Directors

Re: Total Film's Greatest Directors Ever List

That's a funny story, Jim.  And a good point.  Since I have no major opinion on either list, the only thing I would remark is that so rarely do the publications that publish these lists also publish the criteria as to how they arrived at the lists.  However, words are never wasted, even in speculation, which is what we are best left with here as to what Total Film was thinking.

Call me devil's advocate, but I think time will tell on M. Night Shyamalan.  The fact that he draws so much controversy in the here and now is probably going to lead to some sort of posthumous epic status in the future, provided films endure.  It's Murphy's law.  I don't think he's the greatest, but I appreciate his films and his type of filmmaking.  He's got his own style, anyway, and just because his ego has inflated far beyond the scope of his talent doesn't mean he doesn't have talent to speak of.  The Sixth Sense is a great flick anyway.

I suspect the same thing will happen for Terry Gilliam.  He's the black sheep of Hollywood right now, though, so any love he might deserve will probably not be given to him until he's not around to hear or appreciate it himself.  Everything's political.  He spends lots of money on making his movies, but he doesn't get big audiences.  Posterity will probably put him on lists in the future, saying he's a "groundbreaker" and a "visionary."  That's what his fans say now.  It'll happen...eventually.

I was fascinated by the Total Film list mostly because of the nicknames.  Like I said, I have no major opinion about positioning or the content of this list or the other one posted by Risselada.  I don't feel I've seen the required number of films to really be qualified to make a judgment on either list.  I thought it was interesting enough to discuss here, though.  Lists are always controversial because of the people who fancy themselves experts enough to make the lists to begin with.  That's why they're fun! :-)

Re: Total Film's Greatest Directors Ever List

I agree with pippin06 on the vast majority of his points.

I kinda see Shyamalan as the new Joel Schumacher.  Shall we compare?

Schumacher's Flatliners -- A fun movie with an eye for grandiosity about death and the afterlife, whatever it is.  It turns into a sort of horror flick with heart as the film wears on.  The characters find themselves haunted by the horrors they've commited themselves, but find redemption in the act of apology.

Compare to Shyamalan's The Sixth Sense -- A really fun movie with a focus on the individual about death and the afterlife, whatever it is.  In the end it's remembered as a horror film, but it has a sort of heart as well.  A small child brings realization to a middle-aged man who never realized he'd actually passed away, and brings a sort of redemption to his mother who always doubted her own mother.

Schumacher's The Lost Boys -- This makes for one hell of a popcorn flick and it's got a popular cast: The Two Coreys (as they are called) and the slightly less popular but still recognizable Diane Weist.  It's a stupid movie with very little purpose.

Compare to Shyamalan's The Village -- I found the movie to be entertaining, if a little predictable (or a lot predictable) with a few cast members who'd been getting a fair amount of press at the time like Adrien Brody.  The movie didn't really have anything new to say.  You know, it's all about how man cannot suppress his very nature of hostility and how any society has always crumbled from the Greeks to the Romans to maybe America?  It's also a stupid movie with very little purpose, but that's all The Lost Boys or The Village were ever really meant to be.

One more:  Schumacher's Batman Forever.  Stop cringing.  It does you no good.  Batman Forever was a cheap attempt to capitalize on a successful franchise.  The movie made good money, I'm sure, but it's generally regarded as the second worst Batman movie to date (the worst being Batman and Robin).

Then look at Shyamalan's Lady in the Water.  Again with Paul Giamatti, good actor that he is, in a role that makes him look childish.  In a way it's a continuation of a franchise because that's how it was advertised.  The wording in the trailer is probably close to, "An M. Night Shyamalan Film."  People went to see it because he directed.  In a way, it's a franchise.  But it's not a very good movie in any way, shape, or form.

I see a lot of commonalities between the two, and I think we just need to watch Shyamalan's films for the entertainment value and overlook his frequent plot holes, his trademark plot twists, and his hack style.  I can watch his movies just for fun in the same way that I can't say no to a viewing of The Lost Boys.

Re: Total Film's Greatest Directors Ever List

GradysGhost:

It's also a stupid movie with very little purpose, but that's all The Lost Boys or The Village were ever really meant to be.

I don't know too much about Schumacher, but from everything I've heard from Shaymalan, he thinks pretty highly of himself and his movies.  And I highly doubt if you asked him about The Village that he would say he intended it to be "a stupid movie with little purpose" even if that's really what it is.

Re: Total Film's Greatest Directors Ever List

Re: Total Film's Greatest Directors Ever List

Re: Total Film's Greatest Directors Ever List

Re: Total Film's Greatest Directors Ever List

I watched Falling Down again lately and liked it as much.  But then I get stuck in traffic by Lockheed every day, wear glasses and short-sleeved white shirts,  my wife looks like Barbara Hershey on one of her good days, and I've been thinking about running amok or amuck with my Daisy since the housing bubble burst.

Also kind of liked Tigerland. 

Re: Total Film's Greatest Directors Ever List

Re: Total Film's Greatest Directors Ever List

sonofkinski:

It IS "amok", isn't it? Never feels right to type, but I'd swear I've read it as such...

amok vs amuck

Re: Total Film's Greatest Directors Ever List