me. But I agree that everyone is allowed their personal likes and dislikes (especially since mine can tend towards the weird end of the spectrum)...

One thing I personally think should be brought into consideration is the total body of work. One or two good films don't make someone "the best", or "the worst" in my mind, and I really don't think you can consider anyone that hasn't directed a significant number of films when thinking of names that belong on this.

Lastly, financial success of the films should be considered in whether someone is a good or bad director I think. I'm not saying that the person needs to be making all kinds of blockbusters or anything, but if the films the director makes consistently do poorly, that may be a bad sign for him/her.

Great responses so far, lads. But lets be real here, it all depends on the director. If the director is good, then he can convince the studio to give him creative freedom.

That's what I like about Nolan, ya see. He did a commercial movie in Batman Begins but he did so with the APPROVAL of Warners, not without them. To do a movie who's last installment in the franchise completely RUINED it's reputation and STILL get creative freedom from the studio big wigs says a lot about Christopher Nolan, guys.

I'm sticking with my comment... (2 or 3 up from this one)

I'm also going to say that while the director is important, very important, he or she is not always the one in charge, no matter how "good" they may be.
If you have a crap-tastic script, no real financial backing, a studio demanding things that just can't (or in some cases shouldn't) be done, actors that end up sucking big time... any of those things, and I'm sure plenty of others... your chances of making a good film go downhill quickly.



Since Nolan's name seems to keep coming up, I decided to check out his imdb file, since I don't really know his work overall very well... I was surprised when I realized that he was the director for the film the thread creator's name is from, so I guess I understand better why his name keeps coming up. There is nothing wrong with that though. Please don't take that comment the wrong way, its just interesting to realize that after you brought his name up again.

Don't get me wrong, I thought Memento was amazing, and I really liked the direction taken for Batman Begins (as well as the movie itself). But beyond that he has a total of 6 movies listed as director, including The Dark Knight being made right now.
A body of work that covers only that, in my personal opinion, doesn't qualify him to rank up there with the "biggies"...

He has made Memento, the one movie in his listing that does garner a lot of attention (and rightfully so in my opinion); 1 Batman flick that is good (and another one in the works), but I wouldn't put directing those up on a pedestal really; Insomnia, which was interesting, but honestly... ehhhh; The Prestige, which again was interesting, but still not what I'd call over-the-top praiseworthy; Doodlebug, which is actually a short, not a feature length film; Following, which I honestly don't know anything about; and the last credit is actually a listing for Doodlebug again within a group of shorts that were put together. So you are really looking at 5 feature length films, one more in the works, and a short.

After going through that, I would say that yes, he is a director of interest, someone to keep an eye on, but I wouldn't give him too much credit as a director yet...

Nice post, mate. I'm glad you too realise that Memento is a masterpiece. It saddens me a bit when you say that The Prestige was just "interesting". It's a four star quality film that has a lot more to say than just magic.

The film works as the best metaphor for the differences between auteurs and directors. Showmanship vs genuine gifts, y'know. It's a big filmmakers commentary, to say the least. How about watching it enough time. I just dont' except anybody calling the film interesting.

And I don't see where Nolan making only 6 films doesn't put him up with the big guns...after all, David Fincher AND Quentin Tarantino have made about the same amount in over 15 years of their career, perhaps they shouldn't be up there with the "biggies" too, eh? Nolan has done it in less than 10 years, mate.

Oh, and guess what, mate? THREE of Nolan's 6 films have made it onto the imdb's Top 100 list, namely Memento, The Prestige, and Batman Begins.

You also might want to look at Total Film's (The most reliable film magazine in the UK according to most) Top 100 Directors of all time...the man who "only made 6 feature films" made it to number 32, beating super heavyweights such as:
Ridley Scott (Blade Runner) ,
Roman Polanski (Chinatown),
Francois Truffaut (The 400 Blows),
andDavid Lean (Lawrence Of Arabia).

That is no mean feat, beating these legendary auteurs, and Total Film isn't a joke magazine. They happen to be highly regarded amongst filmmakers, actors and producers. Hell, even the folks at Sight and Sound consider Total Film to be a strong rival, so you have to start taking Christopher Nolan seriously. More importantly, you have to start NOW.

In addition to being the finest director, Nolan happens to be a gifted writer as well. His screenplay for Memento earned him an oscar nomination for Best Screenplay. Now, i'm not a fan of the oscars, but they did well there by acknowledging how beautiful the screenplay to this outstanding film was. But how could it not be acknowledged? Memento is the definition of a five-star film.

Since you have not seen Following, I must say that you are in for a treat. It's a fascinating debut and a great introduction into Nolan's world. As a film by itself, it's actually ***1/2. As a debut, however, it's **** quality. It's somewhat inspired by Hitchcocks earlier works, with a little bit of Taxi Driver thrown into the mix. Interesting movie that works really well. Gives new meaning to the phrase, "do what you know". Go and order it off Amazon NOW, mate.

His filmography speaks for itself:

Following ****

Memento *****

Insomnia ***

Batman Begins ****

The Prestige ****

The Dark Knight - this film has the potential to be four stars, and given the skill of the director...it will be

OK... now I think you just might be Nolan himself, just plugging your films...

...of course, that would be pretty cool too!

Go ahead and blast me for it, but I'd be happy to never hear again of another self-important, self-inflated Quentin Tarantino project.

I love J.C. for the most part and although I think he is a top director, I also think the Film, Escape from L.A., is one of the worst directed films ever...ever.

__________________

“The gladdest moment in human life, methinks, is a departure into unknown lands.” – Sir Richard Burton

I know what you mean, mate. Still, that's a tad bit harsh on Mr Tarantino. Yes, he can come across as self-indulgent and a bit arrogant, but he is undeniably talented.

I'm no fan at all. In fact, there are times where I can stand the bloke, but you have to respect his love of cinema. You can tell that he is more than passionate about movies just through his compulsory pop culture references. Yes, some people have suggested that he burrows too much, but so have many other autuers. As a director, he's scarily gifted; as a writer, he's pretty much a genius by using the aforementioned references to sharpen his signature dialogue.

When a bloke says, "Movies are my religion and God is my patron", there is some sort of honour in that kinda phrase. Well, at least if you're a movie lover.