- The Best Movies of 2008
- Review: Twilight
- Review: Quantum Of Solace
- American Film Market
- Plot vs. Story
- Review: Let The Right One In
- Who Is The Best American Actor?
- Clint Eastwood Directing Techniques – Finding and Trusting Good Material
- Hollywood Lit Sales
- Foreign Pre-Sales - 2007-2008 2
admin, ben van bergen - Review: Quantum Of Solace 4
yemek tarifleri, Jenny R., tony, Suave Hippopotamus - The Marketing of Diablo Cody 3
me myself and I, Artemis, don't care about the pics - The Five Most Overrated Directors In Film 8
Michael W, Eugene, juggs mackenzie, Ashmeriel [...] - Review: Twilight 2
mystee, Nick Turner - Plot vs. Story 1
RT
The Five Most Overrated Directors In Film
January 9th, 2008
Last week, I shared with you a list of eleven directors who have impressed and influenced me with their art and craft. In other words, directors that I liked. A lot. Now it’s time to venture to the other end of the spectrum. Directors I can’t stand.
Let me start off by saying that these are not the five worst directors working today (although most of these directors do suck). Rather, this is a list of the five most overrated directors who have earned countless awards and accolades and can seemingly do no wrong in the eyes of critics and fanboys.
1. Martin Scorcese
The most overrated hack of them all, Scorcese is the king of cinematic masturbation and the “Look, ma, I’m directing” style of filmmaking. He represents almost everything that’s wrong with self-indulgent directing. The critics love him because of his ability to move the camera. If only he could move the audience. But then again, why bother telling a story when you can swoop through an overblown scene with a steadicam. Or get the brilliant actor Daniel Day-Lewis to do a Robert De Niro impersonation for over two hours opposite Leonardo DiCaprio. He finally won an Oscar when he took the depth and resonance out of the sublime Hong Kong thriller Infernal Affairs
2. Steven Spielberg
No one can deny Steven Spielberg’s talent. Then again, it takes a singular talent to reduce the Holocaust to a black and white cartoon like Spielberg did with Schindler’s List
3. Quentin Tarantino
If you want a poster boy for self-indulgence, then look no further. For those of you who want to make movies the Tarantino way, follow this simple recipe:
- Drink lots of coffee.
- Watch 20 B-movies in a row without sleeping.
- Write a script copying sequences verbatim.
- Cut up script and rearrange the sequences at random.
- Insert conversation you had with racist/sexist wino on the bus into script.
- Record for 2 hours as you channel surf through white trash oldies radio. This will be your soundtrack.
- Send script to Harvey Weinstein.
- Get a big head (literarlly and figuratively).
- Direct with big head firmly planted up ass. Tell actors to treat your dialogue like its from the Bible.
- Make sure the running time is over 2 hours.
- Go to imdb.com and look up obscure films. Claim them as your influences.
4. Christopher Nolan
Christopher Nolan is only on this list because of his tendency for lazy storytelling and his over reliance on narrative gimmicks. What do I mean by lazy storytelling? I mean that when encountered with a narrative problem, Nolan almost always takes the easy way out even if it changes the rules of the world he has set up. For instance, take Memento
5. Paul Thomas Anderson
A Scorcese wannabe that has managed to capture some of Scorcese’s cachet with the critics and fanboys, Mr. Anderson has never met a long tracking shot he didn’t love. His movies are self-indulgent, pretentious and bombastic. You want to know how to make a movie filled with sex about the porn industry boring? Watch Boogie Nights
UPDATE: Just saw There Will be Blood. Still overrated. Read what I thought here: Cinemoose Review For There Will Be Blood.
Buy the Moose a cup of coffee.
January 21st, 2008 at 7:07 pm
That’s hot!
February 11th, 2008 at 8:02 am
Man.. you sure do have an ego. What have you ever done to make a mark on the world or a name for yourself?
February 14th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
I agree 100% with you about Tarantino. Scorsese has made his share of flops, and should have already won an Oscar for Raging Bull and not The Departed. Same with Spielberg, he has given us some hits, some misses. Nolan has a great noir style that I do enjoy, so I will disagree with you on that note, same with Anderson. TWBB was a terrific film, mostly becasue I associate myself with Plainview, (the part of “Having a competition in me,” and “Working with these people.”) You forgot about Robert Rodriguez, maybe he was already posted, I don’t know, but je ,akes pure crap. I will also submit that the Coen Brothers are overrated. “Miller’s Crossing, Big Lebowski,” and “Fargo” were great, but I have been burned by “Barton Fink and I’ll say it, “No Country.” The ending of that one just left me hanging. Regardless, everyone is entited to their opinion.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:40 am
‘..falls just short of it’s accolades.’
In my opinion, it brought about some spotty character development (if any, depending on the character), and told a simple story using far, far too much time. I did gather a very solid sense of realism from the desolate landscapes, time setting, minimalist and appropriate dialog, costume, etc.. and the cinematography was certainly very well done.
Some stories, no matter how well told, or how well portrayed, are simply not worth hearing, no matter how perfectly executed. No matter how beautifully framed the scene, it may still only be a 3 out of 10.
I’m not sure it was worth watching, and I LOVE film, all genres, foreign, independent, subtitled, etc. Unless the basic story interests you, take your 2 1/2 hours and re-visit a classic like Forrest Gump or something that is simply packed full of everything this film lacks. Content.
July 4th, 2008 at 7:10 am
[...] What prevents this movie from being truly great is the pretentious over direction by overrated hack Martin Scorcese, who has admitted to abusing cocaine during the production of this movie and seems intent to [...]
July 11th, 2008 at 11:27 am
[...] lot of people love this overrated, self-indulgent movie by hack Martin Scorcese. Then again, a lot of people voted for George W. Bush twice, so there you go. Must be the same [...]
July 30th, 2008 at 3:17 am
Totally agree with you on all of the above; but I want to expound on your sentiments. The reason these directors fail to deliver the goods is because they are no longer crafting grand narratives. Instead they are trying to conform to formula. People who take the view there is nothing new under the sun forget that everyday many new words spring into existence. That’s because necessity and cultural circumstance dictate the development of words… and myths are just a more elaborate expression of words. As for Nolan… he is one of the most overrated directors ever. I’m not sure his style qualifies as noir unless you like tepid watered down noir. Moreover, the guy has serious screen direction issues and as one who works in the industry I know he tries to cover up a multitude of bad direction through choppy editing, which ignorant people praise as a stylistic choice. It’s actually a bandaid to a bigger problem — bad direction and coverage. Even the best works of Nolan will be forgotten in the years to come, just like Huston. Spielberg will continue to thrive, but even he has lost the drive to find the great new myth of our time. Another person: Scorsese. His worldview is so plagued by pessimism that he is beloved by cinephiles alone, his films having difficulty penetrating the larger audience and taking root. He’s become woefully a cliche. But I have hope that there will be those individuals who can bring the artistic innovation of Scorsese to something that is new and accessible and relevant to a large audience. It can be done, but it will take someone who understands the fundamental role of myth in our society, and has the experience to navigate the film industry and ultimately realize his or her vision.
October 6th, 2008 at 7:36 am
While I agree with what you say. Its the order I would like to change. Nolan is flavor of the month, and may well disappear but unfortunatley his influence will live on. I find his movies joyless and with out any emotional narrative whatsoever. Lacking any real identifying style, sucking any real pleasure out of watching a movie. The Darkknight will be emulated, the “Nolan noir” unstylistic dark and preposterously unreal “real world” copied nauseatingly over and over again. No2.
Speilberg the father of the blockbuster, his influence on cinema is undeniable in its destruction of good film making. Quite simply the popcorn movie mogul who begat the likes of Michael Bay and McG. what more can you say. No1.
The other three, fine, mix and match but there are worse culprits. George Lucas for example, but is he even a director? Its the insidious influence these people have that is the worse part. In the case of Lucas the toymaker its the marketing tie-ins. The Star Wars saga is nothing more than one huge commercial. Now every movie needs its tie-in.
Bring on Zack Synder or Guy Ritchie, pretenders to the to the emulation crown. Or even further back John Woo. But are Scorcese, Anderson and Tarantino that emulated, and their influence that far reaching? I not even sure that Tarantino has recieved that many accolades or that much industry respect for that matter.
In this digital age where you can shoot as much film as you like at a reduced cost. With hours and hours of footage directors become little more than editors. There is no vision here just cut and paste. Try just telling an engaging story, without all the bangs and whistles and gimicks, I am pretty sure the movie going audience isn’t all that dumb, that a cut needs to be made every other minute to stop them being distracted by .. oh I don’t know the piece of popcorn that that has fell from their slack drooling mouths.
October 17th, 2008 at 7:20 am
[...] The Five Most Overrated Directors In Film 6 juggs mackenzie, Ashmeriel, jon, Floyd [...] [...]
October 23rd, 2008 at 3:05 am
Now everyone is talking about the American economy and eclections, nice to read something different. Eugene
December 16th, 2008 at 5:49 am
I thought I was the only one who felt this way. Damn, you are observant and HONEST.
A good friend of mine said that years ago, before there was such a thing as “film school”, filmmaking was a “seat of your pants” art form…the great (and even “merely good”) directors drew from their own life experiences and vision. Now, filmmaking has become, like “fine art” (bleccchhh) “Art about art about art about art”…big on pretense, low on originality or personal vision. YAWN.
Thank you so much!