Movies Films where the Director was the problem

[Joe_Armstrong]

Today I saw a documentary about Galaxy Quest.
Harold Ramis quit as director because he thought he couldn't get Tim Allen
to be the best captain.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Untouchables with De Palma.

I like some of De Palma's stuff but his style is so fucking 80s. It just did not age well at all. Scarface and Untouchables both should have had different directors. They both kind of feel like overrated shlock.

That said, Carlito's Way, was brilliant.

I would say Carrie, Carlito's Way and Scarface are master works. His style wasn't confined to the 80s look and feel. Carrie was a very high end 70s movie and Phantom of the Paradise was a 70s movie made in the spirit largely of the 60s.

I think he mostly just went over the same cliff most directors do at some point...Coppola, Cimino, Carpenter, Shyamalan, etc.

 

[Fedorgasm]

Untouchables with De Palma.

I like some of De Palma's stuff but his style is so fucking 80s. It just did not age well at all.

THANK YOU!!!! OMG I've had this debate with people and they all thought I was crazy.

I can't believe we disagree so much on Richard Jewell and yet we may be the only 2 people that think the direction in the untouchables was horrible.

 

[Prefect]

THANK YOU!!!! OMG I've had this debate with people and they all thought I was crazy.

I can't believe we disagree so much on Richard Jewell and yet we may be the only 2 people that think the direction in the untouchables was horrible.

There is a lot that I don't like about Richard Jewell but I think that Paul Hauser gave an incredible performance. All the other actors I thought were a little over the top. Maybe, Paul was the only one to not listen to Eastwood's shitty ass directing.

I don't understand De Palma. There is a lot of work he did that seems very modern and well done and then he did shit like the Untouchables, which I think people only like because Sean Connery and Kevin Costner were in it. I think Mamet put together a good script but jesus christ it feels like a weird movie.

​

 

[Prefect]

I would say Carrie, Carlito's Way and Scarface are master works. His style wasn't confined to the 80s look and feel. Carrie was a very high end 70s movie and Phantom of the Paradise was a 70s movie made in the spirit largely of the 60s.

I think he mostly just went over the same cliff most directors do at some point...Coppola, Cimino, Carpenter, Shyamalan, etc.

There is nothing master about Scarface. It is slow and plodding with pacing issues and there is no nuance, climax, or resolution. It is like a character study but the main character is a cartoon.

 

[moreorless87]

Found another, at least IMO;

The Game (1997)

At moments looked great, but by the end it's an incoherent mess. I'd love to have been a fly on the wall in the editing room. Either Fincher made the wrong cuts, or he didn't get the shots he needed to fill out the story.

I think the issue mostly is people misjudge what kind of film it is, they think its a conventional thriller when really its a drama. The worst you can say of it I think is that the various twists becomes a bit improbable but I think that matters much less when you realise its a film about Douglas's character being forced to step outside his gilded existence and confront his personal issues.

 

[moreorless87]

I would say Carrie, Carlito's Way and Scarface are master works. His style wasn't confined to the 80s look and feel. Carrie was a very high end 70s movie and Phantom of the Paradise was a 70s movie made in the spirit largely of the 60s.

I think he mostly just went over the same cliff most directors do at some point...Coppola, Cimino, Carpenter, Shyamalan, etc.

I can kind of see his point a bit about the Untouchables, it does sometimes I think feel a bit too "clean" in the way its shot(honestly Coster's Ness is a bit bland for me as well) which doesnt really match the material but Scarface is I think ideally suited to De Palma's style, I think its fundamentally just a pulpier film than something like the Godfather and if anywhere suits De Palma's look its surely 80's Miami?

 

[BisexualMMA]

I can kind of see his point a bit about the Untouchables, it does sometimes I think feel a bit too "clean" in the way its shot(honestly Coster's Ness is a bit bland for me as well) which doesnt really match the material but Scarface is I think ideally suited to De Palma's style, I think its fundamentally just a pulpier film than something like the Godfather and if anywhere suits De Palma's look its surely 80's Miami?

I only like The Untouchables...I don't consider it De Palma firing 100% on all cylinders. I thought the Connery stuff was all great but the movie wouldn't be so memorable without him.

To me Scarface was about as close to an 80s Michael Mann movie that you would get from somebody who wasn't Michael Mann. And I think it's better than Thief and Manhunter which I both liked. To Live and Die in LA might be another candidate from other directors but I think Scarface is better there too. Cobra kind of halfway tried to capture the same thing and do some kind of fusion of Dirty Harry and Miami Vice.

I think Scarface also wasn't really De Palma's signature style at the time it was made. I would even say it was a bit of a departure. When I think De Palma I usually think of his going out of his way to use different lenses at the same time to get different parts of the frame in focus for unusual shots like he did in Carrie and there was one of them in Casualties of War that kind of stood out from the rest of the movie. Otherwise I would think of elaborate stuff like the nightclub shot in Carlito's Way that goes all around the club in one take or the spinning dancing shot in Carrie.

With Scarface he kind of did something different (maybe not entirely different from Blow Out) and made the best Miami Vice type of thing ever produced.

 

[herpd807]

The Last Jedi

 

[Hyperglide]

Star Trek '09 directed by JJ. Abraham's was a real shit show. Shaky cam overuse, lense flare over use and made the entire sets and vibe of the movie feel like an Apple Store.

I think he is the most overrated director of this gen. for all the praise he gets.

 

[cws80us]

I can think of 2 examples off hand:

1. Rian Johnson- The Last Jedi. He completely ruined the entire sequel trilogy after being handed a solid foundation by JJ Abrams. Sure the Force Awakens was a lot of rehash from the OT, but it was well received and setup a lot of interesting plot points to be explored in Episides 8 and 9. But, Johnson just flushed the whole thing and wrecked it.
2. Taiwan Waititi- Thor Love & Thunder. After the success of Ragnorak, he was given free reign and delivered a complete dud. He went way too much on the comedy and silliness and very weak on plot. The whole thing was a disjointed mess.

 

[Two Crows]

I would say Carrie, Carlito's Way and Scarface are master works. His style wasn't confined to the 80s look and feel. Carrie was a very high end 70s movie and Phantom of the Paradise was a 70s movie made in the spirit largely of the 60s.

I think he mostly just went over the same cliff most directors do at some point...Coppola, Cimino, Carpenter, Shyamalan, etc.

Carrie is brilliant film that transcends it's era easily.

 

[Two Crows]

Nope was dumb as fuck. Peele has the early M. Night Shyamalan and early Neill Blomkamp carte blanche to do whatever he wants and he seems to be heading for the cliff faster than M. Night did.

I actually give Nope some points because I had NO IDEA what was going to happen next. Not sure that is completely a good thing, but it was nice to be surprised a little. Also, the dangerous animal theme was done very differently than "Giant Spider Kills All!", or "Giant Snake Kills More!", etc. It was a refreshing change of pace (IMO).

Also, while I despise DEI/woke/whatever, I felt Daniel Kaluuya gave the most genuine "country" performance from a "black" man I've ever seen. His mannerisms and speech truly mimic the country boys I've known (and I mean in person, and "country" as in guys who work cattle & pig farms). His quite sort of do-it-myself approach was very convincing (IMO).

To be fair, I'm citing the writing and acting, so the direction would be completely fair game.

 

[clutchCAT420]

The latest batman movie with the twilight dude awful movie, direction and script.

 

[Patrick Jane]

Taken 3

 

[TheRash]

Not sure if it’s been mentioned but:

Oliver Stone with Natural Born Killers.

He had a prime Tarantino screen play, Tommy Lee Jones, Tom Sizemore, Juliette Lewis, Woody Harrelson and even Rodney fucking Dangerfield for a cast, and yet we got a cocaine fueled film of chaos.

Don’t get me wrong, I still kinda like it, but my God can you imagine how good that movie could have been if Oliver Stone hadn’t have treated it like a music video.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Not sure if it’s been mentioned but:

Oliver Stone with Natural Born Killers.

He had a prime Tarantino screen play, Tommy Lee Jones, Tom Sizemore, Juliette Lewis, Woody Harrelson and even Rodney fucking Dangerfield for a cast, and yet we got a cocaine fueled film of chaos.

Don’t get me wrong, I still kinda like it, but my God can you imagine how good that movie could have been if Oliver Stone hadn’t have treated it like a music video.

Yeah Oliver Stone became his own worst enemy around the early 90s. Platoon and Wall Street were made and edited "traditionally" and the result was two 10/10 movies or close to it. Then Stone became all weird and experimental, making stuff black and white for a few seconds at a time for no reason, having dialogue continue over shots of a speaking character whose mouth isn't moving, etc. He toned it down to an appropriate amount or just slightly too much by the time of Any Given Sunday but he is a name that definitely deserves mention in this thread.

 

[HereticBD]

Not sure if it’s been mentioned but:

Oliver Stone with Natural Born Killers.

He had a prime Tarantino screen play, Tommy Lee Jones, Tom Sizemore, Juliette Lewis, Woody Harrelson and even Rodney fucking Dangerfield for a cast, and yet we got a cocaine fueled film of chaos.

Don’t get me wrong, I still kinda like it, but my God can you imagine how good that movie could have been if Oliver Stone hadn’t have treated it like a music video.

I think it works in it's favor. If for nothing else, it's an epic acid trip with incredible over the top performances. There's nothing quite like it, and given it's rather experimental approach, it's amazing that it's as coherent and watchable as it is. Whatever he set out to make with that, I think he mostly succeeded, and the style, while not for everybody, helps it stand out more than it otherwise would.

"U-Turn", even though I have a bit of a soft spot for it, is where he really started to fly off the handle.

 

[TheRash]

I think it works in it's favor. If for nothing else, it's an epic acid trip with incredible over the top performances. There's nothing quite like it, and given it's rather experimental approach, it's amazing that it's as coherent and watchable as it is. Whatever he set out to make with that, I think he mostly succeeded, and the style, while not for everybody, helps it stand out more than it otherwise would.

"U-Turn", even though I have a bit of a soft spot for it, is where he really started to fly off the handle.

I’ll agree that it kinda worked, I mean I’ll watch a few minutes every time I come across it. But with all the resources Oliver Stone had it could have been so much greater. Just tone down the chaos for what seems like chaos’ sake. Nothing wrong with experimenting, but the when it’s counterproductive to the project.

My honest opinion is that Oliver Stone has a super huge ego, and wanted to put his name on the story just so he could say he’s better than Tarantino.

 

[HereticBD]

My honest opinion is that Oliver Stone has a super huge ego, and wanted to put his name on the story just so he could say he’s better than Tarantino.

I don't know about that. Tarantino is the one who threw a shit fit, and it really only got legs after he was established and his opinion meant something. The script was sold before he had even directed "Reservoir Dogs". I doubt Stone knew him from any other script writer at the time he purchased it, and wouldn't have much of reason to be in a creative feud with him, as Tarantino was a nobody at the time. I don't think it was the first time Stone put his personal touch on a script.

Tarantino also has admittedly not even seen the whole movie, and the main thing he complains about(it lacking the "love story" element), is still there, so I don't even know what he's complaining about, other than that it just wasn't his complete and unfiltered vision.