Great Movies by Bad Directors

[Petey Wheatstraw]

I don't think that an individual's writing credits should play a part in a discussion of their skills as a director. When writers who themselves direct create works that are filmed by other people, those people put their own spin on the story. Writers can place their own touch and style upon a story, but their aesthetics are often very different from that of the director. Larry Cohen directed some of the most unique films ever made, writing films that were distinctively his, but when another director films one of his scripts, it is not a Larry Cohen film (Cohen's script Phone Booth, for example, was directed by Joel Schumacher). From Dusk Till Dawn and True Romance contain aspects that brand them as Quentin Tarantino films, but they are very much the works of the directors (Robert Rodriguez and Tony Scott). Scarface is a Brian De Palma film, not an Oliver Stone film. Luc Besson wrote many scripts that are interesting and unique, but his own directorial efforts were informed by different aesthetics than other directors that have filmed his scripts.

[gbeenie]

The Matrix - The Wachoskis

I have to disagree. The Matrix sequels are pretty pants (although I would credit bad screenwriting for that), but I've enjoyed all their other films.

[daltysmilth]

I don't think that an individual's writing credits should play a part in a discussion of their skills as a director. When writers who themselves direct create works that are filmed by other people, those people put their own spin on the story. Writers can place their own touch and style upon a story, but their aesthetics are often very different from that of the director. Larry Cohen directed some of the most unique films ever made, writing films that were distinctively his, but when another director films one of his scripts, it is not a Larry Cohen film (Cohen's script Phone Booth, for example, was directed by Joel Schumacher). From Dusk Till Dawn and True Romance contain aspects that brand them as Quentin Tarantino films, but they are very much the works of the directors (Robert Rodriguez and Tony Scott). Scarface is a Brian De Palma film, not an Oliver Stone film. Luc Besson wrote many scripts that are interesting and unique, but his own directorial efforts were informed by different aesthetics than other directors that have filmed his scripts.

You know, Isaac, if more of your posts were like this, you know, with reasonable-sounding points and valid arguments, and devoted fewer posts on your big-boy crushes on Ralph Bakshi and John Kricfalusi, you'd probably have fewer enemies on the board. 

We get that you like Ralph B. and John K.  That's fine.  If you enjoy their films and other works, that's your prerogative.  Many of us simply aren't interested, and disagree with your assessment of them as the greatest things to ever happen to animation.  That's our prerogative.  You don't have to justify your support of them for us.  If you like something, you can just like it, and if you don't like it, you don't have to like it.  I heard this story on Radio Lab on NPR recently where this scientist was saying that the more we have to justify liking something, the more we make ourselves like it less.  Or something like that.  If I can find the program, I'll post a link, or if anyone else wants to go to the effort, that'd be fine too.

Anyway, the point is, the more effort you put into trying to convince us that Fritz the Cat or the Ripping Friends are the most brilliant artworks ever created, the less you personally are going to believe that.  So don't rationalize why you like these things.  Just like what you like, and you'll enjoy your life more. 

[Petey Wheatstraw]

I don't think that an individual's writing credits should play a part in a discussion of their skills as a director. When writers who themselves direct create works that are filmed by other people, those people put their own spin on the story. Writers can place their own touch and style upon a story, but their aesthetics are often very different from that of the director. Larry Cohen directed some of the most unique films ever made, writing films that were distinctively his, but when another director films one of his scripts, it is not a Larry Cohen film (Cohen's script Phone Booth, for example, was directed by Joel Schumacher). From Dusk Till Dawn and True Romance contain aspects that brand them as Quentin Tarantino films, but they are very much the works of the directors (Robert Rodriguez and Tony Scott). Scarface is a Brian De Palma film, not an Oliver Stone film. Luc Besson wrote many scripts that are interesting and unique, but his own directorial efforts were informed by different aesthetics than other directors that have filmed his scripts.

You know, Isaac, if more of your posts were like this, you know, with reasonable-sounding points and valid arguments, and devoted fewer posts on your big-boy crushes on Ralph Bakshi and John Kricfalusi, you'd probably have fewer enemies on the board. 

We get that you like Ralph B. and John K.  That's fine.  If you enjoy their films and other works, that's your prerogative.  Many of us simply aren't interested, and disagree with your assessment of them as the greatest things to ever happen to animation.  That's our prerogative.  You don't have to justify your support of them for us.  If you like something, you can just like it, and if you don't like it, you don't have to like it.  I heard this story on Radio Lab on NPR recently where this scientist was saying that the more we have to justify liking something, the more we make ourselves like it less.  Or something like that.  If I can find the program, I'll post a link, or if anyone else wants to go to the effort, that'd be fine too.

Anyway, the point is, the more effort you put into trying to convince us that Fritz the Cat or the Ripping Friends are the most brilliant artworks ever created, the less you personally are going to believe that.  So don't rationalize why you like these things.  Just like what you like, and you'll enjoy your life more. 

I don't know what the hell you're talking about.

[Natureboy]

V for Vendetta was a niche film....I really didn't see a whole lot of good stuff in that one....The two Matrix sequels blew, Speed Racer was complete shit, and Bound was just OK. 

Issac, the fact that you tried to tell me that Bela Lugosi Meets a Brooklyn Gorilla was a good movie, disqualifies you from receiving my attention as someone to take seriously about what you think is good or bad cinema.

[GregMcduck]

People, there shall be no Speed Racer bashing while I'm around, you here!

[gbeenie]

Seconded. Speed Racer was the best kids' film I've seen in years.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

I view directors largely as malignent parasites that distort and pervert works of art. Every one of them except the director for "Juno" should be burned at the stake, and the fuel for their burning shall be the mutilated, sometimes still-groaning bodies of every producer in Hollywood.

[gojikranz]

how do they distort and pervert it when they create it?

[Petey Wheatstraw]

V for Vendetta was a niche film....I really didn't see a whole lot of good stuff in that one....The two Matrix sequels blew, Speed Racer was complete shit, and Bound was just OK. 

Issac, the fact that you tried to tell me that Bela Lugosi Meets a Brooklyn Gorilla was a good movie, disqualifies you from receiving my attention as someone to take seriously about what you think is good or bad cinema.

So, you're really going through with bashing me for having the opinion that a dopey low-budget '50s movie is funny? Why don't we save some time and tattoo the word "douchebag" on your head?

[Chaos]

Hmm... was that a C or an E?

[Petey Wheatstraw]

Hmm... was that a C or an E?

That's our Chaos!

http://www.divshare.com/flash/audio?myId=5983880-525

[Tripe]

That's definitely E

[Petey Wheatstraw]

That's definitely E

That's our TripeHoundRedux!

http://www.divshare.com/flash/audio?myId=5983880-525

[Tripe]

E again.

I think E should be promoted to A since it seems to be the primary function of the macro.