login

Author Topic: Worst directors actually employed  (Read 6466 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Andrew1911

  • Schnappi Supporter
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
  • Liked: 0
Worst directors actually employed
« on: January 26, 2007, 08:51:17 AM »
How the hell does Michael Bay keep getting work? He is a horrible director! Uwe Boll? Come on. I've got more. But I forget 'em.


Offline gammer

  • Second Banana
  • ****
  • Posts: 4012
  • Liked: 3
    • GoodTimers Hockey
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2007, 09:15:31 AM »
Uwe Boll is 'the' classic example. I guess he's employed because he works out of Germany and takes advantage of their tax breaks.


Offline mrbasehart

  • Steals from Casinos
  • *****
  • Posts: 16364
  • Liked: 2111
  • Movie-Watching Machine
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2007, 09:40:12 AM »


How the hell does Michael Bay keep getting work? He is a horrible director!

Because he makes studios lots of money.  Check out the world-wide receipts of his movies:

From boxofficemojo.com:

Bad Boys - Budget: 23 million.  World Wide Gross: 141 million.
The Rock - Budget: 75 million.  World Wide Gross: 335 million.
Armageddon - Budget: 140 million.  World Wide Gross: 554 million.
Pearl Harbor - Budget 135 million.  World Wide Gross: 449 million.
Bad Boys II - Budget 130 million.  World Wide Gross: 261 million.
The Island - Budget 126 million.  World Wide Gross 160 million.

Even The Island, which is considered a failure, has made it's money back.  I agree with you that Michael Bay is not a very good director, but as long as people keep buying the tickets, he'll make the movies.  What I do find sad is that with all that money they're making, they can't give Terry Gilliam any money to finish his Don Quixotte film.  It would even star Johnny Depp!


Offline Swish

  • Sparkles in Sunlight
  • *
  • Posts: 65
  • Liked: 1
  • Like, whoa, n'stuff.
    • My Nerdy Pretentious Myspace Blog
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2007, 09:43:17 AM »
How about Joel Schumacher?

I'm desperately trying to find one thing remotely redeeming on his filmography.

The best I can say is "Tigerland was alright... ish."
Writer and Composer of "Biohazard! ~ The Resident Evil Musical"


Offline sarcasm_made_Easy

  • Compsognathus
  • *****
  • Posts: 10320
  • Liked: 15
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2007, 09:45:19 AM »
Joel made phone booth, and as much as i am gonna get flamed for saying it i really enjoyed phone booth.


Offline Bob

  • Afraid of the Wind
  • Posts: 21333
  • Liked: 2405
  • Complete waste of time at www.robertpreed.com
    • My Stunning Home Page
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2007, 09:51:13 AM »
Joel made phone booth, and as much as i am gonna get flamed for saying it i really enjoyed phone booth.

I kinda liked it too...... (sheepish shrug of shoulders).


Offline Grillslinger

  • Magneto-cent Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 319
  • Liked: 1
    • Grillslinger's Creations
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2007, 10:32:23 AM »
I liked the Island...


I also like 8MM. *ducks*


Offline Bob

  • Afraid of the Wind
  • Posts: 21333
  • Liked: 2405
  • Complete waste of time at www.robertpreed.com
    • My Stunning Home Page
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2007, 10:39:43 AM »
I liked the Island...


Oh, so you like "Parts:  The Klonus Horor"?

P.S.   Man, I cannot wait for that to go to trial........ it will be the only time I will turn on courtv to see if it is carried live.


Offline Andrew1911

  • Schnappi Supporter
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
  • Liked: 0
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #8 on: January 26, 2007, 10:55:32 AM »


How the hell does Michael Bay keep getting work? He is a horrible director!

Because he makes studios lots of money.  Check out the world-wide receipts of his movies:

From boxofficemojo.com:

Bad Boys - Budget: 23 million.  World Wide Gross: 141 million.
The Rock - Budget: 75 million.  World Wide Gross: 335 million.
Armageddon - Budget: 140 million.  World Wide Gross: 554 million.
Pearl Harbor - Budget 135 million.  World Wide Gross: 449 million.
Bad Boys II - Budget 130 million.  World Wide Gross: 261 million.
The Island - Budget 126 million.  World Wide Gross 160 million.

Even The Island, which is considered a failure, has made it's money back.  I agree with you that Michael Bay is not a very good director, but as long as people keep buying the tickets, he'll make the movies.  What I do find sad is that with all that money they're making, they can't give Terry Gilliam any money to finish his Don Quixotte film.  It would even star Johnny Depp!

The thing is people don't see those movies for Bay. Anyone could've directed the film and people would still see it. ",


Offline mrbasehart

  • Steals from Casinos
  • *****
  • Posts: 16364
  • Liked: 2111
  • Movie-Watching Machine
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #9 on: January 26, 2007, 11:47:25 AM »
The thing is people don't see those movies for Bay. Anyone could've directed the film and people would still see it.

But that's not the point.  Despite their individual qualities, directors with winning track records are most sought after and Bay has made them a lot of money and proven to them that he can handle lots of their money.


Offline sarcasm_made_Easy

  • Compsognathus
  • *****
  • Posts: 10320
  • Liked: 15
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #10 on: January 26, 2007, 11:54:30 AM »
Quote
But that's not the point.  Despite their individual qualities, directors with winning track records are most sought after and Bay has made them a lot of money and proven to them that he can handle lots of their money.


absolutely true but explain Uwe then lol


Offline mrbasehart

  • Steals from Casinos
  • *****
  • Posts: 16364
  • Liked: 2111
  • Movie-Watching Machine
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #11 on: January 26, 2007, 11:58:15 AM »
Quote
But that's not the point.  Despite their individual qualities, directors with winning track records are most sought after and Bay has made them a lot of money and proven to them that he can handle lots of their money.


absolutely true but explain Uwe then lol

There's a decent article here:

http://www.cinemablend.com/features/Uwe-Boll-Money-For-Nothing-209.html

That explains how he's been able to make those movies. 


Offline Pak-Man

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 17127
  • Liked: 3043
  • Insert $0.25 to Play!
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #12 on: January 26, 2007, 12:05:58 PM »
Looking at the premise for most of those movies, it does say something that Mr. Bay can make them turn a profit...


Offline BathTub

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8383
  • Liked: 356
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #13 on: January 26, 2007, 12:12:54 PM »
That German tax loophole has since been closed.


Offline mrbasehart

  • Steals from Casinos
  • *****
  • Posts: 16364
  • Liked: 2111
  • Movie-Watching Machine
Re: Worst directors actually employed
« Reply #14 on: January 26, 2007, 12:23:44 PM »
That German tax loophole has since been closed.

Yeah, and it'll be interesting to see if he'll be able to make more movies in the future.  I have the feeling that now he's made a name for himself, he might be able to find employment.