Growing out of the “favorite directors” thread: What legendary director disappointed you the most when you finally encountered his work after hearing raves about it from his many fans? For me it’s Preston Sturges, though Tod Browning is a close second. Blake Edwards is up there, but I could see flashes of brilliance as late as the 80s with him, so he gets a pass.
Can you explain why you think thee are “disappointing”. I can understand Browning, in a way – Dracula could’ve been a much more impressive film if Browning had allowed his cinematographer to move the camera around more, like he wanted to. And if you compare his work with that of George Melford (who worked on the same story, albeit in Spanish, on the very same sets) you can see how much more dramatic it could have been. still, Dracula managed some very good shots, and it wasn’t al static. Freaks is widely regarded as a failure, but it’s an impressive film. And Browning’s silent films were apparently successes (although I’ve seen few of those).
Your inclusion of Blake Edwards puzzles me, though. I haven’t seen enough of Sturges’ work.
I’d argue for J. Lee Thompson. Although I loved Guns of Navarone, and he did the original Cape Fear, as well as Tras Bulba and the offbeat Kings of the Sun, he ended his career with some abominable flicks like the 1985 King Solomon’s Mines (a wonderfully terrible movie with an impressive wasted cast) and the laughable Firewalker, starring Chuck Norris and Lou Gossett.
Sturges is a favorite of mine, though I suppose you had to have a liking for broad slapstick between the clever dialog. Miracle of Morgan’s Creek is a comedy classic, and even funnier today when you see the hoops he had to jump through to get it past the censors. I’d also disagree with Edwards, but he, too, was prone to broad slapstick, so that’s probably not your cup of tea.
Krzysztof Kieślowski’s “Tree Colors” trilogy is the first that comes to mind. Blue made its point over and over and over and over and over and over again, then resolved it all in a trite and emotionally ridiculous deus ex machina. White reached potboiler status toward the end, but Red was completely forgettable.
Well, I came of age a bit before the VCR became commonplace. So when I wound up living down the street from a “psychotronic” movie rental place in the late 80s, I binged on a lot of movies I’d heard about in college but had never had the opportunity to see in theaters or on TV. Freaks, Tod Browning’s other masterpiece, was at its heart a 30s romantic melodrama and I was expecting something much more disturbing (I realize the treacly ending where the heartbroken dwarf finds true love with a girl dwarf may have been pushed on him by the studios or the popular tastes of the day.)
Preston Sturges, famous for his “screwball” comedies of the 40s, went for overblown gags and boy did he overblow them. I found Sullivan’s Travels almost painful to watch. Blake Edwards, his stylistic heir, also tended to telegraph his jokes to their detriment. He had a lot going for him: stellar casts, beautiful cinematography, Harry Mancini, and he still often came off as Billy Wilder’s disappointing twin. But there was an acidic cynicism that showed its face just often enough to redeem him, like showing just how far Holly Golightly could fall, over and over, without the audience ever hating her for it.
When I say “disappointing,” I mean capable of making a beautiful, great, important film but containing some inevitable urge to keep shooting himself in the foot and delivering films that come up tantalizingly short.
Lars von Trier. Most of his films are joyless slogs reveling in misogyny. Apparently, that describes both his personal life and working lives as well.
George Lucas. He made one excellent adult film, American Graffiti, and a bunch of mediocre overrated serial films.
Lars von Trier, as previously mentioned, by far. How anyone thinks his films are good, I’ll never understand. How he can get actresses to appear in them even more so. And he even got people to sign onto his Dogme thing.
To a lesser extend, John Ford. His films are n’t bad, but filming every movie, no matter where it is set, in Monument Valley is a bit much to these modern eyes. (truly, he is not the only offender.East Texas looks nothing like True Grit, either, and the Appalachians look nothing like The Deer Hunter. Still, Ford is known for it.)
in a different way, M Night is the most “disappointing”, because almost none of his subsequent films are anywhere near as good as The Sixth Sense. And it is disappointing to not have more moviues like that.
Black Mirror picked up where he left off (and he left off a very long time ago.) Except without any supernatural elements.
M. Night for sure. Sixth Sense was great, I do think Split(very recent movie) is also amazing, but most of his movies are huge misfires. He either makes great movies or absolutely terrible ones.
Great ones:
Sixth Sense
Unbreakable
Split
Signs <–I liked this one
Terrible ones:
The Village
Lady in the Water
Last Airbender
After Earth
The Happening
I will admit that Glass is almost good and might be considered inbetween, but some of his choices at the end were so bad, it almost becomes terrible.
Very true, though he did some decent work as a producer. But he is not a great director, that is for sure.
Star Wars is not overrated.
Star Wars is not overrated, but it was mercifully saved from George Lucas the editor.
I’d still include Lucas as disappointing. For all his vision and early promise, he really didn’t seem to know to include and not include in a story, nor what order to put it all in.
I would add Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer to the list.
Scary Movie was a great comedy and funny as hell.
All of the other parody movies they made after that (Date Movie, *Epic Movie *, Meet the Spartans, among others) were horrible and bombed at the box office.
(For the record they had nothing to do with sequels to Scary Movie.)
I’m gonna toss myself under the bus, but let me first say, I don’t know shit about films, or how they are made, or what the actual fuck a director does, but…
Scorsese. I just don’t like many of the films I’ve seen of his.
I know, I know. It’s ME, not him.
John Waters. Maybe he’s someone you either get or don’t get. I don’t.
Eric Rohmer. Young beautiful people in wonderful scenery talking and talking and never getting to business because of always…talking. Couldn’t get more boring.
I’m with you. He’s a director I *should *like, cause I generally like New Hollywood, his fellow directors and his casts, but his films leave me cold. He never did anything nearly as impressive as Coppola with the first two Godfathers or Apocalypse Now.
[my bold]
That’s not like I remember the ending of Freaks. :eek:.
I remember a diva mutilated into a duck creature presented as a…FREAK!
I thought Mel Brooks had some potential after his work on Your Show of Shows, but other than The Producers, I was mistaken.
Mel Brooks after Young Frankenstein.
George Lucas after American Graffiti.
Both started with their best work and went downhill thereafter. George rapidly, Mel after a few.
Woody Allen, even before all the scandals came out in the 1990s.
Back in the mid-80s, I wasn’t a fan of his contemporary stuff. Fans insisted I would probably prefer his earlier “funny” stuff. With one exception, Everything you wanted to know about sex…, nope. Sleeper, Bananas, Love and Death all left me cold. (Never saw Take the Money and Run, which I was told “that’s the best one”, but I’d already been disappointed too many times) I could see where the jokes were supposed to be, but they didn’t make me laugh.
I think the one exception worked for me because there was no narrative, just a loosely connected bunch of short sketches, so nothing had the chance to go on too long, and I didn’t have to spend more than a few minutes with an unpleasant character.