Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:49 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 132 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By 
Author Message
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7387
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
wisey wrote:
Sydney Lumet – 11
Coen Bros – 15
Steven Spielberg – 21
Alfred Hitchcock – 14
Woody Allen – 27
Rob Reiner – 11
David Cronenberg – 12
Oliver Stone - 14
Martin Scorsese – 20
David Lynch – 9 and the Twin Peaks t.v. series which I’m counting as a tenth.
Richard Linklater – 10
Clint Eastwood – 16
Steven Sodenbergh -12
Robert Zemekis – 10
Peter Weir – 10
Ridley Scott – 14
Tony Scott – 11
Tim Burton -12
Francis Ford Coppola – 11
Brian De Palma – 10
Ron Howard – 13
Richard Donner – 10

I've highlighted the Director's that I believe warrant seeing ten films from. I’m not at all proud of that list. There's no Kubrick, Ford, Amalvador, Huston, Kurosawa etc. Three or four directors I don’t care for much anymore and it seems to contain nearly all modern day film makers with no foreign language film directors. Perhaps if we broke the list down to eight films it would make me feel more rounded? :?

David Fincher sits on 9 films (which I'm guessing most of us have seen) and he will definately be in bold when he makes his tenth.


Well before you feel too bad, remember how many of the great directors were hardly prolific -- Altman and Kubrick would sometimes take 5 years off or more between films. Makes it a lot easier to see 11 Rob Reiner films than Kubrick films

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:08 am
Profile
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
Patrick wrote:
ram1312 wrote:
Who directed Poltergeist?


Tobe Hooper


I know that's how it's credited but what do you guys think?


Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:11 am
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7387
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
ram1312 wrote:
Patrick wrote:
ram1312 wrote:
Who directed Poltergeist?


Tobe Hooper


I know that's how it's credited but what do you guys think?


Gotta go by credited director. So Hooper directed Poltergeist, Hawks didn't direct The Thing From Another World, etc. Otherwise you just open yourself up to arbitraryness

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:34 am
Profile
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
ram1312 wrote:
Patrick wrote:
ram1312 wrote:
Who directed Poltergeist?


Tobe Hooper


I know that's how it's credited but what do you guys think?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poltergeist_(film)

Check out the creative credit section.

I'd say Spielberg was the real director, and him outwardly claiming Hooper was the director was him not wanting to upset studio executives or go against his contract. I mean, he wrote the movie, produced it, was on set almost every day, did the storyboards, and cast members have said he was the real director. It seems pretty clear to me.


Thu Jun 14, 2012 9:47 am
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
The real truth:

Director is a category. Categories don't describe things according to their nature. They simply impose a structure that makes things easier to think and talk about.

If you really want to get into who directed what, I'm sure a lot of people did a little bit of everything on everything. As J-Kizzle says, best to go with what the credits list says, unless you want to write a novel about it.


Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:15 pm
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
Ken wrote:
The real truth:

Director is a category. Categories don't describe things according to their nature. They simply impose a structure that makes things easier to think and talk about.

If you really want to get into who directed what, I'm sure a lot of people did a little bit of everything on everything. As J-Kizzle says, best to go with what the credits list says, unless you want to write a novel about it.


I don't think it should be incluced in Spielberg's official filmography, but that's mostly a technicality, as, by most reports, he did all the actual filmmaking on the movie. Hooper took a backseat, collected a paycheck, and allowed Spielberg to make the movie without breaking his contract.

It's Spielberg's movie. It just is. Hooper gets credit for directing, and that's fine, but if anyone actually does a smidge of research on the movie, they'll find out that Spielberg was the driving creative force behind its existence.

There's merit to what you say about categories, and when discussing most movies I think it's right to discuss it by director to make discussion easier. That said, when there are examples as blatant as this one, I do think it's worth pointing out that Spielberg deserves more credit for the film than Hooper, regardless of who gets the directorial credit.


Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:18 pm
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7387
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
PeachyPete wrote:
Ken wrote:
The real truth:

Director is a category. Categories don't describe things according to their nature. They simply impose a structure that makes things easier to think and talk about.

If you really want to get into who directed what, I'm sure a lot of people did a little bit of everything on everything. As J-Kizzle says, best to go with what the credits list says, unless you want to write a novel about it.


I don't think it should be incluced in Spielberg's official filmography, but that's mostly a technicality, as, by most reports, he did all the actual filmmaking on the movie. Hooper took a backseat, collected a paycheck, and allowed Spielberg to make the movie without breaking his contract.

It's Spielberg's movie. It just is. Hooper gets credit for directing, and that's fine, but if anyone actually does a smidge of research on the movie, they'll find out that Spielberg was the driving creative force behind its existence.

There's merit to what you say about categories, and when discussing most movies I think it's right to discuss it by director to make discussion easier. That said, when there are examples as blatant as this one, I do think it's worth pointing out that Spielberg deserves more credit for the film than Hooper, regardless of who gets the directorial credit.


All of that I completely agree with, but if we're talking about a list here, then I think we should go by official titles

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:25 pm
Profile
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
JamesKunz wrote:
PeachyPete wrote:
Ken wrote:
The real truth:

Director is a category. Categories don't describe things according to their nature. They simply impose a structure that makes things easier to think and talk about.

If you really want to get into who directed what, I'm sure a lot of people did a little bit of everything on everything. As J-Kizzle says, best to go with what the credits list says, unless you want to write a novel about it.


I don't think it should be incluced in Spielberg's official filmography, but that's mostly a technicality, as, by most reports, he did all the actual filmmaking on the movie. Hooper took a backseat, collected a paycheck, and allowed Spielberg to make the movie without breaking his contract.

It's Spielberg's movie. It just is. Hooper gets credit for directing, and that's fine, but if anyone actually does a smidge of research on the movie, they'll find out that Spielberg was the driving creative force behind its existence.

There's merit to what you say about categories, and when discussing most movies I think it's right to discuss it by director to make discussion easier. That said, when there are examples as blatant as this one, I do think it's worth pointing out that Spielberg deserves more credit for the film than Hooper, regardless of who gets the directorial credit.


All of that I completely agree with, but if we're talking about a list here, then I think we should go by official titles


Oh, absolutely. For the purposes of this thread, you have to go by official credit. Sorry if I insinuated otherwise.


Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:43 pm
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
Awesome...all of this was what I was looking for. You guys totally took my thoughts exactly. I went by official credit, but it's kind of cool we all realize who the true creative force was here.

What has Hooper done since?

And this brings something else to mind...how do you guys feel about co-directors? Or special guest directors? Movies like Four Rooms or Sin City...the Grindhouse films...


Thu Jun 14, 2012 9:30 pm
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
People can do what they want when it's their movie.

Sin City is an interesting case: two nominal directors, and a third guest director. Too bad the DGA had to be a bunch of tools about it.


Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:13 pm
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
ram1312 wrote:
Awesome...all of this was what I was looking for. You guys totally took my thoughts exactly. I went by official credit, but it's kind of cool we all realize who the true creative force was here.

What has Hooper done since?

And this brings something else to mind...how do you guys feel about co-directors? Or special guest directors? Movies like Four Rooms or Sin City...the Grindhouse films...

After Poltergeist, Hooper directed Lifeforce(a movie was naked vampires that's mostly notable for being one of Patrick Stewart's early roles) a remake of Invaders From Mars(pretty good), Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2(pretty fun sequel), Spontaneous Combustion(average Firestarter rip-off) The Mangler(one of the worst horror films i've ever seen) then he did a bunch of DTV films which range from good to bad.


Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:30 pm
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 1:43 pm
Posts: 365
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
Vexer wrote:
After Poltergeist, Hooper directed Lifeforce(a movie was naked vampires that's mostly notable for being one of Patrick Stewart's early roles) a remake of Invaders From Mars(pretty good), Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2(pretty fun sequel), Spontaneous Combustion(average Firestarter rip-off) The Mangler(one of the worst horror films i've ever seen) then he did a bunch of DTV films which range from good to bad.


OMG The Mangler. So so so bad. Indescribably bad.

_________________
Sometimes I think I have felt everything I'm ever gonna feel, and from here on out I'm not gonna feel anything new. Just lesser versions of what I've already felt.


Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:15 pm
Profile
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
JamesKunz wrote:
Well before you feel too bad, remember how many of the great directors were hardly prolific -- Altman and Kubrick would sometimes take 5 years off or more between films. Makes it a lot easier to see 11 Rob Reiner films than Kubrick films

It might be interesting to revisit this subject and weight the films by their quality.

By that understanding, I've seen a hell of a lot of Kubrick.


Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:27 pm
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
Ken wrote:
JamesKunz wrote:
Well before you feel too bad, remember how many of the great directors were hardly prolific -- Altman and Kubrick would sometimes take 5 years off or more between films. Makes it a lot easier to see 11 Rob Reiner films than Kubrick films

It might be interesting to revisit this subject and weight the films by their quality.

By that understanding, I've seen a hell of a lot of Kubrick.


I would like to know how we're going to scale the movies based on respective quality?


Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:44 pm
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
I suppose that's fodder for debate, but one possible solution would be the use of star ratings. This would mean that the scale would vary from person to person. It would also mean that there is a certain cap for how heavily or lightly a movie can be weighted... but such a cap is necessary.

I'll use movies I've watched recently as examples. By this reckoning, Troll 2 wouldn't be weighted very heavily. Grand Illusion would be weighted four times that. Prometheus, three times that of Troll 2. Superman/Batman: Apocalypse, twice that of Troll 2.

Again, not a perfect system, but like I said, it would be interesting.

(Yes, Grand Illusion certainly deserves to be weighted many times more heavily than Prometheus, but then, it deserves many more stars than the four that are possible in your typical four star scale. Let us take the time to reflect on that at length, or let's not.)


Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:54 pm
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
Good category. I'm going to have to research this one. Looks like I'll have many of the same directors


Last edited by bob harris on Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:11 pm
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
Spielberg-16
Stone-11
Coens-12
Woody Allen-15
Eastwood-14
Scorsese-13
Reiner-11
Hitchcock-11
Spike Lee-12
Zemeckis-11
Linklater-10
Sodorbergh-11
Ridley Scott-10
DePalma-12
Burton-13
Van Sant-10
Levinson-14
Donner=11
Tony Scott-10
Coppola-10
Howard-13

Way too low on the better ones....a few others really close to 10(Boyle, Fincher at 9)


Last edited by bob harris on Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:22 am, edited 1 time in total.



Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:37 pm
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7387
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
Ken wrote:
I suppose that's fodder for debate, but one possible solution would be the use of star ratings. This would mean that the scale would vary from person to person. It would also mean that there is a certain cap for how heavily or lightly a movie can be weighted... but such a cap is necessary.

I'll use movies I've watched recently as examples. By this reckoning, Troll 2 wouldn't be weighted very heavily. Grand Illusion would be weighted four times that. Prometheus, three times that of Troll 2. Superman/Batman: Apocalypse, twice that of Troll 2.

Again, not a perfect system, but like I said, it would be interesting.

(Yes, Grand Illusion certainly deserves to be weighted many times more heavily than Prometheus, but then, it deserves many more stars than the four that are possible in your typical four star scale. Let us take the time to reflect on that at length, or let's not.)


I love Grand Illusion too. I think it's Renoir's masterpiece and would take it over The Rules of the Game any day, but the film world disagrees

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sat Jun 16, 2012 9:12 pm
Profile
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
If you seized me by the balls and made me choose, I would probably go with The Rules of the Game. But I've seen it a lot more times than Grand Illusion, so it has an unfair advantage.


Sat Jun 16, 2012 9:49 pm
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7387
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Directors You've Seen 10+ Films By
Ken wrote:
If you seized me by the balls and made me choose


Oh Ken, don't tempt me!

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sat Jun 16, 2012 9:56 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 132 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr