Michael Bay is awesome.

James Cameron made one my favorite movies of all time... Titan... no of course not....
The Abyss. One of the most amazing things I ever saw in the theater. All blood, sweat and tears on that screen. Lucas, well I admit it. He's now a hack. THX 1138 and of course SW and AG were landmarks in filmmaking. I can make a distinction between the candyass JG of 1999-2005 and the auture or 1974. Robert Rodriguez is a genius! Not because his movies are awsome. There cool, but but because he makes the movies he wants to make, and he does it his way because he can deliver a blockbuster for 1/2 what a studio can! Michael Bay... well... PT Barnum said there was a sucker born every minuet. Michael just proved It's been a hell of a lot of minutes since 1891.
 
I thought Mariachi really sucked. I respect RR for using resources wisely, but I honestly don't know how he made it big with that movie.
 
I am a big fan of Robert Rodriguez....I think he's a very talented director, writer AND camera man!! I enjoy his movies....I like his editing and I think he makes great use of technology within a good story.

As it was said before...he's doing what he wants to do and showing everyone else it is possible.....I read his book and thought it was pretty interesting how he managed to get his start....he worked for it and encourages others to get out there and make the same thing happen.

I loved Once Upon a Time in Mexico....nice action scenes and overall fun movie to watch. :thumbsup:
 
dj200423 said:
I thought Mariachi really sucked. I respect RR for using resources wisely, but I honestly don't know how he made it big with that movie.
Click to expand...
This was made before the digital revolution. He managed to shoot an interesting fun feature film on film for $7000. That had never been done before.

Nowadays that doesn't seem like that big of a deal, everyone and their dogs are shooting movies for no costs and some are pretty good. but when Mariachi was made, he was the first true guerilla filmmaker to get noticed on a grand scale, mostly due to the cost and the fact he did it all himself.
 
Wow that's too funny.... I'm actually a big fan of RR and enjoy many of his films, but I'm pretty sure there's a reason he's not been nomitated for best director yet.... Some of the weekest performances have come from his direction ( definetly including Madsen in Sin city) I couldn't believe how bad his performance was. I think most of the Actors in Sin City took huge Pay cut's to act in it not RR making a 1mill movie paying out 49mill to actors sorry.......

the way' this thread was started is F*ck'n bizarre...... somebody get the med's....
 
I like RR more than I like his films.

Michael Bay is one of the most innovative directors in american advertising. His movies are like long commercials for short attention spans. It's like candy. Fun once in a while, but don't eat it all the time or you will get sick.

Lucas may not be a great director in the classic sense, but he is (or was if you prefer) a great storyteller. That's the essence of film for me anyway. And anybody that can make a great action film (Star Wars) comprised almost entirely of static shots must know something about making movies.

James Cameron... I can't even comment on that one.

Bruckheimer? has he even directed anything?

It's true that these directors may not get the great performances that other directors do, but that is only one aspect of directing. And lets face it, some stories can be told well without great performances.
 
Stabb_Films said:
This was made before the digital revolution. He managed to shoot an interesting fun feature film on film for $7000. That had never been done before.

Nowadays that doesn't seem like that big of a deal, everyone and their dogs are shooting movies for no costs and some are pretty good. but when Mariachi was made, he was the first true guerilla filmmaker to get noticed on a grand scale, mostly due to the cost and the fact he did it all himself.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I suppose you're right.
 
I challenge you to name one director who has not had failures. We hold these people to such high standards but they need room too experiment and fail. To my mind the only Director who has come close is Kubrick. His one failure was his last, Eyes was just not up to his other movies. As it is with RR. El Mariachi is all heart, and that is why it stands up. It's arguably not even a good story but you can't help but feel the love ooze out of every blood stained frame. And that energy is palpable and entertaining and makes us care for the charachters in ways that Michael Bay can't even imagine.
 
Why is "Eyes Wide Shut" a failure? I thought it was really amazing. The mood, the feel, the soundtrack, colors, etc...overall experience of it is just unbelievable. When i was watching it I said to myself that if i'm going to write a story and direct it, the mood and feel of it is Kubrick inspired.
 
At least this conversation is getting interesting.

Kubrick.

A Director whose work I just never got. Perhaps it was before my time? I don't know. I hear the name Kubrick and it does nothing for me.

For someone with 16 Directing Credits to his name and to be held in such high regard and legendary status is way over my head.

I liked Spartacus, The Shining and Full Metal Jacket but none of these films do I consider "OMG you just have to see this!" films. The rest of his films do absolutely nothing for me. In fact; I think Kubrick is the most overrated filmmaker in the history of cinema.

(This oughta spark a nice debate.)
 
If you ask me....Piffer sucks! LoL

Bay.... Yea actually Piffer, you've got a point here....he truly does suck....awfull films, ALL of them.

Lucas...the man's a genius, sure he's lost a bit of his flare but he's still pure genius. Him along with Robert Rodriguez have been trying to further the art of film making, from a technological stand point atleast. They basically introduced HD film making to the world and continue to do so with ever more success.

Cameron....Great director, definitely one of the greatest action oriented directors of all time! Terminator, T2, The Abyss, Aliens, AWESOME FILMS!

Hudson, to answer your question as to what Cameron's been doing, well he along with Lucas, Rodriguez, and Peter Jackson plan to push the envelope and begin making "3D" films a reality. Lucas will re-release all the star wars films begining 2007 in 3D, not sure of any new films on his plate besides next months EPISODE 3!!!!, can't wait and the new Indiana film. Rodriguez, well the guy's done Spy Kids 3D, laugh all you want, but the 3D experience of the film was pretty awesome, no rumors as to what he'll do next in the 3D realm, but as for films, Sin City 2 is in the talks. Pete Jackson will release a 3D LOTR along with the new King Kong film and possibly The Hobbit afterward. And Cameron's next film will be released in 2007 in the first 3D film to introduce a new 3D tehnology (and no not using those damned red and blue 3D glasses) in the science fiction adventure, "Battle Angel." Pretty exciting times we live in!

Article about Lucas and Cameron's 3D future:
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=entertainmentNews&storyID=702512
 
John_Hudson said:
At least this conversation is getting interesting.

Kubrick.

A Director whose work I just never got. Perhaps it was before my time? I don't know. I hear the name Kubrick and it does nothing for me.

For someone with 16 Directing Credits to his name and to be held in such high regard and legendary status is way over my head.

I liked Spartacus, The Shining and Full Metal Jacket but none of these films do I consider "OMG you just have to see this!" films. The rest of his films do absolutely nothing for me. In fact; I think Kubrick is the most overrated filmmaker in the history of cinema.

(This oughta spark a nice debate.)
Click to expand...

Kubrick overrated??? As Little John would say...."WHAAAAAAAAAAAAT"

Lets see, Kubrick's contributions:

Full Metal Jacket, "How tall are you private? Sir 5'7 Sir, 5'7, well I didn't know they stacked **** that high!" One of the greatest war films ever made!
The Shining, damn do I even need to say anything? AWESOME FN' film.
A Clockwork Orange, just a great film from all aspects.
Spartacus, cmon man how could you not have enjoyed Kurt Douglas's buzz cut even though they didn't do the buzz back in those times.
A Space Odyssey 2001, Holy **** what'r u smokin John, you didn't like this film?? THE sci-fi film of all sci-fi films. Ohhh is that jogging the cabin of the ship shot awesome!
Dr. Strangelove, comedy, pure cynical comedy!
Eyes Wide Shut, the mans camera work on this film is god like, as it is with all his films.

Seriously just observe the beauty of Kubrick's slow moving pans and dolly work, it's absolutely beautiful.
And his music choice is always perfect as well.
He and Akira Kurosawa are the all time greats of directing!

So who's a grade A director in your book John?
 
Here is why Bay is great and under-rated: When cinemascope was introduced, it resulted in much longer takes. There was more camera movment (which kept things interesting), but the average shot length was greatly extended so that the viewer could take in all the information at once--this was the transition between 4:3 and 2.4:1 so it was significant. Because of this, the fast cutting and constructive editing of the Soviet Montage and French Impressionism died off for the most part. Sure, the viewer was now allowed to see sweeping vistas and beautiful panoramic imagery, but the fast, kinetic cutting of previous eras was gone. Beyond this, the limited depth of focus of scope lenses (very shallow) did not allow for much creative framing. People were lined up laterally, and continuity editing was stuck to dogmatically.

Bay did something brilliant with editing, with composition, with controll over mis-en-scene and with color, really. He shoots films in scope, but has cuts which are often less than a second long. He uses constant dolly and jib shots, and regularly crosses the axis of action during conversations. Chase scenes across large locations have brief establishing shots and tons of quick cuts to close ups. What Bay does is to use figure movement to clearly establish what to look for in a scene, then relies on matches on action after that. We're not disoriented by his fast cuts (except when he wants us to be) because he's a master of directing our eyes to what is significant in the frame. His brilliant use of color--he often uses an ultrasaturated, but very limited palate--decreases the amount of information we need to take in. We may have a very crowded scene, but since it's all in a few colors, it becomes simple and space is easier to delineate. Furthermore, by refusing to stick to the axis of action, Bay sacrifices spatial clarity and relies on action itself and almost allows actions, whether conversations or the massive explosions he loves so much, to exist on their own, outside of space and time. His overlapping and elliptical editing do the same thing. His films, in their cinematography and editing bring action to the forefront and jolt the viewer like Eisenstein's Odessa Steps sequence. Seriously, the guy's not making high art, but his ability as a director of kinetic visual sequences is pretty much unparalleled. He's a master craftsman if not a great artist.
 
I think that BAy has a lot of technical merit as a director. He gets the rap that he does mostly because his films lack a certain depth in terms of plot and character development. You can see what is going to happen to just about every character 15 minutes into the film.

His visual style is great, if that type of energy is something you like. But on the downside you have a director that appears capable of only one type of film. That's not necessarily a bad thing because he does the Michael Bay thing better than anyone.
 
Bay is all popcorn. I really liked “The Rock,” but I haven’t been that much of a fan of his other stuff. I mean, it’s visually rich and usually paced well, but paint-thin. No intelligence needed (or in fact desired, most of the time).

Cameron, as much he’s like fingernails on chalkboard as a person, ALWAYS delivers the goods. They’re always superbly paced (though “The Abyss” is a little bit slower than it could be), engaging, well-structured . . . but it’s his attention to detail which really stands out. His movies, even about outlandish things, take place in a real world. Everything from scratches on body armor to license plates on the front of an underwater oil rig, it’s the details which sell his worlds, which make you believe real people live in them.

I’d make a similar argument for Lucas, though he was much better at it when he had no budget. His ‘70s work was brilliant, and he single-handedly re-defined a genre. The latest Star Wars movies have been disappointments, but that doesn’t detract from his earlier work any more than Ringo’s solo work takes away from the Beatles.
 
John_Hudson said:
At least this conversation is getting interesting.

I liked Spartacus, The Shining and Full Metal Jacket but none of these films do I consider "OMG you just have to see this!" films. The rest of his films do absolutely nothing for me. In fact; I think Kubrick is the most overrated filmmaker in the history of cinema.
Click to expand...

Full metal jacket and the shining are deffinately MUST SEE films. He was a really odd director and thats why he stood out.
 
since it was brought up about 3D developement....I have to see it for myself but I was told by a friend that James Cameron is working a new technique ....and I could be wrong so don't hold me to this!! ....but I think when making his documentary on the Tittanic, Ghost From the Abyss, (nice reference on past titles!!) there was a method of using 2 cameras side by side working from what I understood like a pair of human eyes...completely in sync with each other.

I completely forgot about this until I saw this thread....I think I'll pick up that documentary this week to check it out....I'm not even sure if it was part of the documentary or part of a special feature on the DVD.....but it sounds like James Cameron is looking to help bring forward another nice tool that once developed will just be a matter of time before us little guys have access to it!! :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top