Angel Dust on 14/4/2009 at 03:34
Tetsuo is actually quite a well made film I think and has more worth than just it's pure shock value.
Quote Posted by 242
Many? I can't count more than 5-8 who can be compared with him in terms of creating as involving, atmospheric, and not banal movies. Many directors created one or two masterpieces among a number of so-so flicks, but only a few created virtually only masterpieces.
I would say there are certainly far more than 5-8 directors who surpass Kubrick in terms pure film making talent. Of course many of them are far more prolific than Kubrick, who wasn't, and consequently have a few misses in their filmographies but they have just as many hits. Off the top of my head film makers at least as strong as Kubrick:
Kurosawa
Bergman
Fellini
Spielberg
Chaplin
Huston
Hawks
Tarkovsky
Ford
Hitchcock
Altman
Eastwood
Lean
Lumet
Scorsese
And God knows how many I am forgetting. Kubrick seems to be the go to guy for 'My first art film' and unfortunately gets talked about above and over IMO far superior film makers. The flip side of that is he is also the favourite whipping boy of the anti-art film crowd and often held up as an example of what is 'wrong' with them. Personally I quite like most of his films, in particular
2001,
Dr Strangelove and
The Killing (although that naff climax at the airport is staggeringly bad).
demagogue on 14/4/2009 at 03:48
What I think Kubrick did well that distinguishes him was really branding himself, though also like Orson Welles, Hitchcock, and Spielberg of course where the branding-meter goes off the scale, but Kubrick in particular for being the artist-director.
Not that other directors weren't distinctive and instantly recognizable, they were, but I think Kubrick really went out of his way to promote and work on projects in a way that propped his name and would make a mark in the public imagination, like an ego kind of thing that I think a lot of other great directors were too busy making better projects to bother miffing about crystallizing the public imagination around their egos. Not that that's such a bad thing; if that's what he was after all along, he got what he wanted.
Rogue Keeper on 14/4/2009 at 09:15
They're all great.
I SAID!
jstnomega on 14/4/2009 at 23:57
Quote Posted by demagogue
What I think Kubrick did well that distinguishes him was really branding himself, though also like Orson Welles, Hitchcock, and Spielberg of course where the branding-meter goes off the scale, but Kubrick in particular for being the artist-director.
Not that other directors weren't distinctive and instantly recognizable, they were, but I think Kubrick really went out of his way to promote and work on projects in a way that propped his name and would make a mark in the public imagination, like an ego kind of thing that I think a lot of other great directors were too busy making better projects to bother miffing about crystallizing the public imagination around their egos. Not that that's such a bad thing; if that's what he was after all along, he got what he wanted.
w/that thought in mind, tho he wasn't there to the end, the small portion(s) of One Eyed Jacks done by Kubrick, the landscapes, are so obviously his work
Rogue Keeper on 15/4/2009 at 07:08
Quote Posted by Angel Dust
Kurosawa
Bergman
Fellini
Spielberg
Chaplin
Huston
Hawks
Tarkovsky
Ford
Hitchcock
Altman
Eastwood
Lean
Lumet
Scorsese
What about Rid? "Best eye in the business" as Michael Deeley puts it. But frankly, since 1492 Conquest of Paradise, his works were either artistically mediocre or downright dull (White Squall, GI Jane). I don't know what's the problem, perhaps he didn't have luck for better screenplays...
242 : Kubrick is rather a special case among filmmakers in the aspect that relatively early in his career he reached very high level of artistic freedom and wasn't very dependent on financiers' mercy. He didn't have to do compromises for mainstream audience much. But as it goes with these uberartists, he wasn't immune to his own share of manners. I mean, apart from his initial treatment of actors as if they were props, show me how many filmmakers out there can afford to do 50-100 takes of one scene?
Angel Dust on 15/4/2009 at 12:12
Hey I said I probably forgot tons! Although my love of Alien and Bladerunner aside I personally wouldn't put Ridley Scott on a top directors list. He has fairly strong visual style but not really much else as pretty much the rest of his work illustrates. That said I am keeping an eye out for his apparent return to sci-fi.
Rogue Keeper on 15/4/2009 at 12:21
If nothing else (Alien and BR put aside), then certainly The Duellists, Legend, Thelma and Louise and 1492 hold their firm position in history of modern cinema. Pretty much every director had his weak pieces... maybe with exception of Stan, hehe.
Also, if you put such an overgrown kid like Spielberg into the list of the greatest filmmakers, then Scott deserves his share of the pie, too!
vurt on 15/4/2009 at 12:30
Eyes Wide Shut, loved it, extremely atmospheric movie that've i've seen numerous times.
The Shining is also great. I've seen 2001 a couple of times but i find it a bit boring, i much rather watch Solaris (also VERY slow but it manages to keep my interest up all the way through anyways)
AI was great the first time i saw it, the second viewing was just "ok".
I don't think i've seen Barry Lyndon yet..
june gloom on 15/4/2009 at 17:23
Solaris is okay.
