Watching the Oscars (SPOILERS!)

  • Thread starter Thread starter TC
  • Start date Start date
directinglegend said:
Haven't read any other posts, but I'm REALLY dissapointed that Munich didn't win anything. It was my favorite drama of last year. Granted I never saw Brokeback, but CRASH doesn't deserve to win best picture. I turned that film off half-way.
Click to expand...
WOW! why!the intensity in that film was great! i know all i hear is, it's stereotyping. well when it happens to you it's a different ball game
 
This has probably been mentioned before, but the oscar nominated shorts that were discussed in this forum earlier are all on iTunes for 1.99 each. Cheaper than a rental at blockbuster.
 
I strongly disagree with the comments directed toward your avatar's namesake...
but I also disagree with your implication that there are no better directors today.

Shyamalan is 4 for 4 since 1999 in my book (and I am excited about Lady in the Water). However, I would say:
-Spielberg
-Scorsese
-Gibson
-Scott (Ridley)
-Scott (Tony)
-Cameron
-Zemeckis
and
-Howard
all come to mind as being better at this time.
 
I think M. Night has a great amount of talent, but I think most of his movies are uneven at best. Strong debut with 6th Sense, mixed results with Unbreakable which I like more than not, I hated Signs and I hated the Village... both defied logic. Yeah, they were shot well, but the writing and stories for both films were riddled with hole and banging your head against the wall at the sheer stupidty moments. Aliens that come to a planet of water and can't open a door... jackasses that would move to the middle of nowhere when a wacko says ," I'm a bit of a history buff"...yeah, I'm sold! Let's move now!

He has a great deal of promise but a great deal of hubris as well. I don't think he is in the same league as the fellas mentioned by Chad, whom I agree with are all better than M. Night. It will be a long time before Night can top the films on Spielberg's resume alone, let alone Coppola or Scorsese.


Night is a tough one because there are strong feelings on both sides. You either love or hate him.

-Robert
 
Ought2bCommitted said:
Yeah, they were shot well, but the writing and stories for both films were riddled with hole and banging your head against the wall at the sheer stupidty moments.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to defend his writing skills. I just don't think he gets the respect he deserves as a director. That's all.
 
Ought2bCommitted said:
jackasses that would move to the middle of nowhere when a wacko says ," I'm a bit of a history buff"...yeah, I'm sold! Let's move now!
Click to expand...
Oh, nothing like the Heaven's Gate group or Jonestown <not of sarcasm> :evil:
 
angrynerdrock07 said:
I'm not trying to defend his writing skills. I just don't think he gets the respect he deserves as a director. That's all.
Click to expand...


Okay, I wrote a long explanation about why I thought Shyamalan was a good director and it didn't post. So this comment may seem out of place.
 
Blaine said:
Oh, nothing like the Heaven's Gate group or Jonestown <not of sarcasm> :evil:
Click to expand...

Yup and they were all geniuses too.

But, at least they weren't pretending to live in some undetermined past time period because they couldn't deal with their own lives. LOL.
 
Spielberg sucks, howard is good, scorsese is good even though he hasnt made anything good since goodfellas, ridleys are okay, gibson? I hope you're not talking about Mel. Cameron fell off titanic, and thats that.

Shyamalan is the best, along with Darren Aronofsky who takes second place in my top 3 directors.
 
angrynerdrock07 said:
I'm not trying to defend his writing skills. I just don't think he gets the respect he deserves as a director. That's all.
Click to expand...

I think he does, but ht gets a lot of ragging for his scripts...always the surprise ending...or wanting to be a surprise ending.

My problem with him isn't that he can't direct, he can. But he's too much of an egomaniac (George Lucas????) to let someone else fine tune his ideas. And then there's those awful cameos.
 
Ought2bCommitted said:
Yup and they were all geniuses too.

But, at least they weren't pretending to live in some undetermined past time period because they couldn't deal with their own lives. LOL.
Click to expand...
No, they were going to board the space ship in Hale-Bopp's tail because they were so well adjusted. And what the hell was going on in the middle of the jungle? :evil:
 
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.
I will not get drawn in to another Spielberg Sucks debate.


Sorry...just going totally Bart Simpson there for a second.
I'm better now.
 
FilmMakerr said:
Spielberg sucks, howard is good, scorsese is good even though he hasnt made anything good since goodfellas, ridleys are okay, gibson? I hope you're not talking about Mel. Cameron fell off titanic, and thats that.

Shyamalan is the best, along with Darren Aronofsky who takes second place in my top 3 directors.
Click to expand...

ohhh... you did NOT just say spielberg sucks :furious3: :furious3: ...

i liked Sixth Sense but to me thats M. Nights ONLY good movie everything else sucks big time...


anyway we should not get into ANOTHER Spielberg discussion here. It always turns out bad and turns into persoanl attacks. so please no Spielberg fighting please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top