I was looking at the list of movies Coppola has directod over the years.
Okay, he made all three Godfathers, which are great(even III in my opinion).
Apocalypse now is great too.
But what about his other movies? Aren’t they average for the most part? I mean, I have seen his name on the list of greatest directors of all time.
Is there something I’m missing?
Personally, I think if directors make three great films, they’ve redeemeed themselves for a long while. His visions are very epic in scope, and there will be a lot of that in his newest that’s coming out. I’m excited for it.
Just for the reference for other Dopers wandering into this thread, here’s the IMDb link for FFC.
I wouldn’t say he is overrated, but he does seem past his prime. He deserves mention as a great director, but only in the past tense. His peak was in the 1970s…just take a gander at some of the movies that he had a part in making during that time:
Patton (1970; co-writer)
The Godfather (1972, director and co-writer): Brilliant.
American Graffiti (1973, producer).
The Conversation (1974; director, writer): One of his gems that doesn’t get the attention that it deserves.
The Godfather, Part II (1974; director, co-writer, producer): A movie of such stunning brilliance that it never fails to amaze me every time I see it.
Apocalypse Now (1979; director, co-writer). Another brilliant flick.
The Black Stallion (1979; executive producer). I haven’t seen this movie in many years, but I remember seriously liking this when I was a kid. and this despite the fact that I’m not particularly partial to horses in the first place. What I remember most (IIRC) was the almost total absence of dialogue for a long stretch of the movie…which was no problem for a kid with severe-to-profound deafness.
Contrast that with the 1980s…the only movie of his I liked was Tucker: The Man and His Dream, which didn’t seem to have done the business at the box office that it should have.
He started off the 1990s with directing The Godfather, Part III, Bram Stoker’s Dracula, and that horrendous schmaltzfest, Jack. His career doesn’t seem to have recovered since. Unlike most Godfather fans, I didn’t totally despise Part III, but I acknowledge that it isn’t nearly in the same caliber as the first two.
So…is he overrated? I don’t think so. He had his part in contributing to some amazing movies in the 1970s.
But I do think he’s run out of juice.
He has a visionary strength that was rare when he was making his bones, and may be that much more rare nowadays.
If one is to view the entire body of work, and consider the topics, visual and verbal treatment and editorial choices made along the way, it’s hard not to admit that he is an extremely brilliant, and singular mind.
His vision is powerful and unique. I personally don’t see him as over rated one bit.
My two cents.
Cartooniverse
Haven’t seen any of the Godfather movies, but you’ll never convince me that Apocalypse Now is anything more than an excruciatingly boring exercise in directorial onanism.
The Conversation, though, is a pretty good film.
I think probably he’s probably a has-been, and is generally regarded as such.
I feel like i mention this a lot, but on the Godfather DVD special edition box, his commentary about the making of GF III is really really really facinating to watch. (In fact, they all are, if you’re as big a dork as I am)
The most interesting thing about the commentary is just listening to coppola talk about how everything went wrong and how different he and the cast and the industry were in the early seventies versus the late 80s/early 90’s.
He ran out of steam by nearly killing himself doing Apocalypse Now, and never really recovered. Then with some economic troubles with American Zoetrope and Paramount he was sort of forced (by himself and others) into a number of financially tempting but artistically questionable decisions.
But the 2 GFs, the Conversation, and A:N are serious contributions to cinema, and thats a lot, number-wise. The Godfathers just ranked 2 and 3 consecutively on AFIs annual best of all time poll, for the umpteenth time, conversation is recognized by a small but vocal community as a minor masterpiece, and Apocalypse: Now is nothing if not a huge lightning rod for controversey and bitter debate about the director as ego, auteur, genius and maniac. And its either a cautionary tale against “directorial onanism” or an inspiration for a generation of ambitious visionary filmmakers, depending whom you ask.
I love it, btw, and just bought Redux, and like it even more.
Chris
How could you forget Rumble Fish, IMHO his last great movie?
I agree with Atreyu… The Conversation is one of Coppola’s best films, with one of the finest performances Gene Hackman’s ever cranked out, but it is rarely recognized as such. I personally think it is his finest work.
To answer the OP, it’s not so much that Coppola is overrated. He has made some excellent, influential films – The Conversation, Apocalypse Now, and the first two Godfathers. These days, however, he is given more credit than he deserves, as he has proven (to me, anyway) that he’s expended whatever talent he had. Jack was just silly, Godfather III didn’t deserve to be related to its two older and tougher brothers, and Dracula was a travesty on every level, save one (Gary Oldman was, after all, a great vampire).
He’s not over-rated, as he has done great work in the past, but he hasn’t directed a good movie in a long time.
He made four great or at least near-great films: the first two Godfather films, Apocalyse Now, and The Conversation. That’s four more than most directors have made. Incidentally, have any of the important American directors of the '70’s continued to produce consistently good work?
Seconding what Wendell said, when was the last time any of these directors produced something worth more than the celluloid they were printed on:
William Friedkin–Quick, name his last movie! Anyone? Rules of Engagement, it had Samuel L. Jackson? Anyone? No? Since, arguably, Sorcerer, he’s had one or two good films.
Hal Ashby gets a pass because he’s dead, but the second half of his career, after Being There, was a waste.
Peter Bogdanovich? Hah! A punchline for the last 20 years, and little more.
Bob Rafelson? George Lucas? We all know what happened to Michael Cimino. The only two important directors I can think of from that era for whom a case can be made are Robert Altman and Milos Forman, and even Altman has been largely hit-or-miss since Nasvhille, or at least since Buffalo Bill.
The only director who came through the 70s immediately unscathed that pops to mind right away is Spielberg.
This curious flick came out in 1982, I think. It is the somewhat confusing story of a girl who goes to Las Vegas, looking for love. It is an early example of computer-generated scenes, but the plot is so lousy I couldn’t watch it all the way through. I believe that Coppola blew a wad of cash on this-it was a total flop.
Is it available on DVD?
Not over-rated = the 70’s
overrated = the 80’s
stick a fork in him = the 90’s
Steven Spielburg? (starting with Jaws)
Are you guys high or have you somehow never heard of Scorsese?
I will not rate him as overrated. Sure he has not produced anything great in the last two decades but that doesn’t make his previous genius any less important.
Orsen Wells is also considered a great director but his track record was also spotty. But even then nothing could tarnish the brilliance of his early work.
It is the moments of their greatness that showed they were far superior to many (not all of course) of their contemporaries.
Aside from Speilburg and Scorsese (And they have had some clunkers too) Age has not helped the wunderkids of the 70’s (Tell me Lucas is a great director today and I’ll laugh in your face)
IIRC, Eraserhead was made in the 70s. So, David Lynch has been making his unique brand of cinema since the 70s. I am glad to see there are many who have seen “The Conversation”. Engrossing from start to finish. Coppola is indeed a puzzling character given the wild fluctuations in the quality of his films. Either his life has been one hell of a volatile ride emotionally, or his visions are merely flashes of brilliance. The former is more probable than the latter, but neither makes him overrated.
Are you sure you saw the same movie? It wasn’t confusing at all, and that’s not what it’s about.
It was a “flop” in financial terms only. Artistically, it’s just as brilliant in its own way as The Conversation. The plot isn’t “lousy” or confusing, it is simplicity itself. It’s about a couple who’ve lived together for 5 years and are starting to get on each other’s nerves. They’re at that point in a relationship where you still love each other, but you start to think “what the hell was I thinking and where else could I be and who else could I be with?” and so they fight and break up. They each meet other people for a glorious and satisfying one night stand, but come to realize that the person they loved was the person they were meant to be with.
It is simple, but Coppola wraps it up in a breathtakingly gorgeous fantasy package.
None of the scenes were computer generated. Coppola used several different innovative and creative optical and camera techniques to achieve a beautiful fantasy world. The production design was by Dean Tavoularis (just about all of Coppola’s films, plus Little Big Man, and Farewell My Lovely), and the cinematography was by the great Vittorio Storaro (Apocalypse Now, Reds, Ladyhawke, The Last Emperor, The Sheltering Sky, Dick Tracy).
One From The Heart is a a gem that was unfairly tarred and feathered by all the critics upon release. It was ignored, overlooked and undervalued by the people who would most love it, and it fell into oblivion, dragging Zoetrope along with it. It’s a Fantasy Romance Musical for adults, and, well, lord knows the director of all those big Macho movies had no business going and making a movie like that! And so he was crucified, along with the film.
Coppola got SO MUCH flack for this movie! He was criticized while making it, though many of the techniques he used (such as also shooting on videotape to see immediately what the shot would look like) are commonplace today. His use of sets to build a stylized time and place, in this case, Las Vegas, foreshadowed Moulin Rouge’s set-built Paris. The cast is great! Frederic Forrest, Terri Garr (who for once got to be sexy and dance!), Nastassja Kinski, Raul Julia, Lanie Kazan, Harry Dean Stanton, Allen Garfield…they’re all excellent.
The use of music as a character is also brilliant. The soundtrack by Tom Waits (singing duets with Crystal Gayle) is flat-out wonderful. They sing as a couple in a parallel storyline, and if you listen to the lyrics and follow their story, it adds even more to the film.
The whole movie is a treasure and will get its due, someday. Hopefully.
No, unfortunately. It would look so stunning on DVD, too.
While I’m here…I also loved The Cotton Club!
The first of Spielberg’s great films was not Jaws. It was Duel, an absolutely phenomenal suspense film.
Spielberg is going to go down in history as one of the greatest directors, and my guess is that he still has a lot of great films in front of him. Age is going to improve him.
And certainly Martin Scorsese belongs on the list of great directors of the 70’s who are still making great films.
Woody Allen belongs on that list, even though I’ve never been a huge fan of his movies.
Milos Forman directly One Flew over the Cookoo’s Nest in 1975.
Ridley Scott directed The Duellist and Alien in the 1970’s, and is still going strong.
The Coen Brothers almost make the list, with Blood Simple dating to 1984.
He flashed onto the scene in the sixties, but Mike Nichols is still making decent movies.
Primary Colors and Wit were both good. What Planet Are You From? was underrated, I think.
bordering on hijack here, but since someone mentioned the Cohens, it made me think of all the visionary “great” directors have a lot of crap on thier resumes, inaddition to a few good (ok great) films.
But the Cohen Brothers are (by my estimation) completely without a stinker.
Blood Simple
Millers crossing
Rasing Arizona
Barton Fink
Hudsucker Proxy
fargo
Big Lebowski
DAMNIT I WASN"T FINISHED
bordering on hijack here, but since someone mentioned the Cohens, it made me think of all the visionary “great” directors have a lot of crap on thier resumes, inaddition to a few good (ok great) films.
But the Cohen Brothers are (by my estimation) completely without a stinker.
Blood Simple
Millers crossing
Rasing Arizona
Barton Fink
Hudsucker Proxy
fargo
Big Lebowski
Oh Brother Where art Thou
The Man Who Wasn’t There
Fink and Hudsuker being my two least favorites, but still excellent fims that i own and watch from time to time…
So thats 9 in 18 years, without one bad flick. Is there anybody comperable in terms of quality and consistency?