The problem I have with him is not that he makes popcorn movies. It’s that he fails on that level. There are good ways and poor ways to do even that.
For one, they’re completely over-edited. Take The Rock. IIRC, you had a Hummer chasing a ferrari in San Francisco. Can’t miss, right? Wrong. The chase is so chopped up, you can’t tell the two cars are in the same city, much less on the same street. Close up of Ferrari going around corner. Cut. Close up of Hummer ramming car. Cut. Close up of person jumping out of way of Ferarri. Cut.
Go watch the chase in Ronin, then watch The Rock.
But, you know what. . .the people who see his movies don’t pay attention. They come out going, “Ferrari! Hummer! San Fran! Awesome!” Sorry, not awesome. I got nothing against a car chase. I got something against his.
His fight scenes are worse.
And, he ALWAYS throws in this little non-sense heart-tugging sidelines. The father/son thing in Rock. The girl in Con-Air. You always see it coming a mile away.
And even if I did like that style, it’s something that seems to take absolutely no art or craft. They look like anyone could make the exact same movie if given the same screenplay. That’s not true of most of the people on this list. Bay is completely bland and forgettable.
That said, I still might see The Island. I’ve heard better things about it.
I was gonna say, Simon West did Con Air. But basically, both of those directors came out of Propaganda Films, where they “came up” shooting commercials and music videos, and producer Jerry Bruckheimer pretty much rubber-stamps every action movie they make, so they all have that similar look and feel. Bay gets a bad rap, and perhaps deservedly so, but he’s just doing what Bruckheimer wants.
Sigh, once again I’m shocked by some of the names that come up in best/worst of threads.
I disagree with the nominations of Lynch and Verhoeven and am completely flabbergasted that someone would call Hitchcock overrated. He definitely deserves his place in the pantheon of director-gods. Heck, his name has even been adjectivized: Hitchcockian. Not many directors can claim that kind of influence.
On the other hand, I completely agree that Bay and Schumacher deserve to be on this list and I’d like to add one more:
Jan De Bont.
He’s actually had a long and distinguished career as a cinematographer but his output as director has uniformly sucked. From Speed to Twister to the execrable remake of the Haunting he’s yet to direct anything that isn’t downright risible.
Didn’t Ken Russell direct “Women in Love”? I think that is a wonderful film. So he made at least one really good one, while most were indeed over the top.
To me there was a kind of bought-offness to the conversion. I really haven’t taken Ebert seriously since the latter years of his partnership with Siskel, when the two would call crappy movies “instant classics” and seemed to lose their critical edge.
Never seen his stuff, no interest. I didn’t nominate him in this thread, either, but I think any director that would feature himself in a hardcore porn scene has some exceptional issues.
I opened this thread specifically to nominate Schumacher, and it doesn’t surprise me that I’m not the first to mention his name.
His films (with the possible exception of Lost Boys) are almost entirely built of style with barely a grain of substance. And his style is somewhere between “cheesy” and “flakey”. Or perhaps “corny”.
Hey, I liked Crimes of Passion, but not because of Russell. And Tommy was just awfulo. I do have to admit Women in Love is not too bad, in terms of the direction, though.
I just watched the trailer for Crimes of Passion, and discovered that Russell also did Altered States. Okay he’s out of the running.
Victor Salva is a director who molested an underage actor in one of his movies (Clownland,i think).he went on (after prison) to write and direct a Disney movie,Powder.If you know his history,then watch the movie,it is a definitely queasy experience
Anyway, though I’ll agree on Bay and Schumacher (though Schumacher gets a near pass for writing Car Wash), I think the most consistently bad director in mainstream hollywood has to be Nora Ephron.
Even at their worst, both of these directors showed a unique and bizarre vision. They certainly aren’t hacks, by any stretch of the meaning of that word.
Ocean’s Twelve - sucked
Solaris - sucked
Full Frontal - sucked
Ocean’s Eleven - overrated fluff
Traffic - overrated fluff
Erin Brockovich - overrated fluff
The Limey - sucked ass
Out of Sight - The half that I saw sucked. I’ll concede its possible the other half didn’t suck as much.
Gray’s Anatomy (1996) - Good - but only because he was filming Spalding Gray’s monologue
Sex, Lies, and Videotape - Sucked and overrated
I never saw the following, but since I’ve already wasted too much of my life watching Soderbergh movies, I’ll have to assume they also suck or are overrated fluff: The Underneath, King of the Hill, Kafka, Schizopolis, Winston, Yes
The OP said “or most overrated,” remember. I wouldn’t call Soderbergh the worst director in Hollywood. But he’s definitely the most overrated I can think of. He consistently gets outrageous accollades for his crap and/or fluff. Including Best Director for Traffic, which, aside from the filters, is a thoroughly pedestrian movie. You can expect about as much insight and creativity from your typical primetime drama.
Bay and Schumacher are also pedestrian directors - but nobody’s putting them in for Best Director.
I actually liked Soderbergh’s “King of the Hill” and it’s not at all like his other films. I think I like it though because I descend from a poor family in St. Louis.