2015 Directors roundtable: Ridley Scott, Quentin Tarantino,

>>64524971
Why didn't they get anyone that's good with camera in there

Why does Uno Fartitno act like he's 14

>>64524971
At what time do they talk about Blade Runner 2?

File: haneke_a.jpg (28KB, 675x380px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 675x380px

will we ever get one as funny as this again?

>>64525587
when Ridley mentions sequels, QT says he was excited for prometheus, then I think O'RUssell jokes about Blade Runner 2 but Ridley doesn't say anything

>>64525661
The actors Franco/Eisenberg/Duvall will forever be the best

>>64524971

Ridley Scott

>all these big movies with "special effects and shit"

>prometheus, the martian

>>64525733
>The actors Franco/Eisenberg/Duvall will forever be the best
Anyone have the gif/webm?

Damn look at them 4 inch heels Ridley Scott's wearing.

File: Screen Shot 01-06-16 at 12.48 AM.jpg (50KB, 676x130px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 676x130px

>>64525880
>even the youtube thumbnail knows

Writers
Sorkin in the same room as AMy Schumer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-GKiB43iJs

File: 1450857377117.jpg (26KB, 500x326px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x326px

>five minutes in
>Tarantino's glass is almost empty

>>64524971
someone needs to tell orussel to shut up or fuck off

seriously this guy loves to hear himself talk so much and he says he's humbled

>>64525796
I know,Did anyone else think Ridley Scott is a douche? He's like 'I did commercials, I already know everything' 'everything on the martian went perfectly, no problems whatsoever'. Nigga is insanely arrogant

>>64526333
Nigga is a veteran, he made his first long feature at 40, of course he saw everything

Anybody have a youtube link to the final action sequence from "Police Story 3: Super Cop"?

I probably rented it on VHS in the early 90's, but now I have to know what the fuck QT is on about.

>>64525661
i cant the full roundtable for that, just the 4min clip. grr

>>64526446
It's GOAT. Jackie Chan almost gets killed. In the bloopers he nearly falls off of the train and probably would have been caught under the wheels.

>>64526447
>>64525661
full haneke roundtable where he blows hollywood the fuck out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui2kFHP-bSc

>>64526611
oh thanks. i was looking for it as director's, why did thr put him in the writers one?

>>64524971

>2001 is about what? I don't know

lol Inarritu

>>64526759
Might just be an availability thing, since he needed the translator, he would have made the main roundtable akward so they put him at the kiddies table

I strongly suggest no one watches the roundtable with Amy Schumer and Dunham, It was an hour of circle jerking. But for women. So, I guess it was actually a circle fingering .

>>64526611
i'm glad he's talking shit about Downfall and Shindler's list

>>64526333
It's better than Inarritu and the rest being like "UGHH MY JOB IS SO DIFFICULT"

Do any of European or American directors really like/appreciate/ Tarkovsky? It seems like he pretty much has no visible legacy? I mean even Inarritu basically namedropped him like a pseudo-patrcian..

how big was he when he was alive?

Chris Nolan interviews Tarantino about the Hateful 8
Conversation With Quentin Tarantino & Paul Thomas Anderson about Hateful 8 and 70mm

>>64527205

File: Daisy Ridley.png (237KB, 651x780px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 651x780px

>>64525733
>QT says he was excited for prometheus
>he
>was

File: image.png (2MB, 1904x881px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1904x881px

>>64527372

>>64527461
looks like they're having vietnam flashbacks
>it ain't me starts playing

File: 1312945603760.png (137KB, 356x353px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 356x353px

>>64526034
>that was 4 years ago

say it isn't so

>>64526333
Would you rather he had lied and said "being a filmmaker is so hard! Making The Martian was a bitch! :'("?

File: beaver.png (214KB, 400x686px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 400x686px

>>64527461

>>64525498
Who? What?

>>64527372
It would be pretty stupid to still be excited for Prometheus though wouldn't it?

>>64528816
https://youtu.be/48a6ZS7jJQ0

You're in for a treat.

>>64529733
Oh man I really would but the first 30 seconds alone defeated me.

>>64525796
He's fucking retarded and hasn't made a good movie in fucking forever. His stuff still looks good and creates a certain atmosphere but that is it.

>>64526294
He's like that on his directors commentaries as well. Clearly really thinks he's a genius.

>>64530156
>hasn't made a good movie in fucking forever.
The Counselor is one of the very best films of the decade so far.

>>64526333
>no problems in the Martian

Except for the Martian

>>64530288
It really isn't although I'd say that it was better than the rest of the shit he directed in recent history.

File: qt shutup.png (680KB, 843x661px) Image search: [Google]

680KB, 843x661px

>QT immediately sperging out about muh digital

I'm only 8 minutes in but Ridley Scott seems so surly and out of touch it's amazing. Dudeee

File: gooselaugh.gif (2MB, 308x310px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 308x310px

>>64525733
The one with Gosling was good

>>64530870
actually im retarded, it's the same one

>>64526611
Damn, him and tarantino would be interesting cause he said he doesn't like people making entertainment out of the holocaust

>>64530523
Its funny since Danny Boyle is in the same room and he was one of the guys who started the whole Digital film making thing with the success of 28 days later

>>64524971
Ridley Scott is /fa/ as fuck

>>64527137
Can you give a tl;dr, I don't want to watch it

>>64530751
His commentaries on his films are absolutely amazing. He talks slow and gravelly and it's comfy as fuck

>>64531004
This desu. Dude is nearly 80 and BTFO out of man children like Cuckiltino

>>64524971

>no Max Landis
>no Christopher Nolan
>no JJ Abrams

Pantheon of the Gods would have been complete

File: 1432585360352.gif (502KB, 160x160px) Image search: [Google]

502KB, 160x160px

>>64531040
>Imagining Max Landis in a room with actual filmmakers who were directors at the time that his father killed several people

I'd pay the full price of an IMAX admission ticket just to see that in HD.

Iñarritu has the funniest fucking mexican accent ever, he sounds like that mexican guy from Tim and Eric Awesome Show.
http://www.adultswim.com/videos/tim-and-eric-awesome-show-great-job/cinco-urinal-shower/

>o russel rolling his eyes at superior directors

confirmed for faggot if that wasn't clear enough

>>64526113
>>64527137

Amy Schumer is actually fine in the writers one. I only know her from the memes but she's really humble and knows she doesn't deserve to be there and just lets the writers talk and tries to learn. It's Sorkin who is the most obnoxious cunt in history. The nigga acts exactly like the worst of his characters and smugly soapboxes about the internet and newspapers and the death of America and his show getting cancelled and those damn kids on his lawn etc. etc. I had literally had to skip ahead until he shut up at parts. The Brooklyn and Room writers are both fine and total vets and the Inside Out writer is is pretty awesome and exactly like the Pohler character.

>>64531336
Dude has clearly got short-man syndrome. Imagine knowing (although he's probably delusional) that your'e the weakest filmmaker at the table?

3 Kings was pretty good, he has literally never made anything good ever sine.

>>64529733
LOL....BASED TARANTINO

>>64524971
>no villenueve
REEEEEEEEEEEEE
Also how the fuck does that Hooper faggot keep getting on this roundtable? Did he even make a movie this year?

See now, after this I love Blade Runner so much more.

>>64531460
Redmayne Transex film is made by him

>>64531384
>smugly soapboxes
He was asked a question about answered about his views
He's actually humble, there's a bit where he says he's not smart like his characters

>>64525443
its not a cameraman roundtable, dipshit

>>64531460
Does that guy make anything that isn't the most obvious pandering oscarbait?

All his movies sound like a parody of the kind of movie that would be nominated for oscars

>>64531715

They talk about why newsroom got cancelled for 5 fucking minutes anon. You can like Sorkin's work if you want but if you're not there just to see him talk there's no way he's not an obnoxious cunt in this discussion, he dominates every discussion and talks about his politics as much as he does writing.

>>64525443

Cinematographers is later this month

>boyle, o russel, hooper

Literally who?

Ridley was absolutely based.

>>64531850
>not knowing Danny Boyle
fucking pleb

the other 2 are shit tho

Quick poll right here:

How many bodies are buried in O'Russel's backward?

4? 5? More than 5?

>>64531024
Aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh! Basically they five their experiences. I think Dunham twice made me sick. She is sickening to watch. She talked about that they didn't replace David Letterman with someone diverse. She told a story how she eavesdropped on someone talking shit about her show, when the other yantas asked who she said she would mention after the show. Schumer talked about her standup. The black woman mentioned how she has a hard time finding work.

>>64531916
>Danny Boyle
>not pleb
lol

>>64531850
even if you dont like the movies you should know who they are

>>64531954
>not liking Trainspotting
fuck off

>>64531024
>His commentaries on his films are absolutely amazing. He talks slow and gravelly and it's comfy as fuck
I wish more were on jewtube but thanks for the heads up. Listening to him and Crowe doing the Gladiator commentary for now and it is quite good, and the Joaquin tidbits are hilarious.

>>64527239
For the wrong reasons though. Just like his movies. I really like them, but probably because for different reasons then Hanecke intended

>>64525498
Because you're projecting

>>64532077
I like it, but his films aren't exactly highbrow

>>64531850
>not knowing based Boyle

You best be kidding m8y

>>64524971
Why the fuck would they invite Quentin ?

>>64532218
They did back in 2012. David O Russel wanted to strangle Tarantula every time he spoke.

>>64524971
Why did they invite Tom Whopper? I never heard of him until now.

>>64532434
because he is an academy award winning director, with a new movie which will probably get multiple nominations at least? maybe you should watch more movies.

Name one good meme from their movies! I hate these hacks. Name one good meme NAME FUCKING ONE!

>>64531402
He's the best American director right now. Certainly better than all those other faggots at the table for this year's movies. Steve Jobs was an abysmal failure, transex oscar bait is just a seat warmer, Revenent is 3hrs of expository anguish, the Martian was literally reddit, H8 was a dull pastiche of other Tarantino flicks. Joy was the film of 2015. They could've kicked some of these has-beens for McKay and Coogler.

>>64531460
Hooper sucks and so does this panel. I'd have loved to have Coogler in the room with Tarantino to give him shit about the N-bombs, Miller in the room to give Inarittu a chuckle about his hardships making The Revenant.

File: 457.jpg (152KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 900x900px

>>64524971

>Directors arranged from left to right in order of quality

>>64532600
I did watch King's Speech and Les Mis, just didn't pay attention to the director's name.

what kind of your dream roundtable panel /tv/?

>>64532764
Todd Haynes
Don Hertzfeldt

>>64532764
this is bait if ive ever seen it

>>64525661
>Jim Halpert and Apatow cracking fart jokes while this masterful artist sits there
I hope his translator didn't bother with all the retarded shit they said

>>64526113
Are you implying Sorkin is talented?

>>64532845

I know they're supposed to have released a movie in the year but fuck it:

>Denis Villeneuve
>PTA
>Ryan Coogler
>John Carpenter
>Michael Mann
>David Lynch

>>64530224
but his movies are mediocre at best

File: w0t.jpg (1MB, 5000x5000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 5000x5000px

>>64528749

>>64532127
What wrong reasons? The guy is right on the money about director's responsibility.

>>64532845

QT
Spike Lee
Werner Herzog
James Cameron
Kathryn Bigelow
Brian DePalma

>>64532853
You're a pleb if I've ever seen one.

David O Russell is the ultimate pleb filter, it's incredible how reliable he is at separating the men from the boipussies

>>64532248
Everybody wanted to kill him whenever he spoke. Even worthless hacks like Ben Affleck, Hooper and Ang Lee couldn't stand his autistic ways

>>64532845
>Von Trier
>Scorsese
>Woody Allen
>Haneke
>Malick
>Lynch
It would be almost unbearable to sit through

>>64532845
Uwe Boll
Paul WS Anderson
Tommy Wiseau
Dennis Dugan
Michael Bay
Christopher Nolan

>>64532248
Who doesn't?

Based Russell.

>>64533147
Affleck isn't a hack. His 3 films are all decent thrillers.
Hooper is bland but sounds sincere in the films he makes.
Lee is definitely not a hack. Not quite a great director, but firmly above the average.

>>64533215
Scorsese is such a pleasure to listen to when he's going on about films he loves. Some of the interviews he recorded for AFI are on youtube and his enthusiasm for stuff from The Archers is really contagious.

Things I got out of the interview

1. These questions are shit and they seem to be the same every year
2. Tarantinos passion is commendable. He's like a child at heart. Even though his movies are hit or miss I enjoy hearing his autistic ramblings about film
3. Ridley Scott is the most based person there. The Martian sucked but at least he knows what the business is all about.
4. David O'Russell looks just as bored to be there as we are of his Bradley Cooper and JLaw films
5. Danny Boyle didn't say much. Maybe that's because his movie just put him in debt
6. Hooper is a faggot. I'm glad when he started talking most of the time someone cut him off.
7. Innaritu strikes me as the same personality type as Tarantino. He loves films not really for what they mean but what they make him feel and what kind of stimulation they give him. He's like a little kid at the table. Slightly less autistic than Tarantula tho.
8. I really wish someone like Villenueve was there instead of Boyle or Hooper. Hell I would've preferred to see JJ Abrams in that room if only for his defense of big budget and sequel films killing the industry

>>64531738
>Enemy
>oscar pandering

>>64533895
He's talking about that Hooper guy
>makes the film about the stuttering king
>makes les miserable
>makes a new film about a transex

File: Sion Sono.jpg (20KB, 284x300px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 284x300px

>this is the extent of current modern american film makers.

Hilarious.

>>64533915
Yeah, noticed after I made the post

>>64533944
Has this laotian lad made anything worthwhile besides what I know about now, that is, Love Exposure? I didn't even watch it yet, btw, lel

O'Russell likes the theatrical cut ending of Blade Runner lel

that's why he's a hack, shit taste

>>64534039
And Ridley isn't because he took 6 cuts to shit out a meme flick?

>>64534086
>>>reddit

can someone just point out when tarentino farts so i don't have to watch this whole thing for an hour

>>64534240
Every time he opens his mouth

>>64526998
more like you don't know what he's talking about

>>64534240

I'm framing this and putting it on my wall

>>64532845
I just want to see Fincher on a roundtable for once. It seems like he isn't one for interviews or panels

>>64534950
Because he's 100% a technician. If he's got a shit script his films are nice to look at, but absolute shit tier (Girl with a Dragon Tattoo).

File: Father and Son.webm (3MB, 704x368px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 704x368px

>>64534031
His whole filmography is above standard.

>>64534950
Apparently hes interviewed on the new Hitchcock Truffaut docu

File: Himizu.webm (2MB, 704x368px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 704x368px

>>64535066

What is that disgusting spic doing there? Did he made a flick about building walls?

>>64535045
I don't see why that would be a reason not to have him on a roundtable. To hear him talk about and compare his process to others. what got him into making movies? why does he focus so much on the small details and why so many takes? is it autism? would he ever consider writing and if not why? i remember one interview where tarantino said fincher was one of the best directors working right now and one of the few where he is interested in what he will make next, yet he is at a different level because he is not a writer-director. it would be interesting to see a conversation between the two, especially with finchers use of digital

>>64535203
He's whiter than you, fuck off.

>>64535260

Build wall, spic.

>>64535203
He's more talented than anyone there except Boyle

>>64535315
He's a hack and you're a pleb

>>64532845
Welles
QT
Kubrick
Wes anderson
Scorsese

Super pleb, but i'd love to see how they'd interact

>>64535356
Welles would destroy everyone there. QT is a manchild, Kubrick was an antisocial hermit, Wes would blubber some hipster shit Ebro) every now and then to remind everyone of his existence, Scorsese would be under the table sucking Orson's feet.

>>64535459
>Scorsese would be under the table sucking Orson's feet.

I think that would be tarantino

>Russell's face when QT starts going on about digital and film again

>>64532845
mann, lynch, fincher, zombie, pta, nolan.

>>64532845
Living:
Tarantino
Scorsese
PTA
Villenueve
Coen Bros
James Cameron

Dead:
Renoir
Fellini
Kubrick
Chaplin
Hitchock
Leone

WOW! They're are all white men. Upholding the patriarchal and white supremacist entity know as Hollywood.

>>64535487
Nah, Quentin ain't like that, he's a foot connoisseur, he's got tastes. Marty though... He would go the gay way. If he needed to. He would go the gay way.

>>64532845

Scorsese
Sofia Coppola
Irvin Kershner
Michael Mann
Spielberg
PTA

>>64532845
>dream
So I guess I can pick dead people
>Kubrick
>Tarkovsky
>Bergman
>Fellini
And maybe Herzog and the 6'11" beast F.W. Murnau to balance all those artsy manlet faggots

Fucking love Danny Boyle. His films are a bit hit or miss but I always enjoy hearing him talk about his films and cinema. Plus he was spearheading digital with 28 Days Later... and even if the quality isn't THAT good these days the film is still great.

Shit, Danny Boyle has the best filmograpy there. Tarantino has some fucking embarrasing flicks, and Ridley Scott gave up after Blade Runner, Iñarritu made the same film three or four times before whoring himself to jews with Birdman. Other two are irrelevant.

>roundtable
>table is actually round

>>64536158

Well meme'd, Reddit.

>>64524971
Scott > Tarantino > Boly > literally could not care of rest of the hacks

>>64535353
You're such a faggot

>Its a Boyle sits there bored for 45 minutes not saying anything episode

>>64536076

>tarantino has some fucking embarrasing flicks

Haven't seen Hateful 8 yet, but Django and Jackie Brown are the only two that don't really hold up. I still wouldn't call them "embarrassing" though.

>>64537082

You're an idiot. Jackie Brown is a literal 10. Everything else he's done has aged like shit.

>>64537111
>Jackie Brown is a literal 10
you're a funny guy, nothing he has is past a 7

>>64535889
Kubrick doesn't belong. The others would shit all over him and make him leave before the introduction.
Add Kurosawa and Bresson though.

>>64534459
Underrated post.

>>64535353
Nice buzzwords, /tv/ 101.

>>64532845
Ozu
Kurosawa
Sion Sono
Beat
Teshigahara

They can argue about the mess that is the current Japanese social system and all point fingers at who is to blame.

Shit it would be fun.

>>64537215

It's one thing to call Kubrick overrated, but as soon as you start listing other director and saying they'd shit all over him it becomes clear you have no idea what you're talking about.

>>64535315
This has to be bait. Boyle is a hack.

>>64537306
Kubrick is only, ONLY (ONLY) regarded as good is because he is American.

He is literal dogshit when you compare him to the rest of the world and their greatest directors.

>>64537304
Fuck off, weeb.

>>64537363

Weird because all of those director regard Kubrick as a master filmmaker.

>>64537363
Hello reddit

>>64537396
I hope you're not implying Tarkovsky liked Kubrick.

>>64537363

Lot's of third world directors do seem to get a lot of recognition for just winging it.

>>64537396
Yeah, no. I never once heard Goddard mention Kubrick, or Bergman, or Ozu or Naruse.

He is simply an over glorified cameraman.

The modern contribution for American cinema has been very stale. What did Kubrick do but make nice sets? Not one of the stories he directed had anything to do with him but are simple bastardizations of others works.

He can't create a story worth a dam. He is no way near the top when it comes to directors. Like people imply he is.

>>64537366
>implying the japanese golden age of cinema isn't the greatest that ever was.
>inb4 French new wave
Yeah, no.

>>64537529
>story
not him but you clearly don't know what you're talking about

>>64537304
Who's Beat?

>Sion Sono
How dare you put him alongside the other three masters. And no Mizoguchi, Naruse or Kobayashi?

>>64537529

>simple bastardizations of others works

People who get mad that none of Kubrick's films are "faithful adaptations" are the lowest of the low.

>>64537583
Every single one of Kubricks works is an adaptation of another story.

Whereas true directors, such as Bergman and Naruse created not only original stories which they then put on film, they sometimes created whole genres and camera techniques, which are still being used today.

>ad hom

You know you could use examples to back up your point, plebian.

>>64532845
Kubrick
Lynch
Tarkovsky
Malick
Tarantino (he's so autistic and ingenious, I love him, makes him that much cuter)

File: lel.png (16KB, 500x301px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 500x301px

>>64537617
>Who's Beat?
Takeshi.

Pic related.
>>64537640
>People who get mad that none of Kubrick's films are "faithful adaptations" are the lowest of the low.
See pic.

Actual great directors create their own stories. It's got nothing to do with adaptation quality.

>>64537643
if you'd know what you're talking about you'd know story is unimportant in cimena as it is foremost a visual medium
going 'muh story' just shows how you ignorant you are

>Bergman and Naruse
>namedropping to seem smart

>plebian
just kill yourself

>>64526495
>>64526446
Police Story 3 is what Matrix wished it could replicate with bad CG, but Supercop did it for real

>>64537529
weebfag/10

>>64530156
Ridley Scott is talking from the perspective of a director. As a director, Scott really does seem to know everything he needs to know to turn out a good film.

His problem has always been one of story. Scott has always had problems knowing which screenplays are worth turning into films and which ones are worth avoiding. And when he gets a bad screenplay, he doesn't have the writers' chops to fix it up and make it good.

Team Scott up with an excellent screenwriter, good actors, and producers who don't get in the way and you'll get a doggone good film.

>>64537749
>Takeshi
Yikes. And no, your point was terrible. A better discussion would be with directors of the same period.

People in this thread sure are butt hurt that film is an American art form and the best directors of all time are all American.

>>64537791
>Team Scott up with an excellent screenwriter, good actors, and producers who don't get in the way and you'll get a doggone good film.
Shame this hasn't happened for over 30 years.

>>64536889
>>64537278
>Falling for gimmicky Mexcrement

Classic /tv/

>>64537791
Should they direct the movie for him to?

>>64537752
You to, are missing the point.
You're also a proper fucking idiot. Why don't you just watch slide shows, of nice looking countries and vistas?

Movies are not a fucking visual medium, that's literal capeshit logic. It's a huge component yes, but like theater, like music, like any form of art, it's a story an artist is trying to tell.

All that ad hom without making any actual points backed up with reasoning.

And you called me a pleb, heh.

Are you really disregarding all the works of literally all the greatest directors of all time, simply because they are story focused?

Hitchcock? Felini? Goddard? Naruse?

You're a fucking pleb.

>>64537807
My point is it's not meant to be a discussion, it's meant to be a shit fling of who fucked over the Japanese.

Jesus. I actually had to spoon feed you a joke which is outright explained.

>>64537922
>nuh uh!
>Movies are not a fucking visual medium, that's literal capeshit logic.
ahahaha holy shit i'm dying here
just stop already

>>64537955
>joke

>story is a medium

>>64537866

Except Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven and Black Hawk Down but apparently those don't count

>>64537791
>Team Scott up with an excellent screenwriter, good actors, and producers who don't get in the way and you'll get a doggone good film.
Wow that means he's unique! No other director could make a good movie under all those conditions

>>64538008

You'd be surprised

>>64537981
>didn't actually respond to points raised
>thinks he is doing anything but proving how much of a retard he really is
Please, continue.

>>64537983
Things usually are not funny when they have to be explained.

>>64538002
Those don't count because they aren't good movies. I'd take The Counselor above all of them.

>>64538002
They don't count because they are reddit

>>64529733
This is the weirdest fucking thing

>>64537749

>the only actual great directors are also 100% original screenwriters

Kubrick elevated virtually everything he adapted into something completely his own, and everybody is aware that at a certain point he pretty much said "fuck you" to the original source material.

He consulted with Clarke on the screenplay for 2001, but at a certain point just cut him off, and the overturned car in The Shining was obviously him saying that this wasn't just King's book put on film.

>>64524971
>fucking hack fraud O Russel in the same room as Inarritu and Scott

Absolutely disgusting

>>64537922

>movies are not a fucking visual medium
>that's literal capeshit logic

Not sure if retarded or trolling.

Of course movies are a visual medium, and virtually all capeshit is either tedious or headache inducing to look at.

>>64537922
implying pleb isn't a meme

>>64538166
>didn't actually respond to points raised
I did, you just denied mine after with your uninformed opinions.

>>64538309
How can people miss the point this badly?
No where have I said Kubrick himself is a shit director.

I have said, which no one is yet to refute, he isn't a great director like everyone says, as he is a simple camera man.

Great directors infuse all techniques available to them to create something of their own. Again, it's got nothing to do with adaptation, his stories, his themes are not his own.

A great director like Ozu had a unique camera technique only used by Ozu, he created stories coupled with this technique and you can tell Ozu's style from a fucking mile away. Kubrick on the other hand, made simple schlock, which looked nice.

>>64538446
>saying stop is logically responding to points.
Okay then.
Here, (you).

>>64538008

You need look no further than Steven Spielberg, who's lost it in his old age.

For starters, "A.I.", the film that Kubrick might have worked on next after "Eyes Wide Shut" had he not died. Personally, I hated "A.I." and thought it was utter crap. I've never had those opinions of any of Kubrick's films.

Secondly, "Minority Report." Oh, boy! A film based off a story by Philip K. Dick! That's gotta be good! I loved "Blade Runner" and "Total Recall."

Nope. "Minority Report" wasn't terrible but I was tremendously disappointed. Quite honestly, I think Ridley Scott would have done a better job.

>>64538449
Ozu movies are boring as fuck. I guess its okay because they were all original.

>>64538499
see >>64537752

>>64538449
Don't worry anon, people dont like the truth so thats why you are getting shit for speakin it here.

>>64538373
>Based Russell having to suffer the stink of pleb hackery

Scotchtape and Inaratturd were both abysmal failures, senpai. Joy was #1 for 2015.

>>64538531
see>>64537922

>>64538520
Cool.

>>64537905

A director is not a writer. Yes, he will have some control over the actors but Scott has done a good job of that over his career. I've never had a complaint about the actors Scott uses.

But, as I said, my problem with Scott is that, for whatever reason, some of the stories he picks to base movies on just aren't very good. They're either uninteresting or they have really bad plot holes. *cough*Prometheus*cough*

But Scott is capable of turning out a good movie and I usually seriously considering any film he directs.

Contrast this with someone like Michael Bay.

>>64538553
Joy was fucking terrible, just like every other O Russel movie.

File: image.jpg (154KB, 344x505px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 344x505px

>>64524971
>no Malick

>>64538576
I only needed to see your uninformed opinions once.

>>64538602
>>>>reddit

>>64538449
Holy cow.

Kubrick is the fuckin' master of film directing. Among American directors, I can think of few that have had a greater impact on film.

Many of the visual effects in his films were designed by him. The camera angles, the lighting, and the endless takes to get the appropriate reaction from the actors are the mark of a great director.

Consider George C. Scott's performance in Dr. Strangelove. It was Kubrick who tricked Scott into kind of overacting the part. Scott was initially quite upset with the takes that Kubrick ended up using in the film, thinking that Kubrick was asking for those goofy takes to warm Scott up.

>>64538449
Problem is Kubrick adapted molded the stories as his own and as vessels for is expression, that's arguably as genuine as creating his own.

>>64538449

It sounds like you need to learn how to formulate whatever point you're trying to make before posting it, because you're not being as clear as you think you are.

>kubrick made simple schlock which looked nice

That's really the only thing you've consistently been saying.

>>64538635
Ad hom is not a way in which to refute an argument.

>>64538765
Your opinions aren't you, learn what Ad hominem means before posting about it.

>>64538730
>Many of the visual effects in his films were designed by him.

Funny, because one of the reasons 2001 was done in Britain was to escape the US patents on effects, including the slitscan technique.

And tricking actors into giving you material is LITERALLY a director's job. Coppola tricked a guy into getting in bed with a fucking horse head.

File: doorway.webm (3MB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 960x720px

>>64538730
That's literally my point, see >>64537363
>The camera angles
Kek.

>and the endless takes to get the appropriate reaction from the actors are the mark of a great director.
Holy cow, if a director is not able to get the performane he wants form his actors, he is a shit director. Someone who is able to get a desired performance isn't somehow a great director, he is simply competent.

>the lighting
This is the one of the only things which he did well, and even then it was not original as you imply it was.

>>64538733
>that's arguably as genuine as creating his own.
Not even in the slightest.

>>64538759
>That's really the only thing you've consistently been saying.
Because that's literally my point. Well the other point. Sounds like I am being pretty clear.

>>64524971
Roundtable power rankings: Tarantino > Russel > Inarritu > Scott > Hooper > Boyle

Scott is a horrible personality yet managed to contribute more than Hooper or Boyle

>>64538870
>Not even in the slightest.
Nice opinion.

>>64537905
you absolute fucking moron get off the film and television board if you are this unforgivably stupid

>>64538870

>sounds like I am being pretty clear

It honestly sounds like you're just parroting a contrarian opinion you've seen posted multiple times on /tv/ because you it it makes you sound "patrician".

>>64538875
Tarantino's downgrading himself, the stupid fuck. H8 is pretty much everything his critics have been warning about.

2001 was only worthwhile Kubrick film.

EWS, his late career turd, is a fucking Lifetime movie for Christ sake

Damn, it's stupid to expect good things in this place, but when this thread went south it went SOUTH

>>64526611
based though he is a joykill

>>64538974
EWS is in fact his best film

>>64537922
Movies are a visual medium, this is by no means 'capeshit logic'. You have MOTION PICTURE.

Story, narrative, character are all tier below in importance for movie. The most important part by far is the directing.

>>64538730
>Greater impact on film.
and that's why Kubrick annoys me. Generations of DOPs and directors who think plastering movie with pretty pictures full of hack symbolism means good directing and worthwhile cinematography.

Take any Nolan or Villeneuve garbage bin movie, it's just pretty photography even when you are dealing with fucking bodies of drug war.

No sense.

>>64539013

The ironing.

>>64539025
2001, his middle career turd, is a fucking Star Wars movie for Christ sake

>>64538963
Regardless of the film, I always enjoy hearing Tarantino speak. Subdued Quintin is quite pleasant. It makes me want to enjoy his movies more.

File: Untitled.png (459KB, 1624x2496px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 1624x2496px

>>64538894
>Nice opinion.
Not at all.

>>64539071
All symbolism is hack symbolism

ITT: Hot opinions

>>64539095
>all movies in space are star wars
Kek

>>64539148
re
uh
re

>>64539123
Oh shit.

That image is portraying Ingmar Bergman's directing career and how many of his movies he both directed and wrote.

An actual truly great director.

>>64539110
I agree, he's got enormous amount of film knowledge. It's what he does with it that's the problem.

>Boyle barely spoke
>that shit English from the spic
>boring stories

Meh...

>>64539095

>literally a side project for the staging of both the moon landing and the bigfoot footage
>a fucking star wars movie

It's still the greatest space film, and one of the most ambitious science fiction films every attempted.

>>64539123
lmao what the fuck

>>64535956
Is this why Days always had a distinct feel to it?
Like I always saw it different from movies from that time.

Too little running time, bad interviewers and a not diverse- in personality- enough table

>>64539246
So it gifted us with conspiracy cucks and Monster Quest.

Nice defense, m8.

>no James Gray
>no Michael Mann
>no John McTiernan
>no Michael Bay
>no Nolan
why did they ignore all the good American film makers

>>64539282
Bit intimidated when presented with the works of a truly great director?

Who both wrote and directed the good majority of his works?

>>64539559
Not to mention all of his critically acclaimed works being solely his own works in both direction and story?

Unlike Stanley "Pleb bait" Kubrick.

>>64533559
>The Martian sucked
[citation needed]

>>64539622
You won't find it on reddit

>>64539559
I love Bergman. I don't really see your point though.

>>64539622
The movie gets its main narrative point across in just about 8-12 minutes from what I recall. On top of that it has some dumb and rushed point about failures in the space program which happens early in the movie too. And it has nothjing else to tell.


So why is the movie so fucking long? It could be at least 2 hours shorter movie for fuck sake.

It's pretty bad dude.

>>64533559
I agree my man. But loser-mode Boyle is better than Smug-"I'm definitely getting Oscars" Hooper

>>64539422
Because you're /starwars/, faggot

>>64539698
Literally said it about 50 times. Not going to say it again, feel free to follow the comment train.

>>64539422

>no Trevorrow

>>64539622
it wasnt really exciting
he didnt do anything risky with the movie

File: 1423741450676.jpg (72KB, 341x445px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 341x445px

>>64539720
>>64539735
>All these grasping-at-straws fags

>>64539733
Nice opinion.
Just keep namedropping directors, I'm sure you'll make a good point someday.

>>64539733
see
>>64538924

>6 white men

>>64529733
UNO

>>64539817
FARTO

>>64539816
IS THAT A PROBLEM?

>>64539659
Ah, that famous /tv/ wit.

>>64539700
It's a simple piece about man versus nature. It's not supposed to be some intricate diorama of the human condition. Simplicity is not inherently bad just as novelty isn't inherently good.

>>64539743
If you weren't unnerved when he recorded his log next to his makeshift duct tape door, then there's something wrong with you.

>>64539761
>>64539775

So yes, it is now a proven fact that the highest caliber director whose work youare familier with is Kubrick.

God forbid anyone else have a higher knowledge of cinema than you and anyone saying anything which is slighty disagreeable is just diregarded.

Try Lynch next, start with Eraserhead, he is right up your guy's alley.

>>64532845
Alon Abutbul
Tom Hardy
Aiden Gillen

>>64539816
Who would you invite? Assume you could get any person alive.

I'm genuinely curious.

>>64539893
its pathetic, they are literally just jerking eachother off, seriously literally
these old quacks are so out of touch its not funny its just a joke now

relevant old white men

>>64539959
It's no fucking Cast Away, the gimmick of talking to a computer screen (sure, DA MODERN COMMENTARY) is much less gripping than Hanks talking to the football. All the tech gimmicks and how it was filmed just felt like that, gimmick and advertisement as opposed to something *honest*, it doesn't help Matt Damon isn't convincing in his role and a fucking person that's flying a goddamn space station or some Hermes shit literally asks 'can I have that in English' when someone gives him tech speech about OS.

It's grating as fuck movie/experience, at least for me. I also hated how slack jawed their apology about failed missions were - look it was the people who rushed to decisions and made faults *shows cargo load blowing up and nobody getting hurt*

it was such a fucking.. baby thing. Should've blown up the fucking Hermes space ship or the original crew when they're going, that would been more respectable.

>>64540060
So your assumption is that because he's a botanist, he should be able to understand complex computer programming concepts without aid?

>>64539978
>all this damage control
lol

>>64540023
Easy. Katheryn Bigalow, Penny Marshal, Sofia Coppolla or Ava Duvernay

All of the above have wa more talent and experience under their belts than half of these geezers

>>64540096
>all this ad hom
lol

>>64540095
No the fucking spic at Herpes Space Ship who is fucking flying a goddamn space ship throws the generic 'can I have that in English xD' line.

>>64539978

>gets called out for basically spouting how kubrick is an overrated meme director
>somehow interprets that to mean that everyone calling him retarded has only ever heard of kubrick and not his super obscure bergman
>recommends lynch as though that's the next logical step for all the plebs telling him he's an idiot

Lost Highway is my favorite film, btw.

>>64540148
Okay, replace "Botanist" with "Pilot" then. Your objection is still absurd.

>>64540155
LH and Mullholland Dr. both feel like 'yeah lads we had TV show script but now we dont have TV show so I hacked up together a movie for fun'

Silencio is the only good scene in those two movies.

OK the lesbo shit in Mulholland Dr. is p. good Lynch directing porn when?

>>64539959
moon did everything about "alone in space" stuff better

>>64540155
See the pic posted >>64537749

Spouting nonsense means literally nothing.

Where did I imply Bergman was obscure? My point was actually the opposite, since you know, Bergman is pretty entry level but an actual great director, unlike Kubrick.
Where did anyone actually refute my points? (ad hom doesn't refute anything)
Lynch is the next logical step for people who get fooled by pleb bait.

>Lost Highway is my favorite film, btw.
How am I not suprised :^)

>>64540226
and Alien did it better than any Alone In The Space movie.

>>64540266
there is more to scifi than horror

>>64540235

Nobody knows anything about you, so stop typing "ad hom, ad hom!" in every post.

You do sound like a bitter Swede though, who probably learned English and has nothing better to do with it other than to shitpost anti-america troll crap on 4chan, though.

>>64540235
Where did the Kubrick isn't good meme come from?

File: 1420639884811.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>64540334
That's not what we were shitposting about.

>Alone in the space.
Find me a better film than Alien for that.

Pic obv. not related but Prometheus looked great.

>>64540339
Attacking the argument and not refuting the points is a form of ad hom.

:^)

You are still not refuting anything, you know?
If what I am saying is so outlandish and so completley untrue, it should be pretty dam easy to refute what I am saying, no?

The only thing anyone has said is
>he got the performances he wanted, therefore he is great

Come now, use your big boy words and shut down my points with irrefutable evidence and or logic.

I shall be waiting.

>>64540226
Okay, but we're not comparing films. We're judging things on their own merits.

>>64524971

this is p gud content

File: 1434746953096.jpg (760KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

760KB, 1920x1080px

>>64540339
>Picking up the Anti-American Card
Holy shit I am not even the Swede you are arguing with but you are pathetic.

>Don't like Shitbrick
>ANTI-AMERICAN

Fucking lmao

>>64540397
well, when I watched that part I was wondering if duct tape+plastic would hold during a storm on mars

I dont think it would

>>64540427

It was a joke, directed at a troll whose done nothing but call American directors, Kubrick in particular, overrated, spam Bergman as somehow far superior, and respond to any argument with "ad hom".

This thread can't hit auto-sage soon enough.

>literally the best thread on /tv/

>>64540460
That was the point, to scare you.

>>64540516
but it held

maybe if he died it would have been interesting

>>64540515
Thanks for conceeding to the point that the only reason Kubrick is regarded as good is because he is American.

You've made your bed, have fun laying in it.

You're still only posting ad hom.
Actually the refute the points.

>>64538875
is this power rankings as directors or roundtable contributors

>>64540578
Kubrick is a great director because his films look great and no one It's better at telling engrossing intelligent stories.

>>64540515
>>literally the best thread on /tv/
You know, he is actually trying to have a discussion with you.

That being why Kubrick is over rated. It is you who refuses to actually discuss the topic, but still putting your voice out there.

Just saying. Go post in the Star Wars threads.

>>64540659
That's literally a subjective opinion (wrong to this part at least, no one It's better at telling engrossing intelligent stories).

Here I thought we were having an actual discussion on the objective quality of film.

magic

>>64540712
Being the best is subjective but the quality of how his movies look and the story telling is objectively great.

File: Kurosawa.jpg (248KB, 1223x817px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 1223x817px

>>64540845
>story-telling
Not his. Literally been the major point of this whole argument. Bastardizations of others works =/= his.

>how they look
There is better. And this is entirley subjective.

List other directors you have seen, I don't even care if you lie, all I care is that you have been posed the question.

He is pleb bait. He cannot be even remotley considered great, on an objective level. He would get laughed out of a room filled with actual great directors. The like of whom I have listed many times in this thread.

>>64540945
Mate, you're a clown. Good thing that once this thread ends you will be able to drop your bait argument and pretend this pathetic display never happened.
Alternatively, there's always the good ol' "kill yourself".

>>64540945
Books are not films. If you make a film based off the plot of a book the story telling is still the director's which is a mix of content (words and plot from the book which are still picked out and changed by the director) and visual storytelling (acting, setting, camera techniques and style).

>>64540427

>Picking up the Anti-American Card

Aside from saying that Kubrick only adapts other people's stories with pretty camera work (which was contested in multiple posts), all you've said is that people only think he's a great director because he's American, which you never even tried to explain the reasoning behind.

Not to mention that Kubrick made most of his best films as an Expat in England, whereas Hitchcock, for example, made most of his best films in the US.

>>64540945
If looks is entirely subjective then what is an objective criticism?

>>64541065
Well obviously, but the core of the book i.e. the themes are not the directors. He has created nothing except simply adapting books to film, that's not what a great director does. A great director creates his own story, his own vision and then put's it on film.

>>64541055
:^)

>>64537922
That's an oversimplification. So just because he doesn't write his own scripts means he's a bad director? A director's job is to direct, period. Hitchcock didn't write many of the movies he directed either

>>64541107
You understand I was referring to aesthetics?

>an objective criticism?
In this discussion, well when referring to any director I would say the objective quality which make a director great would be the culmination of all his efforts as related to the end result.

Kubrick adapted, he made things look nice.
Great directors created everything about their work.

File: karlssonthemanlet.jpg (15KB, 373x309px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 373x309px

>O'Russell

File: 1379334446735.jpg (76KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 600x450px

Jesus Christ could they have found a bigger group of past their prime and awful directors? Remember when Haneke was on this and he called Spielberg a fucking fraud who used the Holocaust to push his own fraud agenda? Apparently that type of honesty isn't welcome so lets get the beaner director of The faggot from Titanic shot in poorly framed closeups in the woods for three hours, an actual autist that is in love with feet and big black dicks, and that guy that directed two decent movies thirty years ago instead.

>>64541135
That's a dumb description of a great director. I don't agree with out but kubrick only misses out on having an original story for just some of his films. What about the ones not based off a book? For a director to be great all his films must be original?

>>64541178
I can't tell you how dumb that is.

>>64541090
That's not me, he even said so. WTF is wrong with you?

>because he's American, which you never even tried to explain the reasoning behind.
See this thread. Holds very true since the only peopl trying to refute me only post ad hom and cannot differentiate between the objective and subjective quality of film.

>Not to mention that Kubrick made most of his best films as an Expat in England
This doesn't mean anything.

>Hitchcock
That's an actual worthy director of praise, but you are yet to tell me why Kubrick isn't only regarded as good becasue he is American.

Keep in mind, nowhere have I said Kubrick is bad. Quite the opposite, I like Clockwork. I am saying he is over rated as hell, mainly because he is American and the majority of people who view movies are American.

QT is a cutie

>>64541212
>just some of his films
Try all of his critically acclaimed films.

>What about the ones not based off a book
Go on, list them.

EWS - Based on book
Clockwork - Based on book
FMJ - Based on book
2001 - Based on book, at least written by actual writer.
Barry Lyndon - Based on Book
Dr Strange Love - Based on book
Lolita - Based on book
Paths of Glory - Based on a book
The Shining - Based on a book
The Killing - Based on book

>>64541233
Of course you can't.

>>64525443
Maybe they all brought their own cameramen and cinematographers, who were silently fighting each other the whole time.

>>64541243

>i am saying he is over rated as hell, mainly because he is american and the majority of people who view movies are american

So your argument is that any critically acclaimed director whose films have been viewed by a large audience, and aren't sufficiently obscure, according to you, are overrated?

>>64541243
You haven't explained what the objective qualities of a film are.

>>64541211
You're going to die from being so booty blasted all the time.

>>64541307
A director isn't the same as a writer. Get off /tv/ until you learn the difference. Fuck off.

>>64541333
No.... Just Kubrick and Lynch. What is with people putting words in my mouth? Where did I meantion any other director except Kubrick and Lynch?

Jesus just how flustered are you in not being able to come up with anything? You don't have to reply I don't care what you have to say, all I want is meaningfull discourse which could potentially change my views. Not matter how cancerous you think I am being I am still taking shit away from this argument.

It's simply proving my point.

>>64541307
That doesn't mean anything though. Ozu, for example, wasn't famous for his scripts. He was famous for how he shot his films. Hitchcock didn't write Rope, or Notorious, or Dial M for Murder, or Vertigo, or Psycho, or North By Northwest either.

>>64541307
His movies being based off books doesnt affect his skill as a director.

>>64541392
>Ozu, for example, wasn't famous for his scripts
Ozu and Naruse were very famous for their story telling. They created a genre.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shomin-geki

Hitchcock is famous and acclaimed for pretty much the creation of suspense. Not for his movies, persay.

>>64541418
No, but it certainly doesn't mean he is a good director. When actual good directors do create their stories, their own themes.

What is a movie but playing out important themes to the individual? All he did was take other's themes and turn them into his own.

He is one of the most over rated directors. And you are all yet to prove me wrong.

>>64541376
Great directors are, that's my god dam point. See >>64539123

Is there a rape going on in this thread? Yes
Does the 'victim' realizes he's being raped? No
Is it funny? Yes

>>64541391

>what is with people putting words in my mouth

You should really take an intro logic class if you ever go to college.

>>64541491
There's no proving you wrong, you child. Your stupid assumptions can only lead to even worse arguments.
>le director has to write le screenplay
>le kubrick is overrated because burger people

>>64541502
Hahahaha. So because I say Kubrick is over rated and give exact reason as to why he is over rated. That means I am saying every single director of the same heritage as he is over rated, because thats how college logic works?

Fucking lol.

>>64541491
>difference between a good director and great director is if he wrote his own completely original script.
You are beyond retarded.

>>64541554

You were asked to explain your fuzzy logic, which you didn't even try to do.

>So your argument is that any critically acclaimed director whose films have been viewed by a large audience, and aren't sufficiently obscure, according to you, are overrated?

>>64541597
What do you consider Bergman? Wait, it doesn't matter what you consider Bergman, it's how the world considers him.

If Bergman is a great director, Kubrick simply can not be. Bergman has done everything Kubrick did, and more.

Keep in mind, I barely like Bergman on a subjective level, he is just the only example I am willing to use.

Also this will be my last reply, rejoice in your plebdom. I am done.

I have not conceeding, I am simply leaving to cook my dinner.

Have fun, plebs. I will make sure to check the archives of all your replies though.

>>64541630
I gave exact reasons, you can read the thread. I am leaving.

>>64541663
Kubrick is better than bergman

>>64541682

>i am leaving

Finally.

>>64529733
Life Goals right there to be utterly honest with you relatives

File: CoachPhoto-ChipChipperson_zpsd91c7187.jpg (14KB, 325x250px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 325x250px

>>64541211
Yeah, and their mothers are all whores tss tss

QT is a cutie

>>64538974

Ahem. Dr. Strangelove?

>>64541663
>>64541682
>teehee I'm not conceding
>I'm going to cook my dinner, you losers
>I have the high ground

This is literally textbook defeat and concession. What a pathetic faggot.

>>64530224
>muh magic
Does this cunt seriously think he's Kurosawa

>>64527137
circle fingering, wow german Humor tier to be honest

>>64541307
Kubrick was co-author of the 2001 book.

>>64541491
>Great directors are, that's my god dam point.

Hmmm....

I can't say I agree with you there. That like saying a conductor of a symphony can only be great if he composes his own great music.

I've not studied film or worked in the film industry but it's my understanding that the job title of director does not include writing duties. A directors job is to translate an interpretation of a written work (novel, screenplay,etc.) to a visual and audio medium.

>>64541663

I think Bergman and Kubrick create two different types of films.

Bergman's films are more arty and, quite honestly, difficult for people to watch, understand, and enjoy. Perhaps it's a cultural thing and not being Swedish or understanding Swedish causes me to miss some of the fine nuances of Bergman's films. However, while I find his films intriguing, they don't fully engage me.

Kubrick's films are more accessible. There's definite craft in Kubrick's films and it's of the highest caliber. I don't think anyone can deny that. That's why I think Kubrick is great. However, it's clear that Kubrick's film are not as arty as Bergman's.