what makes a good director?

C

c.g._eads

Veteran
some say the ability to direct actors. some say the director's 'eye', how he sees the composition and lighting in a shot. Some say his efficeincy, how he knows EXACTLY what he wants, eliminating wasted time. There are many other arguments you can use. But the truth is that most directors only possess one, or at most, two, of these traits. John Woo's films look awesome, but most actors working with him (who are being honest) say that the guy is a nutball, incapable of explaining what it is he wants (a listen to the Paycheck commentary confirmed this). Michael Mann is a master of mood, but he doesn't seem to ever really have a hold on the story. Spike Jonez is retarded, and yet he still makes movies that people like. We all know about George Lucas' deficiences.

My question is, what do YOU think makes a good director? And who is the best director working today? Why?

Enlighten me.
 
c.g._eads said:
Spike Jonez is retarded, and yet he still makes movies that people like.
Click to expand...
How so? :huh:

c.g._eads said:
Michael Mann is a master of mood, but he doesn't seem to ever really have a hold on the story.
Click to expand...
Now I DEFINITELY disagree with that statement. Have you seen The Insider?
 
If a sudden problem occurs, how does the director improvise? That, in combination with everything else you listed, makes a good director in my opinion.

We were doing a shot, and one of our actors needed to scream in terror. He's a very talented actor, but he had "the giggles." I wanted to go out and buy a tarantula to throw at him to make him stop laughing and scream the way I wanted him to, but I was out of money. So what did I do? I improvised! I had a couple people hold the actor down and I took out a gun (airsoft...he thought it was real). And said if he didn't stop laughing I'd blow his brains out...Then I chambered a bullet (bb) and aimed it at him. He immediately stopped laughing...And started screaming...This is also how I find my actors' personal boundaries (killing two birds with one stone saves time).

I might be a good director if I wasn't insane....Makes good stories for the commentary though...And the actors enjoy themselves because there is always a surprise waiting for them. I was surprised that they were all excited to come back at every shoot (no pun intended).
 
ha ha. good story. also a little scary. actually, i'm freaking terrified of you now.

The Insider may be Michael Mann's most narrative film (that or Collateral), but I still don't think the guy knows how to navigate his way through a story. He's too interested in stopping here or there to explore a seemingly disconnected moment (coyotes in Collateral), probably because those moments play more to his strength. I've seen The Last of The Mohicans 10 times and I still don't know what it's about. I love it though, cause it's the best marriage of music and image in the last 20 years. All I'm saying is that if this guy could focus on the story just as much as he focuses on the other things, he'd be unstoppable. Heat could have been up there with The Godfather and Goodfellas had it been more focused, don't you agree?

somewhat related question: did anybody hear the rumor that Al Pacino's character did coke in an earlier cut of Heat? Which is why he played the role so over the top? Cause in a lot of those scenes he had gotten high just beforehand? Or is this just rumor?
 
CrackerJap, you are one crazy freakin dude... and I mean that in the best possible way!

In answer to the original question, I'm a huge fan of M. Night Shyamalan... I think the reason I enjoy his films so much is that they come accross as very complete. I think the reason for this is that he is involved in every aspect of their creation from start to finish. He's almost obsessive about having his hands in every part of the process. That might make him a little difficult to work with, but I think the end result shows the value of his input... just my .02 :grin:
 
I thought Michael Mann totally screwed up Ali. I enjoyed the film to an extent. I have to rewathc Heat, it has been a while but I'm not a big fan of Mann. Collateral wasn't all that good either.
 
My favorite director has to be Takashi Miike. He pumps out 11 movies a year, has a low budget (for the most part), and is able to make these movies good despite the circumstances. His humor is very dark (which I enjoy), but his films are more than just shock factor. Many of them have deep meaning, and it's a shame that many people can't appreciate that, whether they're fans of his work or not.

What makes him a great director?
#1) Filmmaking is his life...literally. Making one feature a year is tough, and this guy makes 11 (rough average per year), all of which are of great quality.

#2) He is able to accomplish this by having people donate services for free (CG, graphic design, digital design, etc).

#3) He goes for realism whenever it is possible (ex1. A woman vomits in a dog bowl and a man eats it...This is her actual vomit. ex2. Semen falls off of a plant's leaf...Several members of his crew actually "donated" semen for this scene). This does not only make things more realistic, but it gives a good story to tell too, making certain people interested in his other work.

#4) Many of his actors are his close friends. They're people he can trust. Even if he gets an actor he can't stand, he is able to find a quality about the actor that he likes, stopping him from hating that actor. It makes working a whole lot easier.

#5) He is able to direct films of all genres. Coming of age tales, dramas, buddy flicks, camp films, horror, comedy, dark comedy, gangster flicks, etc.
 
hmm, so so far the advice for being a good director is threaten your actors' lives and use real semen whenever possible.

Sign me up!
 
CrackerJap said:
Then I chambered a bullet (bb) and aimed it at him.
Click to expand...

I've directed live television for 16 years now, and I've fantasized about that many times. Thanks for living the dream! :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top