Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Lists and Top 10s >> RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 1:14:36 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8402
Joined: 13/4/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r

I've made my feelings clear on this list, but no Wes Anderson, Darren Aronofsky or Martin Scorcese is laughable.

Again your missing the criteria which the list is supposed to be based on. Scorsese has been making films for something like 40 years and like others have suggested is not the outstanding filmaker he once was. Anderson you could make a case for but since the Royal Tenebaums has been hit and miss and again has been around awhile now. Aronofsky is the big admission for me he has really come into his own the last few years and contures to push himself creatively.

(in reply to vad3r)
Post #: 31
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 1:29:09 PM   
Harry Tuttle


Posts: 7993
Joined: 12/11/2005
From: Sometime in the future.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r

I've made my feelings clear on this list, but no Wes Anderson, Darren Aronofsky or Martin Scorcese is laughable.

Again your missing the criteria which the list is supposed to be based on. Scorsese has been making films for something like 40 years and like others have suggested is not the outstanding filmaker he once was.


His last film was the best thing he's done since Casino for me.

quote:

Anderson you could make a case for but since the Royal Tenebaums has been hit and miss and again has been around awhile now.


No misses in his filmography as far as I'm concerned and his last film was possibly his best.

quote:

Aronofsky is the big admission for me he has really come into his own the last few years and contures to push himself creatively.


By using the same plot in 2 successive films?

I'm joking with that last one, I agree that his ommission is a bit strange.

_____________________________

Acting...Naturaaal

Your knowledge of scientific biological transmogrification is only outmatched by your zest for kung-fu treachery!

Blood Island. So called because it's the exact shape of some blood

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 32
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 1:40:03 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.
I don't think the been around a while argument really holds up, tbh. Not when PTA is number one, someone who has been making films as long as Anderson and Aronofsky. Same goes for Ramsey, she's been making films almost as long as Anderson/Aronofsky. Lars Von Trier has been making films since the 80s. So has Soderbergh. Fincher since the early 90s, Nolan since the late 90s. And look at the inclusions of Herzog and Malick. I think it simply comes down to this being the list of directors that excite the Guardian writers, I come to this conclusion because they say so in the intro to the article.

(in reply to Harry Tuttle)
Post #: 33
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 1:43:13 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8402
Joined: 13/4/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harry Tuttle


quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r

I've made my feelings clear on this list, but no Wes Anderson, Darren Aronofsky or Martin Scorcese is laughable.

Again your missing the criteria which the list is supposed to be based on. Scorsese has been making films for something like 40 years and like others have suggested is not the outstanding filmaker he once was.


His last film was the best thing he's done since Casino for me.

quote:

Anderson you could make a case for but since the Royal Tenebaums has been hit and miss and again has been around awhile now.


No misses in his filmography as far as I'm concerned and his last film was possibly his best.

quote:

Aronofsky is the big admission for me he has really come into his own the last few years and contures to push himself creatively.


By using the same plot in 2 successive films?

I'm joking with that last one, I agree that his ommission is a bit strange.

Well I still need to see Hugo so can't comment on that. But one film doesn't sudderly redeem him, overall I still find him a good director just a bit hit and miss compared to his peak. For example Midnight in Paris was Woody Allen's best film in more than a decade but he still has a lot of stinkers to make up for.

(in reply to Harry Tuttle)
Post #: 34
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:05:38 PM   
Harry Tuttle


Posts: 7993
Joined: 12/11/2005
From: Sometime in the future.
I don't think Scorsese has made a bad film, or at least a film I don't like, since Bringing Out The Dead. That's a 13 year streak of making good to brilliant films, so personally I don't think he's got anything to make up for.

Gangs may be flawed but there's enough good there to give it a pass in my opinion (Day Lewis cancels out Diaz and then some for example), The Aviator is very good, The Departed is very good despite Nicholson's best efforts to derail it, Shutter Island is a very effective thriller and Hugo is fantastic.

So yeah, no redemption required for Scorsese as far as I'm concerned.

_____________________________

Acting...Naturaaal

Your knowledge of scientific biological transmogrification is only outmatched by your zest for kung-fu treachery!

Blood Island. So called because it's the exact shape of some blood

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 35
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:13:08 PM   
Rhubarb


Posts: 24508
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: No Direction Home
I don't think even with Allen its about making up for the stinkers (of which there are a few), but just how excited can you get about a ageing director putting out another movie? Exciting suggests youth, or at least a return to something, or saying something different. Herzog and Malick make the list for different reasons, but their inclusion makes sense.

_____________________________

Team Ginge
WWLD?


quote:

ORIGINAL: FritzlFan

You organisational skills sicken me, Rhubarb.



(in reply to Harry Tuttle)
Post #: 36
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:19:21 PM   
Harry Tuttle


Posts: 7993
Joined: 12/11/2005
From: Sometime in the future.
Yeah I'm not arguing that Scorsese should have been on the list, I was just disagreeing with Elephant Boy's assertion that Scorsese no longer makes great films.

Although, saying that, I'm much more likely to be excited to see a Scorsese flick than I am a Herzog one.

_____________________________

Acting...Naturaaal

Your knowledge of scientific biological transmogrification is only outmatched by your zest for kung-fu treachery!

Blood Island. So called because it's the exact shape of some blood

(in reply to Rhubarb)
Post #: 37
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:20:58 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.
I revisited a lot of Woody's films over the last year or so and I think there's only five or six genuinely bad films. He's just unfortunate they all came in the last decade. But for a man who has been making films for over 45 years, and who writes and directs them all himself, also starring in the majority of them, it's a hell of a record.

(in reply to Rhubarb)
Post #: 38
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:23:46 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harry Tuttle

Although, saying that, I'm much more likely to be excited to see a Scorsese flick than I am a Herzog one.


Exciting is such a personal thing. Out of that list, I'm not excited for The Master, I'm interested in it, but not excited. Soderbergh, Tarantino, Nolan, Whedon, Abrams, Fincher, Reitman, none of them really excite me.

(in reply to Harry Tuttle)
Post #: 39
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:35:49 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Harry Tuttle

Although, saying that, I'm much more likely to be excited to see a Scorsese flick than I am a Herzog one.


Exciting is such a personal thing. Out of that list, I'm not excited for The Master, I'm interested in it, but not excited. Soderbergh, Tarantino, Nolan, Whedon, Abrams, Fincher, Reitman, none of them really excite me.



I'm surprised to hear you say this given you've pretty much liked everything Whedon has done so far.

_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 40
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:36:24 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8402
Joined: 13/4/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson

I don't think the been around a while argument really holds up, tbh. Not when PTA is number one, someone who has been making films as long as Anderson and Aronofsky. Same goes for Ramsey, she's been making films almost as long as Anderson/Aronofsky. Lars Von Trier has been making films since the 80s. So has Soderbergh. Fincher since the early 90s, Nolan since the late 90s. And look at the inclusions of Herzog and Malick. I think it simply comes down to this being the list of directors that excite the Guardian writers, I come to this conclusion because they say so in the intro to the article.

Yes but the appeal of someone like PTA just like with Melick or Lynch is that he is a quality over qunity director who has made five films which range from master pieces to very good in something like a seventeen year period, it would be different if he been releaseing a film every other than the quality would likely suffer. To me the list is more of a hottest/most important current directors list than a new directors list, that is why I can't understand Aronofsky not being there.

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 41
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:39:23 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson

I don't think the been around a while argument really holds up, tbh. Not when PTA is number one, someone who has been making films as long as Anderson and Aronofsky. Same goes for Ramsey, she's been making films almost as long as Anderson/Aronofsky. Lars Von Trier has been making films since the 80s. So has Soderbergh. Fincher since the early 90s, Nolan since the late 90s. And look at the inclusions of Herzog and Malick. I think it simply comes down to this being the list of directors that excite the Guardian writers, I come to this conclusion because they say so in the intro to the article.

Yes but the appeal of someone like PTA just like with Melick or Lynch is that he is a quality over qunity director who has made five films which range from master pieces to very good in something like a seventeen year period, it would be different if he been releaseing a film every other than the quality would likely suffer. To me the list is more of a hottest/most important current directors list than a new directors list, that is why I can't understand Aronofsky not being there.


But that's just your subjective opinion. I think Boogie Nights doesn't hold together and Magnolia is terrible, so he's a very hit or miss director for me, and others on the site. Malick is hated by as many as he's loved. Same for Lynch. Even hardcore Lynch fans have problems with Inland Empire. Just as there's several of us here who don't think Wes Anderson has made a bad film. You can't take your subjective opinion and say "Well this is why this director was included and this one wasn't"

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 42
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:39:59 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8402
Joined: 13/4/2006
quote:

ORIGINAL: Harry Tuttle

I don't think Scorsese has made a bad film, or at least a film I don't like, since Bringing Out The Dead. That's a 13 year streak of making good to brilliant films, so personally I don't think he's got anything to make up for.

Gangs may be flawed but there's enough good there to give it a pass in my opinion (Day Lewis cancels out Diaz and then some for example), The Aviator is very good, The Departed is very good despite Nicholson's best efforts to derail it, Shutter Island is a very effective thriller and Hugo is fantastic.

So yeah, no redemption required for Scorsese as far as I'm concerned.

Yeah Gangs is the one for me outside of DDL there is very little else to recommend it, and the Departed is solid but nothing special. I just think maybe by his high standeds of the 70s/80s he has been soft pedling a bit in recent years. Also find his documentaries a little hit and miss. Again if this was a greatest directors list then him and Allen would have a good case to be included but its not.

< Message edited by ElephantBoy -- 6/9/2012 2:42:08 PM >

(in reply to Harry Tuttle)
Post #: 43
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:41:09 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Harry Tuttle

Although, saying that, I'm much more likely to be excited to see a Scorsese flick than I am a Herzog one.


Exciting is such a personal thing. Out of that list, I'm not excited for The Master, I'm interested in it, but not excited. Soderbergh, Tarantino, Nolan, Whedon, Abrams, Fincher, Reitman, none of them really excite me.



I'm surprised to hear you say this given you've pretty much liked everything Whedon has done so far.


And I'll probably enjoy his next work too, but that doesn't mean I get excited for what he does next. I don't even know what he's got planned next, and I don't really plan to seek out the info. That's why I don't mark him down as a director who excites me.

(in reply to vad3r)
Post #: 44
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:45:08 PM   
Rhubarb


Posts: 24508
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: No Direction Home
quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson

I revisited a lot of Woody's films over the last year or so and I think there's only five or six genuinely bad films. He's just unfortunate they all came in the last decade. But for a man who has been making films for over 45 years, and who writes and directs them all himself, also starring in the majority of them, it's a hell of a record.



I take it your looking forward to see him teaming up with Roberto Begnini?

_____________________________

Team Ginge
WWLD?


quote:

ORIGINAL: FritzlFan

You organisational skills sicken me, Rhubarb.



(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 45
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:46:55 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rhubarb

quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson

I revisited a lot of Woody's films over the last year or so and I think there's only five or six genuinely bad films. He's just unfortunate they all came in the last decade. But for a man who has been making films for over 45 years, and who writes and directs them all himself, also starring in the majority of them, it's a hell of a record.



I take it your looking forward to see him teaming up with Roberto Begnini?


To be fair to Benigni, he was in one of the greatest films ever made.

(in reply to Rhubarb)
Post #: 46
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 2:49:44 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8402
Joined: 13/4/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson

I don't think the been around a while argument really holds up, tbh. Not when PTA is number one, someone who has been making films as long as Anderson and Aronofsky. Same goes for Ramsey, she's been making films almost as long as Anderson/Aronofsky. Lars Von Trier has been making films since the 80s. So has Soderbergh. Fincher since the early 90s, Nolan since the late 90s. And look at the inclusions of Herzog and Malick. I think it simply comes down to this being the list of directors that excite the Guardian writers, I come to this conclusion because they say so in the intro to the article.

Yes but the appeal of someone like PTA just like with Melick or Lynch is that he is a quality over qunity director who has made five films which range from master pieces to very good in something like a seventeen year period, it would be different if he been releaseing a film every other than the quality would likely suffer. To me the list is more of a hottest/most important current directors list than a new directors list, that is why I can't understand Aronofsky not being there.


But that's just your subjective opinion. I think Boogie Nights doesn't hold together and Magnolia is terrible, so he's a very hit or miss director for me, and others on the site. Malick is hated by as many as he's loved. Same for Lynch. Even hardcore Lynch fans have problems with Inland Empire. Just as there's several of us here who don't think Wes Anderson has made a bad film. You can't take your subjective opinion and say "Well this is why this director was included and this one wasn't"

I know its all subjective but I was just pointing out why the Guardian might have gone with someone like Anderson. Have to question over Lynch and Malick. Yes Inland Empire was not for everyone but I seem to remember hardcore Lynch fans loving it and many of them on this site gave it rave reviews upon its release so you are remembering that very differently to me, also don't agree on Malick as far as indie filmmakers ago he is one of the most highly respected by fans and critics. Anderson again is suvjective but I just think that until Moonrise Kingdom he had pretty much gone of the boil since TRT.

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 47
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 3:01:08 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy

I know its all subjective but I was just pointing out why the Guardian might have gone with someone like Anderson. Have to question over Lynch and Malick. Yes Inland Empire was not for everyone but I seem to remember hardcore Lynch fans loving it and many of them on this site gave it rave reviews upon its release so you are remembering that very differently to me, also don't agree on Malick as far as indie filmmakers ago he is one of the most highly respected by fans and critics. Anderson again is suvjective but I just think that until Moonrise Kingdom he had pretty much gone of the boil since TRT.


But again, you can't do that. Nobody can, because the article states that they're listing the directors that are exciting them. It's not about quality over quantity, or anything like that. It's the subjective opinion of one or more Guardian critic about which directors they're getting excited about. It's really that simple. It's not about great directors, or most important current directors, if it was, would they really include someone like Whedon?

As for Lynch, yes, Inland Empire was loved by many, but it was also hated by many. For a lot of the hardcore it was a step too far. Same goes for Malick, look at the Metacritic scores - 69 for The New World, 78 for The Thin Red Line. Decent scores, but not the level that suggests complete love. And that's what you're suggesting with saying their films are quality over quantity. You've picked some of my favourite directors there, but suggesting that Malick and Lynch don't split audiences is just silly. And this is hardly an indie list, it has Whedon, Nolan and Fincher.

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 48
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 3:14:27 PM   
paul_ie86


Posts: 11422
Joined: 4/1/2007
From: Chelsea Hotel #2

quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Harry Tuttle

Although, saying that, I'm much more likely to be excited to see a Scorsese flick than I am a Herzog one.


Exciting is such a personal thing. Out of that list, I'm not excited for The Master, I'm interested in it, but not excited. Soderbergh, Tarantino, Nolan, Whedon, Abrams, Fincher, Reitman, none of them really excite me.



I'm surprised to hear you say this given you've pretty much liked everything Whedon has done so far.


And I'll probably enjoy his next work too, but that doesn't mean I get excited for what he does next. I don't even know what he's got planned next, and I don't really plan to seek out the info. That's why I don't mark him down as a director who excites me.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2094064/

_____________________________

My Group Project's facebook page. Please like

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 49
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 3:16:57 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.
Oh, that's actually for real? I've heard it mentioned a lot but I had it in my head it was like a live-read.

(in reply to paul_ie86)
Post #: 50
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 3:17:00 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ
quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Harry Tuttle

Although, saying that, I'm much more likely to be excited to see a Scorsese flick than I am a Herzog one.


Exciting is such a personal thing. Out of that list, I'm not excited for The Master, I'm interested in it, but not excited. Soderbergh, Tarantino, Nolan, Whedon, Abrams, Fincher, Reitman, none of them really excite me.



I'm surprised to hear you say this given you've pretty much liked everything Whedon has done so far.


And I'll probably enjoy his next work too, but that doesn't mean I get excited for what he does next. I don't even know what he's got planned next, and I don't really plan to seek out the info. That's why I don't mark him down as a director who excites me.


Much Ado About Nothing is coming out this year. He wrote the screenplay and directed it. Shakespeare, black & white, no budget, made up almost entirely of Angel and Firefly cast members. Makes me hopeful of it breaking into your top 10.
Do you respect Whedon as an auteur/person? In terms of his artistic integrity, the fact that he does mostly everything himself, his writing of women, his down to earth/geek personality, communication with fans etc

< Message edited by vad3r -- 6/9/2012 3:22:59 PM >


_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 51
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 3:24:30 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r

Much Ado About Nothing is coming out this year. He wrote the screenplay and directed it. Shakespeare, black & white, no budget, made up mostly of Angel and Firefly cast members, makes me hopeful of it breaking into your top 10.



I think on paper there's some terrible casting choices there.

quote:

Do you respect Whedon as a person? In terms of his artistic integrity, the fact that he does everything mostly himself, his writing of women, his down to earth/geek personality, communication with fans etc


I think he's a decent writer, but Buffy was a show with more seasons I dislike than like, and the last time I watched Angel the Connor stuff was nearly unwatchable.

(in reply to vad3r)
Post #: 52
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 3:26:41 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8402
Joined: 13/4/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy

I know its all subjective but I was just pointing out why the Guardian might have gone with someone like Anderson. Have to question over Lynch and Malick. Yes Inland Empire was not for everyone but I seem to remember hardcore Lynch fans loving it and many of them on this site gave it rave reviews upon its release so you are remembering that very differently to me, also don't agree on Malick as far as indie filmmakers ago he is one of the most highly respected by fans and critics. Anderson again is suvjective but I just think that until Moonrise Kingdom he had pretty much gone of the boil since TRT.


But again, you can't do that. Nobody can, because the article states that they're listing the directors that are exciting them. It's not about quality over quantity, or anything like that. It's the subjective opinion of one or more Guardian critic about which directors they're getting excited about. It's really that simple. It's not about great directors, or most important current directors, if it was, would they really include someone like Whedon?

As for Lynch, yes, Inland Empire was loved by many, but it was also hated by many. For a lot of the hardcore it was a step too far. Same goes for Malick, look at the Metacritic scores - 69 for The New World, 78 for The Thin Red Line. Decent scores, but not the level that suggests complete love. And that's what you're suggesting with saying their films are quality over quantity. You've picked some of my favourite directors there, but suggesting that Malick and Lynch don't split audiences is just silly. And this is hardly an indie list, it has Whedon, Nolan and Fincher.


1. I can't say what I think might be behind their thinking in selecting a certain director? Of course I can after all its not like I am stating it as fact just my reading of it. Besides it is clearly a list of hot current directors because that explains why there are a number on the list who have only made a couple of films.

2. I think Lynch splits audiences more than Malick does, but again you are talking about directors with nitch audiences so really its a case of people outside of their fanbase not really getting their work. New World and Tree of Life are the two debateable Malick films but still judged against other directors work those are not what you would call bad films, so if you take his record overall it still stands up pretty well.

3. Never said it was a indie list just called Malick a indie director which he is

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 53
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 3:31:12 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy

I know its all subjective but I was just pointing out why the Guardian might have gone with someone like Anderson. Have to question over Lynch and Malick. Yes Inland Empire was not for everyone but I seem to remember hardcore Lynch fans loving it and many of them on this site gave it rave reviews upon its release so you are remembering that very differently to me, also don't agree on Malick as far as indie filmmakers ago he is one of the most highly respected by fans and critics. Anderson again is suvjective but I just think that until Moonrise Kingdom he had pretty much gone of the boil since TRT.


But again, you can't do that. Nobody can, because the article states that they're listing the directors that are exciting them. It's not about quality over quantity, or anything like that. It's the subjective opinion of one or more Guardian critic about which directors they're getting excited about. It's really that simple. It's not about great directors, or most important current directors, if it was, would they really include someone like Whedon?

As for Lynch, yes, Inland Empire was loved by many, but it was also hated by many. For a lot of the hardcore it was a step too far. Same goes for Malick, look at the Metacritic scores - 69 for The New World, 78 for The Thin Red Line. Decent scores, but not the level that suggests complete love. And that's what you're suggesting with saying their films are quality over quantity. You've picked some of my favourite directors there, but suggesting that Malick and Lynch don't split audiences is just silly. And this is hardly an indie list, it has Whedon, Nolan and Fincher.


1. I can't say what I think might be behind their thinking in selecting a certain director? Of course I can after all its not like I am stating it as fact just my reading of it. Besides it is clearly a list of hot current directors because that explains why there are a number on the list who have only made a couple of films.



But when you say things like

quote:

Yes but the appeal of someone like PTA just like with Melick or Lynch is that he is a quality over qunity director who has made five films which range from master pieces to very good in something like a seventeen year period, it would be different if he been releaseing a film every other than the quality would likely suffer.


That reads as if you're stating it as fact rather than opinion.

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 54
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 3:32:15 PM   
elab49


Posts: 54574
Joined: 1/10/2005
Isn't that still kind of imposing your own view though? Both in naming 2 films as the only debateable ones then removing part of the debate by saying 'oh, but they're not bad of course'?

Some people don't think Malick makes good films in their subjective opinion. Some, including me, like some but by no means all of his films. Lots of space in there for alots of views and an explanation of the lower scores mentioned above.

_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 55
RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World - 6/9/2012 3:34:04 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

Isn't that still kind of imposing your own view though? Both in naming 2 films as the only debateable ones then removing part of the debate by saying 'oh, but they're not bad of course'?

Some people don't think Malick makes good films in their subjective opinion. Some, including me, like some but by no means all of his films. Lots of space in there for alots of views and an explanation of the lower scores mentioned above.


Yep, this. It brings it back to seeming like you're trying to state a subjective opinion as objective.

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 56
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Lists and Top 10s >> RE: Guardian Top 25 Directors in The World Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125