I don’t think any of the directors listed in the OP are bad. All have had works that could be called brilliant, or as with Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich, very very successful.
To me, the preeminent bad director who can easily get work on major projects is Renny Harlin. Far more misses than hits in his career, both critically and commercially, but he did have a couple of very good ones and his most brilliant is Deep Blue Sea. Not that Deep Blue Sea is brilliant, but it was a very different approach to the subject matter and still stands out as pretty original and well done for a shark movie.
Oh yeah, I do agree with the OP about Verhoeven.
Wes Craven is a guy who gets a lot of credit from horror fans but his bad movies outnumber his good movies about 5-1. Obviously, Nightmare on Elm Street and Scream are excellent, but the rest is just not very good.
George Lucas has a huge reputation and is extremely commercially successful, but probably only has one great movie he did most of the work on: Star Wars. For all his other successes he had very big names collaborating with him and he usually didn’t direct those movies.
The Wachoswkis- Lots of points for ambitious concepts and style, but it only really came together once: the Matrix.
But you know of it, right? That a guy in his twenties had a scant budget in the hundreds of thousands, but slapped together a critically-acclaimed movie that (a) grossed a solid $140 million, (b) got him nominated for the ‘Best Director’ Oscar, and (c) was the reason why a major studio then took the big gamble of agreeing to his terms for bankrolling a crazy picture about space wizards fighting in some kind of star wars?
I mean, I can’t readily defend the film itself until you get around to seeing it – but I figure its bona fides entitle it to the benefit of the doubt so long as you haven’t.
Perhaps. I’ve heard of the movie but I wasn’t aware it was a Lucas film. I always thought it was THX-1138 and then Star Wars. So if it’s good then it’s another good movie under his belt, although he’s still not a great director and I can’t imagine that Star Wars wouldn’t be his best work.
I disagree. La Femme Nikita, Leon: the Professional and the delightful The Extraordinary Adventures of Adele Blanc-Sec (probably the best IIndiana Jones pastiches ever) are all fine films.
October Sky is the real gem of Joe Johnston’s resume, the only film for grown-ups (and with characters that have some depth to them) he’s made so far.
I don’t deny that some of these directors had good films, I just thought the criteria was to pick the BEST films from directors with mostly poor work. Okay, Besson might be stretching it because Besson doesn’t really make bad movies, but they are mostly average with a couple of real gems thrown in.
[QUOTE=RealityChuck] October Sky is the real gem of Joe Johnston’s resume, the only film for grown-ups (and with characters that have some depth to them) he’s made so far.
[/QUOTE]
But he’s a director, not a writer; someone else scripted the dialogue for the characters in JUMANJI and CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE FIRST AVENGER and so on, and Johnston just got asked to coach the actors on how to react naturally to special effects that would only get added in later while pacing everything just right given how memorable action sequences were interspersed with light-comedy moments.
It could have been perfect, had they cast Antonio Banderas in the lead instead of the voice-challenged Gerard Butler. It is a visual masterpiece, to be sure. I found it to be overly long and the backstory of Mme. Giry and the Phantom was something that could have been easily edited out, much like the French plantation scenes were mercifully cut from the original Apocalypse Now. Finally, rather than being grotesque with his mask ripped off, the Phantom merely looked like he had a rather bad sunburn. The deformity could have been done much better. Still, it had some stupendous scenes, notably the opening and The Point of No Return. But I have it on DVD and will watch it again, if only to see Emmy Rossum.
THX 1138 got the special edition treatment, as a sort of preparation for the Star Wars special editions. Unlike the later films, where the additions were mostly superfluous, the effects added to the first film actually enhanced the experience. Plus I think THX 1138 is a fine dystopian film in and of itself.
Roger Corman’s legendary for making cheap exploitation films, most of which are passably watchable junk, but his THE INTRUDER is a solid picture with good performances that still packs a punch today. Might actually be William Shatner’s best work, too. If you’ve never seen it, check it out.
Trigger warning; it’s about a racist Southern town fighting integration, and as such, does not shy away from dropping the N-bomb.
Basically, all his films are undistinguished action movies, interchangeable with dozens of others. He’s workmanlike, but about as generic as you canget. Any director could have pulled them off.
, And most are just the same old same old.
I just watched an excellent interview Lucas gave with Charlie Rose (I saw it on my local PBS station but it may be available on line somewhere). To anyone who really wants to understand what type of filmmaker Lucas is and what type he REALLY wanted to be, I suggest you watch it. What I got from it was that George would have been happy making films like THX 1138 all of his life and never have gotten involved in any big budget money making film franchise.
Jesus “Jess Franco” was responsible for some truly awful films (he directed that clasaic bit of MST3K fodder, The Castle of Fu Manchu, for instance), but he did at least half of a movie that blew me away.
It was Count Dracula, starring Christopher Lee as the Count. It’s not one of the Hammer films.
Shot on a low budget, the film is still the most faithful adaptation of Stoker’s book up until that time. It’s completely faithful (unlike Lee’s earlier, Hammer-made version, Horror of Dracula from a dozen years earlier). And they shot the Transylvanian scenes in an actual castle, giving it a feeling of reality that no other Dracula film had.
Even more interesting is the star power he brought to the film – not only do you have Lee as Dracula, but Herbert Lom plays Dr. van Helsing, and Klaus Kinski (who would himself later take a turn as the Count in the 1979 remake of Nosferatu) played the mad Renfield.
The probl;em is that halfway through, after the Transylvanian scenes and the intial scenes in England, the film gets cheap and stupid and boring. But the first half (which I caught on TV after the titles, so I didn’t know what it was) simply blew me away.
George Lucas is literally a billionaire. If he wanted to make small arthouse films with a limited appeal, he could easily fund them himself and put out one a year, like Woody Allen does.
Yeah, I don’t know why he didn’t make a bunch of smaller movies on his own. He doesn’t even have to direct them. He basically made Red Tails and Indy 4. And that cartoon movie Strange Magic.