Most Overrated Director Ever?

[captainofbeef]

misterbalco said:

I can say that I've seen 7 Hitchcock films: Psycho, Suspicion, North By Northwest, Rope, The Birds, Strangers On A Train, Vertigo. There is hardly any difference between the 7 films. What is Hitchcock's messege during his films?: Dont trust anybody? That is rediculous. Not to mention, he is considered king for his long shots, I aint buying that, when Tarko takes that crown. The Birds is stupid, plain stupid, boring, nothing ever happens. Psycho is ok, but it has some long, tedious shots as well. Rope and North By Northwest are entertaining, but not great films, because they dont do anything for me. The rest of the films that I mentioned suck, but not as bad as The Birds. The Birds is, if I can say so, for The Birds.

But still, Hitchcock is no Ridley Scott or anything...

Hitchcock may not have a deep message behind all of his films, but thats not what his films are about. They are about suspense and keeping you on the edge of you seat, anticipating the next move. I think that both Tarkovsky and Hitchcock are even when it comes to long shots (even though I find Tarko to be the better director). Vertigo does not suck. Not in the slightest bit. I want to know why you think it sucks. Also, you should see Rear Window before you form an opinion on Hitchcock. It is his best film and I think you will enjoy it.

[blackmoses]

Rear Window is not his best film!

[criterionmaster]

You continually do this, you say someone is wrong when this is all opinion, you don't say why you think he is wrong, and you don't explain what you think. You need to stop posting stuff like this without explaining yourself; please, more discussion and less saying everyone is wrong.

[blackmoses]

He did not say it was his opinion he said it is his best.

[captainofbeef]

blackmoses said:

He did not say it was his opinion he said it is his best.

Which is my OPINION!! I think its his best. You think something else is Hitchcock's best. I didn't say, "This is a fact." If you are gonna say that you disagree with something, make it construcitive and more than one line long.

[filmchick101]

whoa. well for me, I say Steven Speilberg.

[kiddo]

blackmoses said:

He did not say it was his opinion he said it is his best.

There`s no point in saying "my opinion..." all the time. That`s just unneccesary; when you say, etc. that Stanley Kubrick is a better director than Bergman, then that`s exclusively your opinion. I don`t feel a need to say "My opinion is that Kubrick is a better director than Bergman. Thats my opinion". Because that is unneccesary. Everything one of us say on this forum is "our own opinion".

[criterionmaster]

True, very true. The only thing I complain about is when someone says "your wrong" and then doesn't say anything else. I mean obviously they are not "wrong" since it is their opinion but add to that the person doesn't even say anything to back their claim up. But yeah, there is definitely much less of that happening, which is a great thing.

[kiddo]

Yeah, if you for etc. say that "Wrong, because Bergman uses the film medium to the fullest; he manages to explore the human spirit in a much more interesting and intellectual way than Kubrick. Bla, bla, bla...", then that`s much more interesting.

A "wrong" or "you know nothing!" says nothing (other than that you disagree, which is very "care"), and you could in stead just shut your mouth.

[mixed]

I find it hard to put into words exactly why Hitch was a great director. I suppose it is the way he draws things out and well, the suspense. The death on the staircase in psycho, the birds coming out of the chimney are such fantastic instances. The final argument in Rebecca, the finding of the cracked glasses in strangers on a train. Im not sure how to give an example of what makes him so great as a director though. Whereas some directors you can easily say its the mood they create or the way things are captured. But with Hitch I'm not sure. His films were made as entertainment so its difficult to understand where his touch has gone in. I need some help from someone on this.

I dont think the films that were slated deserve that though. Psycho, though very very overrated is a highly effective film. Everything to the intricately captured shower scene, to the mesmerising, creepy and scarily realistic performance delivered by Perkins. The birds as well, the pacing on that is perfect. I really think the scene in which the birds come through the chimney, the noise it makes, is one of the most chilling moments in cinema. Also the way they built up on the climbing frame as Tippi Hedren sits on a bench smoking. The way the scene builds progressively, the shots alternating more and more quickly. Just wonderful.

[criterionmaster]

I will say that Hitch could do anything and everything right. He was a genius in that he understood what made people tick; he would do everything just the right amount to make it effective. He was an innovator and almost every single film nowadays takes something from him, whether they know it or not. Very few directors made so many masterful films. It was like everything he touched turned to cinematic gold. His sense of humor is still ahead of it's time. I'm sure others have things to add.

[kiddo]

I don`t think I have too much to add, really, but I must say that I agree with nearly everything you guys say, mixed and criterionmaster.

Hitchcock know how to build up a suspensful story, and he does it so elegantly that we nearly doesn`t notice it! The death on the staircase in Psycho, as mixed mentioned, is one of those few moments in film, where I have felt this stream of warmth inside my body (another time this happend was in Mulholland Dr., when the "bum" turns up behind the restaurant). It seems like Hitch knows how our general emotions tied to suspense (not necessarily other things, such as love, happiness, unexplainable emotions...) works.

[dontdigonswine]

I think Hitch is great, because even though he did a large variety of movies when it comes to subject matter or genre, you can still tell it's a Hitch movie while watching it. There's something very signature about Hitch suspense and direction that sets it apart from other movies, to me at least. This was the same reason why the Cahiers du cinema gang adored him as well; the presence of auteurism in his films. I mean, there's other reasons why I think Hitch is amazing, probably having to do with my love of his individual films (Vertigo, by far the most)

[criterionmaster]

I know people on here think he is overrated, please tell us, what about Hitchcock do you not like?

[criterionmaster]

ptahole said:

Well?

For me, Jim Jarmusch.

I kinda agree, but haven't seen enough of the man's work. I am just surprised there wasn't any debate about this.

[jumpingjackflash]

Chris Nolan
The guy who did Requiem for a Dream
Ridley Scott
Spielberg

and Hitchcock is great but doesn't deserve to consistantly top these Sight and Sound and TSPDT lists.

[PTAhole]

jumpingjackflash said:

Chris Nolan
The guy who did Requiem for a Dream
Ridley Scott
Spielberg

and Hitchcock is great but doesn't deserve to consistantly top these Sight and Sound and TSPDT lists.

I can kinda see these, but I like all the directors you listed. Nolan has only made a few films, so I don't want to judge his career quite yet. Ditto with Aronofsky, although I LOVE all three of his films. Ridley Scott is the master of the inconsistant, but Alien and Blade Runner alone make up for any disappointments. Spielberg is one of my favorite directors, and I will restate my thoughts on him here. I believe many have inadequate reasons for disliking him. It's always that he is too "manipulative," which is the most overused bullshit term in the entire film community. What's wrong with being manipulative. Bergman is manipulative. Any director that makes you feel anything is manipulative, so I think that is a stupid reason. However, if you have a real reason, then I'd be happy to listen. Hitchcock is literally my favorite filmmaker, so I disagree, but at least you like him.

[jumpingjackflash]

I think any director would struggle with the blunt title of 'best ever'. I don't hate Spielberg, I'm just not that big a fan, his work is very much a spectrum for me. I love Catch Me If You Can (strange one I know) and Jaws (obviously), I like E.T and Schindler's List always impresses me whenever I see it. But most of his other work I don't really care for. I can appreciate the craft involved and I respect Spielbergs work ethic. It's just artistically I'm just not felling him, I'm not a fan of Lean or Jackson either. I guess I'm just not an epics guy.

Aronofsky just annoys the crap out of me. Theres a fine line with me when it comes to qwirky/prententiousness and he crosses it for me. Chris Nolan annoys me because he is British and has contibuted next to nothing our film industry. I'm British and am ashamed at the current state of our film industry, its very weak and its talented directors like Nolan who keep it that way. At least leave behind a decent body of work (like Hitch) before packing your bags. This is why I will always respect directors like Mike Leigh. Plus I thought Batman Begins stank.

Oh and while I'm at it other directors I don't quite get:
Jeunet
Tim Burton

Thats all for now.

[kiddo]

jumpingjackflash said:

...But most of his other work I don't really care for. I can appreciate the craft involved and I respect Spielbergs work ethic. It's just artistically I'm just not felling him, I'm not a fan of Lean or Jackson either. I guess I'm just not an epics guy.

I feel somewhat the same way, although I like Leans visual style, and therefore like...him. But there's often that these big epics is a thematically somewhat uninteresting piece of cinema. The Bridge on the River Kwai, comes to my mind; It's extremely beautiful to look at, but content-wise it's far from very interesting...

jumpingjackflash said:

Aronofsky just annoys the crap out of me. Theres a fine line with me when it comes to qwirky/prententiousness and he crosses it for me. Chris Nolan annoys me because he is British and has contibuted next to nothing our film industry. I'm British and am ashamed at the current state of our film industry, its very weak and its talented directors like Nolan who keep it that way. At least leave behind a decent body of work (like Hitch) before packing your bags. This is why I will always respect directors like Mike Leigh.

Basically, I don't understand what your trying to say here. Maybe it's because I ain't British.

[jumpingjackflash]

Basically compared to the US, Japan and non-English speaking Europe the British film industry is pretty weak, for me at least. We have plenty of award winners Oscar wise, The Queen for example will probably do very well. I'm just not very enthusiastic for most British films. Guy Richie is another 'overrated' director. It just seems to me that our nations shared language is as much a disadvantage to our film industry as it is a plus. Its very easy for anybody working in film over here who shows a spark of talent to just go to Hollywood. Australia has the same problem. Hollywood is where all the money is. Chris Nolan is a good example of this. The reason I love Mike Leigh is that he is one of the few who accurately depicts life in the UK as it is and has a back catalogue that is personal to him.

Saying that I did like Memento.

[wkw]

I think that George Lucas is extremely overrated. Aside from Star Wars (he didn't even direct the best ones), THX and American Graffiti, he has done nothing.

[PTAhole]

Everyone hates Lucas, so I don't think he's overrated, more like underrated.

[criterionmaster]

Yeah, it seems like directing those three films is enough to just retire as a master, or at least be called a good director, which I believe he was a great one at one point.

[sacrilegend]

I love Jarmusch and Aronofsky...

I'm not going to call anyone overrated, because it just doesn't seem my place to say that. I enjoy liking stuff more than I do bashing them. Also, I don't know enough to call anyone anything.