Only reason I watched “Chicago”, for what that’s worth.
Anyway, the director’s not the only reason I’ll watch a movie, but generally speaking directors tend to be drawn to certain types of scripts, so for example, I probably won’t like a Wes Anderson movie, regardless of how good of a director he happens to be, or the excellent performances he may elicit from his casts.
I think that’s probably 60-70% of what people really mean when they say “I like so-and-so’s movies”; they realize that so-and-so typically chooses stories that they will like. Probably 20% is knowing that so-and-so’s vision of the source material will be up their alley, and 10% is the actual acting, editing, etc…
A certain director might be the tipping point for choosing a particular movie, usually it’s the actors or plot or even filming location. But then I realised that I will always see Michael Mann and Ridley Scott films.
These two responses sum it up perfectly for me. I will seek out the work of certain directors (Whedon, Raimi, Kevin Smith, Tarantino) and a few others I will avoid, but most of the time it doesn’t matter. The plot or the actors are usually more important.
Not really. I barely even know who the director is until I see his name in the credits. Hell, I track the musical composers more religiously than the directors.
There are a few directors I try to watch, but more I try to avoid. (Michael Bay, Uwe Boll, M. Night Shylaman).
I’ll go see any film that is to my tastes. But, knowing the likes of Malick, Mann, Kubrick and even Shamalamadingdong are at the helm will take precedence over what the Bays, Abrams’ and Bolls barf up.
I watched Midnight in Paris, because everybody said it was an amazing film, plus it had time travel in it.
It was really ordinary. I’ve seen cleverer sitcom premises and more amusing fratboy comedies. Hot Tub Time Machine was a better film, and that was crude and revolting half the time.
I wouldn’t see it done by Boll, Bay, or Shamawhatever, but that’s irrelevant, because there was never a chance they would have been picked for it to begin with. The first two only ever do things that are made to be bad, and I doubt Sham will ever direct anything again after The Last Airbender (which is also the point where I made up my mind definitively about him-- If Airbender had gotten less-than-putrid reviews, I would have gone to see it).
The Wachowski brothers, yes, I probably would have seen it. But then, I also don’t think the second and third Matrix movies are as bad as they’re made out to be. Not as good as the first, of course, but I don’t feel like I was cheated out of the price of my ticket.
I loved the first Bourne movie (Directed by Doug Liman) and eagerly went to the see the Bourne Supremacy. Instead of crystal clear and brutal action sequences that required, you know, decent training and fight choreography, Paul Greengrass decided to just shake the camera instead.
I waited 'til the DVD for the Bourne Ultimatum and his technique hasn’t improved, I simply won’t watch another film by him again.
I will pretty much watch anything that Michael Mann puts out (and usually like it).
Other directors colour what my anticipation of the movie will be like, and may determine whether I’m in the mode for a particular movie or not.
It only matters to me if the director is someone I really like or really dislike. For example: if it’s by Guillermo del Toro, I will definitely watch it, but if it’s by Richard Kelly or Wes Anderson, I’m probably not going to bother with it.
Rollo Tomasi, Skaldjust warned specifically against posting dangerous links like that. Thanks a lot, now everyone in this thread is going to have to get neuralized.
Note: Rhymer Industries’ neuralizers are slightly more invasive than the MiB version.
I’ll agree with those who say that the director is only a big factor in my movie viewing choices in certain instances. Spielberg is hit or miss, and his films are distributed pretty evenly over my love/hate/don’t give a shit spectrum. If the topic interests me, and if I am given to understand by people whose taste I tend to agree with that the film is worth seeing – Lincoln, for example – I’ll go see it. In other cases (M. Night Whateverhisnameis), the director’s name on the poster is a clear warning to avoid the film like the plague.