Overrated Directors?

[Alexandro]

Godardian, I respect your point of view too...

But I don't think Spielberg is the one to blaim here. And I don't think he's simplistic when it comes to his dramatic movies (with the exception of Saving Private Ryan, which is a very annoying movie cause it could have been a masterpiece...yes, that american flag at the end and a lot of other cheesy moments turn it into a joke, but Tom Hanks performance is a truly great one of underplaying, and the first 20 minutes are, simply put, spectacular from a filmmaker's point of view).

You're right about McG,he's a zero to the left. Maybe it's just me but I'm having a hard time thinking about someone who is respected and that I consider overrated, cause I really have a lot of respect for anyone who is clearly honest about their art. Maybe the only one I can come up now is Guy Ritchie, since his movies tend to be about absolutely nothing and rely only on "coolness" and trying too hard.

Spielberg makes personal films. He keeps relying on the same themes over and over, he cares about the stuff he talks about. WWII is clearly importan for him, father son relationships too...but well, some people don't like it, but that doesn't mean he's mediocre, I mean please, open your eyes...

What bothers me the most is the amount of people named here as overrated...These supposedly harsh criticisism s of everyone's work reminds me of myself back when I was a teenager and went trough my "i hate spielberg and i'm really though" phase...now i'm more in love with everything, I don't know, maybe because I'm an actor and since I started this acting thing I tend to appreciate movies more...I don't know...maybe I'm soft, but I enjoy movies more now, so...

[godardian]

Godardian, I respect your point of view too...

But I don't think Spielberg is the one to blaim here....

Spielberg makes personal films. He keeps relying on the same themes over and over, he cares about the stuff he talks about. WWII is clearly importan for him, father son relationships too...but well, some people don't like it, but that doesn't mean he's mediocre, I mean please, open your eyes...

What bothers me the most is the amount of people named here as overrated...These supposedly harsh criticisism s of everyone's work reminds me of myself back when I was a teenager and went trough my "i hate spielberg and i'm really though" phase...now i'm more in love with everything, I don't know, maybe because I'm an actor and since I started this acting thing I tend to appreciate movies more...I don't know...maybe I'm soft, but I enjoy movies more now, so...

On this I can agree with you: It always takes a tremendous effort for a large group of people to make a feature film whether it turns out well or not, and I appreciate that effort. My criticisms may seem harsh, but let me reassure you that when I say a film is bad or I don't like a director, I'm saying, "They tried and failed" or "their approach creates untoward effects for the medium," not "They never should've tried" or "they're purest evil."

If Spielberg's films are, indeed, personal, then I guess the cause for the lack of passion may be that he's using his ability to create a world on film to reassure himself...? I guess what I'm saying is: I see what's there in his films as very, very bland. Whether it's bland for professional reasons (which I strongly suspect) or bland for personal reasons is secondary, though of great interest to me.

I do try not to inflict my preconceived notions onto a film. I look at what's there, I experience it, keep my eyes and ears open to as much as possible, have my intial ("gut") reaction, and then I work backwards from there as to why I loved/hated/was indifferent to a film.

[cowboykurtis]

This whole thread makes me wonder if any of you even like movies?

I LOVE movies, but it's probably because of that that I'm so damn picky. Liking movies doesn't mean never disagreeing with a perception of greatness, does it? It sucks to have your own beloved directors/films slagged off, but I find that kind of thing can actually give me a renewed surge of (protective) love for them.

out of sincere curiosity -- are you a single 40 year old film theory professor at a small liberal arts university?

[cowboykurtis]

If Spielberg's films are, indeed, personal, then I guess the cause for the lack of passion may be that he's using his ability to create a world on film to reassure himself...? I don't go for that.
.

ever conisder that you can not relate to his passion? disinterest does not mean mediocrity.

[godardian]

This whole thread makes me wonder if any of you even like movies?

I LOVE movies, but it's probably because of that that I'm so damn picky. Liking movies doesn't mean never disagreeing with a perception of greatness, does it? It sucks to have your own beloved directors/films slagged off, but I find that kind of thing can actually give me a renewed surge of (protective) love for them.

out of sincere curiosity -- are you a single 40 year old film theory professor at a small liberal arts university?

Pfft! I wish!

That doesn't seem like a very sincere or curious question, though, really. It seems more like you meant it as an insult, or to imply that the person you described would somehow be invalidated in this discussion (which is dead wrong- someone who spends all their time thinking/writing about film, as I would love to, would almost always have much to contribute to any discussion on the subject).

But no, I am none of those things (see the "admins abuse" thread for my lack of singleness and why kotte can't have me).

[soixante]

I used to love Spielberg.  I loved Sugarland Express, Jaws, Close Encounters and Raiders of the Lost Ark.  I used to love George Lucas as well -- THX 1138, American Graffiti, Star Wars.  Without a doubt, both of these guys are great filmmakers.  But something happened in the 80's.

When I watched Return of the Jedi, I was appalled -- surely this can't be the same "George Lucas" who did Star Wars and Empire?  When I watched Temple of Doom, I couldn't believe my eyes.  I loved Raiders, saw it 10 times -- but what the heck was this?  I've never been so disappointed by a film in my life.  Sadly, Spielberg hasn't recovered from this debacle.  I hated Color Purple even more.  

Spielberg in the 80's suffered from the twin poles of ham-fisted extravagance and gooey sentimentality.  The action scenes in Temple and Last Crusade and Jurassic are certainly extravagant, but they lack the freshness and creativity of Jaws and Raiders.  His attempts at serious drama were laughable -- overly sentimental, with John Williams' bombastic music to make everything obvious.

And then there's Hook, which shows that having a large budget and huge production values doesn't guarantee a good film.  It strains harder for laughs than any "comedy" I've ever seen, and then gets all gooey and sentimental.  This film is virtually unwatchable.  The king of cheap sentiment directs the unbearable Robin Williams, and the result is one of the worst films I've ever seen.

I guess the word that comes to mind with Spielberg is "cheesy."  His films are like McDonalds -- I prefer gourmet cuisine.  If that makes me a snob, so be it.  What's wrong with being a snob?

[Raikus]

Kevin Smith and his pathetic Askewniverse.

Couldn't disagree with you more.

[j_scott_stroup04]

Soixante:

Lucas didn't direct Jedi nor did he direct Empire.  He did write the screenplays, though.

[Ernie]

You could say that Whit Stillman, Larry Clark, and Michael Bay are as influential to me as Paul Thomas Anderson and David Gordon Green in the way that I don't want my films to be ANYTHING like theirs. I literally am going to make an effort to do this. I'll even rewatch some of their films just so I can avoid any potential similarities between my films and theirs, seriously. They might not be considered GENIUSES but as long as they have fans other than their fucking moms and dads, I'll consider them overrated. They suck dick at what they do. Not only do I consider them overrated filmmakers but I consider them flat out BAD filmmakers.

See, they are the only three I really HATE, don't accuse me of disliking movies...I think their hurting cinema, that's what I think....they're choking the life out of it in a big big way, they're fucking digging a grave for it. I don't like the films Ron Howard and The Wachowski Bros and Brett Ratner and Guy Ritchie have made (and probably all the ones they will make in the future) but I won't target them here. I don't think they're GREAT filmmakers but I don't think that what they're doing is half as dangerous and awful as Stillman, Clark, and Bay are doing. They're really doing something horrible, it scares me, really it does. Not just the quality of their films but the style as well, the way in which it is shot, the stories they're trying to tell, the way their films are written....it all scares the hell out of me. If they're the future of cinema, then I'll kill myself. Clark is obsessed with photographing girls 10-15 years younger than his little buddy Korine, Stillman just can't get over the pure HILARITY of stuffy white people, and Bay's stuck on explosions and shit....tell me when any of these things become cool and we can have fun.

[godardian]

I actually really like Whit Stillman. The others, I can see how one could be turned off by them. But why so much hate for Whit Stillman? I mean, any reason I can think of for hating Whit Stillman (the unnatural dialogue, the carefully enclosed urbane-wittiness of it all, the literary quality) would also have to be applied to Woody Allen. Not that I think Whit is as great as Woody has been, mind you, but I think he came awfully close with Metropolitan, and I really enjoyed the other two, as well.

I'm still waiting for a Metropolitan DVD release. MacG?

[j_scott_stroup04]

I just want to get this out into the open:

Godardian, you are a very persuasive arguer.  You have well thoughtout arguments and you always support your position.  Many times, you could say that your posts are on the verge of enlightening.  That is very admirable and I have much respect for you, no matter what your opinion is.

[Ernie]

I actually really like Whit Stillman. The others, I can see how one could be turned off by them. But why so much hate for Whit Stillman? I mean, any reason I can think of for hating Whit Stillman (the unnatural dialogue, the carefully enclosed urbane-wittiness of it all, the literary quality) would also have to be applied to Woody Allen. Not that I think Whit is as great as Woody has been, mind you, but I think he came awfully close with Metropolitan, and I really enjoyed the other two, as well.

I'm still waiting for a Metropolitan DVD release. MacG?

Like I said, he refuses to look outside the world of rich white people....he's even more close minded than Kevin Smith, who I respect in a way because he doesn't take himself HALF as seriously as Stillman does. He doesn't even work well within this little world that he loves so much for some reason. His vision is flat and so incredibly boring on its own....when it's set next to something of a more exciting filmmaker (like PTA or DGG), it's fucking PATHETIC how little he has done....not only has he made no effort to work in a more diverse area - he hasn't even capitalized on being familiar with this setting and these types of characters like PTA has done with the Valley or like Scorsese (or Woody Allen) has done with New York. His characters talk....that's all they do...they talk and talk and talk and talk about the same thing in every movie - sex....and it's all laden with BIG words that are just so sarcastic and AWESOME!

And yea, his dialogue sucks horribly. It's unfunny, boring, and condescendingly upper class....

WHITE GUY: Mexican girls tend to be really promiscuous.
OTHER WHITE GUY: You're such a prig.
WHITE GUY: No, I wasn't using "promiscuous" pejoratively. It's just a fact. They have completely different attitudes toward sex.
OTHER WHITE GUY: Well, I wasn't using "prig" pejoratively.

Hahahahha! Yes, now that's what I call dialogue! Good job Whit! You go get those Mexican girls bud! Damn non-whites!

(shortly after typing all this, I found that Stillman has a spanish wife - this made me laugh harder than either of the two films of his I've seen have, it's just too ironic)

[Alethia]

i kinda like him too...........now i feel bad for it lol

[Ernie]

i kinda like him too...........now i feel bad for it lol

What? Why? No no no, don't feel bad if you like him. Nobody should ever feel bad for what they like unless their like a pedophile or something man. Really though, I don't think you should give mine or anybody's opinion that kind of power cause it's up to what you like. I'm no expert, trust me on that. But this is what I think and I do have reasoning for it which godardian asked me to talk about. He probably won't change his mind after he reads my reply and that's alright...neither should you. I was just giving him the respect to respond to his question. I'm not trying to change anybody's mind. I just know what I think, that's all. I'll feel bad if I ever make anybody dislike something they once liked. I shouldn't have that power. I'm 17 years old.

[godardian]

I guess I see Stillman's view of his cozy little milieu as gently satirical. Certainly, he shares with Woody Allen the almost total exclusion of minorities from his films, but that comes with their territories. You could say their territories are dubious for this exclusion, but you can't necessarily say they're being dishonest in any way. Trying to level it out could easily lead to tokenism and falseness.

Also, I don't he's any sort of classist. His films tend to have people of different classes experiencing/talking about that issue in a way that I really don't find condescending or one-sided.

Anyways, I kinda like him. His films are innocuous, but they're not dumb. All the negative things said about Whit Stillman could be said about Woody Allen or David Mamet- they have their tiny (read: exclusive) little row to hoe, and they hoe it well. It's apparently not their aim to put the whole world into their films, which is fine if the films are good, which more often than not they are.

P.S. Pretty much the main reason I like Chasing Amy is that it has a large share of extremely Stillmanesque dialectical-discussion dialogue. When I said "unnatural dialogue," I didn't mean it as a criticism. Though it is often used as a criticism when discussing these filmmakers.