Explore
 Lists  Reviews  Images  Update feed
Categories
MoviesTV ShowsMusicBooksGamesDVDs/Blu-RayPeopleArt & DesignPlacesWeb TV & PodcastsToys & CollectiblesComic Book SeriesBeautyAnimals   View more categories »
Listal logo
Avatar
Added by PvtCaboose91 on 18 Mar 2015 03:39
438 Views 17 Comments
14
vote

Directors Who Get Way Too Much Lenience

Add header image

Choose file... or enter url:
Sort by: Showing 9 items
Rating: List Type:

I love Memento, Insomnia and Batman Begins. They show Nolan really has talent when he finds an agreeable groove. I love than Nolan loves practical effects rather than CGI, and I appreciate that he's a massive advocate of shooting on film stock rather than digitally.

But the Nolan lovers are blowing everything out of proportion. Let me quote my Dark Knight Rises review...
Christopher Nolan fans have worshipped the man for years, exalting his modus operandi of gritty self-seriousness and faux gravitas without providing Nolan with the constructive criticism that he needs to grow and mature as a filmmaker. Due to the overzealous praise, Nolan's movies have been growing increasingly overlong and ponderous, and his ego has now reached critical mass with this third Batman adventure. Thus, instead of working to improve his directorial technique, Nolan stuck by his usual filmmaking chestnuts here, hoping to get away with bad pacing and pedestrian action scenes by smothering everything in relentless dramatic music and over-complicating a simple narrative to make people believe they're smart for understanding it.

And that pretty much covers it. His movies are too bloated and uninteresting, and he disguises his flaws with nice, polished technical specs and good actors. I'm never excited by a new Nolan movie anymore, because I know it's just going to attract fan-trolls who make the movie out to be perfect because they love Nolan, rather than the mediocre slop it'll likely turn out to be.

The lenience NEEDS to stop.

PvtCaboose91's rating:
Rate:

Tarantino really hit the ground running with films like Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown. But his movies entering the 21st Century have been... mixed at best.

People will disagree of course, but Kill Bill Vol 2 was really hit and miss, way too long and bloated, while Death Proof was a complete bust that spat in the face of cinema-goers who like slashers of that ilk. The girl power shit just got way out of control.

And then we got Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained, which, while loved by many, were arguably far too long and bloated, and show a lot of self-indulgence on Tarantino's part, with Basterds further exploring the whole girl power fantasy, and Django thoroughly falling flat with its horrifically bloated second act.

I like a lot of Tarantino's idiosyncrasies as a director - shooting on film stock, retaining R ratings, using blood squibs, great actors - but it's gotten to the point where you just KNOW every movie of his will be three hours long and have characters randomly discussing an obscure movie from thirty years ago. Everyone is excited about the newest Tarantino project and are so prepared to worship it like it's the second coming, but I am honestly not fussed anymore. Tarantino needs to take a step back and try to make something leaner and more focused.

I still consider myself something of a Tarantino fan, because I know how good he can be, and I'm disappointed when he squanders his potential. True fans are ones that can recognise flaws in a director's work.

PvtCaboose91's rating:
Rate:
Average listal rating (1573 ratings) 8.2 IMDB Rating 0

Admittedly, Burton is not as loved as he used to be, but still... Every new Burton project is cause for excitement based on his earlier cinematic oeuvre full of memorable titles.

But really, he has not done anything that's worth a damn since Sweeney Todd, and it's gotten to the point that he's almost done more slop than great movies. Dark Shadows sucked, Big Eyes was met with a resounding "meh," but people are still getting behind Burton's upcoming live-action Dumbo remake. Why?

I'm done giving Burton lenience. I'm a fan of his earlier work, but recent Burton is thoroughly unimpressive.

PvtCaboose91's rating:
Rate:

This is a tough one to admit, because I love Smith's early work, and I own them all. But Cop Out changed everything, and then along came Red State which was fucking dreadful. And Tusk really wasn't too great either.

Smith planned to just hang up his hat after Clerks 3 some years back, but now he wants to just keep making more movies. So he has a huge line-up planned. But do we really want to see what he has coming? This is a man who wanted to quit filmmaking because he admits he's not very good at it. And I agree. Smith has never been much of a director, but he writes good dialogue. And by trying new things and failing, we're being denied the wonderful Kevin Smith dialogue we're actually looking for in his projects.

I'm down for Clerks 3, but everything else... yeah, no. It can wait. I don't like what Kevin is doing. And I don't know why people are excited by any of his new projects.

Seriously Kevin... Whatever you need to get out of your system... I hope you get it out quickly.

Rate:

I appreciate a number of Scott's movies... Black Hawk Down, Alien, Matchstick Men... But his movies are far too mixed in quality. Blade Runner keeps getting re-tooled and only The Final Cut is really worthwhile, Kingdom of Heaven was absolute piss, Body of Lies was a real letdown, Hannibal wasn't too great, The Counselor was a big swing and miss... Yeah.

The problem is that Scott's movies are often extremely leaden. His style is having people stand around with dour expressions delivering flat dialogue. Visuals are usually pretty astounding, but I don't find his movies very involving. I liked Robin Hood and American Gangster, but I'm in no rush to watch them again, because even those are pretty boring.

Every new Scott movie is cause for cheers and hype, but honestly, he hasn't made much lately that's genuinely good and worth revisiting. He gets way too much lenience.

PvtCaboose91's rating:
Rate:
Average listal rating (153 ratings) 7.1 IMDB Rating 0

Apatow directed exactly one decent movie: The 40-Year-Old Virgin. And even that had too much flab it could've done without. Everything else Apatow has done, has been utter shite. Knocked Up is way too long, and Funny People was the most boring, pretentious pile of shit I've seen in years.

He produces some decent comedies, but Apatow's modus operandi got old very quick: same old actors who continually improvise, leading to flabby, unfocused comedies with forced drama that never feels organic or worthwhile.

Rate:

Malick needs to fuck off. Seriously. Badlands is his only watchable movie. The rest have been overlong, bloated, boring, pretentious, fucking horrible wastes of celluloid that are apparently for "true lovers of cinema."

What is his go? Seriously? Even Sean Penn can't make heads or tails of Tree of Life. He makes movies intended to be days and days long, and doesn't cut them down enough. To make long movies, you need a deft touch or something resembling an artistic soul, but Malick has neither; his movies are fucking shit.

Worse, his fans say that if you don't like his movies, you're a churlish animal who doesn't get it. Yeah, fuck off with that shit. I like movies that engage and entertain me. There is nothing engaging or entertaining about his cinematic shit stains, which are also entirely empty. You might get some vague gobbledygook messages if you're a pretentious fucktard who looks hard for something that isn't there. But regular people will feel like they're wasted their lives.

Fuck this guy.

PvtCaboose91's rating:
Rate:

The Wachowskis made one great movie: The Matrix. That's it. The Matrix sequels blew big time, Speed Racer can fuck off, Cloud Atlas was decent but Tom Tykwer probably gets credit for that one, and Jupiter Ascending was a waste.

Yet, apparently people still want to see more of their movies. I have no idea why. They've had enough chances to amaze us one more time, but they keep wasting them.

PvtCaboose91's rating:
Rate:
Average listal rating (396 ratings) 7.3 IMDB Rating 0

Nobody will deny that Stone has made some tremendous movies across his career, like Platoon, JFK, Wall Street, and so on.

But his latter career has been extremely hit and miss. I'll defend World Trade Center, but movies like Alexander and the massive shit-stain Savages show that Stone is really losing his touch. And yet, he still gets a degree of lenience from critics and audiences. I don't understand it.

PvtCaboose91's rating:
Rate:

Because a director has a handful of good films to their name, people often like to follow them and get excited about every new project... But are they really worth our faith if they keep letting us down?

These guys really get too much lenience.

Suggestions welcome.

Added to




Related lists

Games I'm after
12 item list by LordDarkrai
3 votes 1 comment
Overrated Celebs
13 item list by Nikki
5 votes 1 comment
Overrated Movies
5 item list by Nikki
1 votes
Behind Every Successful Man Stands A Mother
5 item list by shotswerefired
9 votes 1 comment
overrated movies
15 item list by marz
16 votes 15 comments
IMDB Titles (1-100)
100 item list by garfield2710
3 votes 1 comment
Movies of 1956
15 item list by nathan
1 votes
Musicians Gone Much Too Soon
44 item list by diabolical dr voodoo
21 votes 20 comments
Food Diet
25 item list by filmbuilder
9 votes 3 comments

View more top voted lists

People who voted for this also voted for


More lists from PvtCaboose91



Comments

Posted: 2 years, 7 months ago at Mar 18 16:51
Malick is good (apart from his last film) but the rest far less so.
Posted: 2 years, 7 months ago at Mar 18 16:52
Different strokes for different folks... I can't stand Malick's movies.
Posted: 2 years, 7 months ago at Mar 18 23:11
Malick is a genius and The Tree of Life is a masterpiece. And I'm not saying that because I'm a pretentious fucktard. I'm saying that because it touches my soul at the deepest level. I'm sorry you don't like his movies because you miss out a lot.
Posted: 2 years, 7 months ago at Mar 19 0:03
I care so very little, I almost passed out.
Posted: 2 years, 7 months ago at Mar 19 4:41
^hahahaha
Posted: 2 years, 7 months ago at Mar 22 5:26
Agreed on some of these. Haven't seen any of Malick's work because I've yet to be encouraged by the trailers for any of them to check one out. Nolan makes films worth watching, I just find some of them to be overrated.

Oh yeah, I'd argue that the Wachowskis made two films that are worth watching. The other is Bound, which is a solid noir film. I'd have to revisit it to determine whether I like it more or less than The Matrix, but it's definitely better than their other films I've seen.
Posted: 2 years, 6 months ago at Mar 25 11:54
Ridley Scott would be at the top of my list, because I love most of his earlier films and all the way to 'American Gangster', since then he's been creatively dead. If you don't mind, I'd like to point out you forgot to mention the two best examples of too much leniency on the whole list: 'Prometheus' and 'Exodus: Gods and Kings'.

I'm a big fan of Malick, but I'd like to think I am in the least pretentious of ways - for example, I wouldn't call anyone a churlish animal who doesn't get it, haha, because I completely understand why someone wouldn't like it. And I certainly don't automatically like everything he puts out. I think what I appreciate about him is he shows familiar subjects and stories in a completely different way. But in the end, I'd watch 'Commando' over 'The New World' any day.

I think Oliver Stone might be a good addition to this list. He's a director that had great films one after another and then most of what he has released since Natural Born Killers has been bloated bullshit.
Posted: 2 years, 6 months ago at Mar 25 16:19
Thanks for the comment, Stehako!

I decided not to touch on Prometheus because I like it, and we'll leave it at that. It's too big a can of worms to open. I haven't seen Exodus.

Oliver Stone is a very good idea, and I will be adding him to this list.
Avatar
Posted: 2 years, 6 months ago at Mar 26 19:04
I can see you like some of these directors by your raiting. Is any of your favorites on here
Posted: 2 years, 6 months ago at Mar 27 3:00
A shit movie can still be well-directed.
Posted: 2 years, 6 months ago at Mar 27 3:38
I agree in all, except Malick, i love malick, i love all his films, and i get them, i dont find them boring, but i guess is not for everyone, i will understand that many wouldnt like it.
I think its montage pure, transposition of images and sounds and words, and I find them very "embracing" (I dont know if that is the word) It's brilliant (Except To the Wonder, i hated it and The New World it's fine i guess)

Nolan and Tarantino WERE great. And the only good films of Scott are Alien and Blade Runner (the last one being my favorite movie of all times)
Posted: 2 years, 5 months ago at May 8 0:45
Great stuff!
Don't agree with the girl power thing in death proof though...I mean how many movies out there let the girls have a say or do the things men do all the time.
Can't we at least get one mainstreammovie where the girls actually get to kick some ass in the same brutal way.
I know,think of it as payback rather than girl power.
If I remember it right, he kind of had it coming?
I think when we see women being brutal and violent(I don't mean looking sexy with a weapon or doing high kicks,more like,just rough and raw fighting) they often come across even worse/rougher, because it is so rare.
I agree with you though,it's not the best work,not the same quality anymore.
Posted: 2 years, 5 months ago at May 8 3:28
Yeah, but there's a line. Having female action heroes like Sarah Connor or Ellen Ripley is fine, but Death Proof's trio of female leads just came off like girl power stereotypes who were enjoying the whole revenge thing just a bit too much.

And the idea of Kurt Russell (Snake Plissken/Wyatt Earp/Cash/Jack Burton) getting beaten up by twenty-something girls is freaking insulting. If someone like Taylor Lautner or Channing Tatum beat up a veteran female actress in a movie, everyone would kick up a stink about it being sexist. But it's ok in this movie?
Posted: 2 years, 5 months ago at May 8 14:00
Yes that's an angle,it would be called sexist, and upset a lot of people(including me,I think death proof is a bit raw).
I agree they are stereotypes,maybe to soften the blow a little,I don' know.
But I think there is a reason for the violence and why the movie has been made(not saying it is quentins personal reason),but I think it's kind of needed.
I see it as there's been a build up for a long time and eventually something is needed to break the pattern and shake things up a bit.
Then if it's any good as a movie,I don't know,but a bit different angle can sometimes be a good thing.
There is a lot of female corpses in the history of movie.
At the same time agree with you,it's a tricky subject.
Sorry if my English is bad,not used to write a lot,so I may come across as blunt.
Posted: 2 years, 5 months ago at May 8 14:34
It's all about tact, really. Kill Bill was undeniably a girl power thing, but it was done with tact. The Bride gets her revenge, and the way she kills David Carradine is tactfully handled.

But Tarantino goes one step further by not only having the girls be completely OTT, but Russell's character doesn't even take it like a man. He's on the ground sobbing and crying. The message there is pretty simple. And again, the girls whooping and savouring the whole thing just comes off as a total girl power trip. Even the critics have called the film a total girl power statement.
Posted: 2 years, 5 months ago at May 8 16:51
I agree with you that it isn't tactfull or anything near Kill Bill,
Kill Bill is better by far,and I wish that more violent movies were more tactful and better made.
Still,I mean it's very often both females and males are portrayed as stereotypes,can't we let the women stereotypes do it brutal and cruel then once in a while.
Stereotypical males kill all the time,in movies that are not tactfull at all,tortures and rapes and stuff,and that's not very frowned upon,or at least it is quite common.
I don't know,I guess I am defending it,because even if it's not a good movie and the portrayal is off, it is,I think, good to get some balance.
Aha! it is like this, I am defending it's existence rather than the movie itself.If that is making any sense.
Posted: 2 years, 5 months ago at May 8 16:51
aaah, didn't mean to click twice.

Post comment


Insert image

drop image here
(or click)
or enter URL:
 link image?  square?

Insert video

Format block