Who is the next Kubrick?

>>86953350
Definitely The Coen Brothers

File: 20-boll-02.jpg (13KB, 225x277px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 225x277px

>>86953350
This guy

I'm aware this is probably a bait thread and going to be a shitshow in a few minutes, but I'll take the bait: there is no "next" kubrick. Cinema is not some kind of sport. Villanueve is probably making some of the most interesting films on that list, but the point could be argued for nearly anyone. Hell, i'm sure people here will make the argument that they're all hacks.

You all know who it is.

>>86953350
All current directors are studio babies, except Tarantino, you know it to be true

File: SPR16_PURSUE_SNYDER_01.jpg (113KB, 500x748px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 500x748px

>>86953350
Zack "King Kino" Snyder

File: larsa_a_l.jpg (68KB, 928x523px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 928x523px

>>86953490
Isn't saying that there is no 'next' Kubrick the typical thing to say anyway?
People can criticize any of these directors, but not all Kubrick films were perfect.

pic related, my pick

>>86953350
in style the closest thing to kubrick right now is probably Paul Thomas Anderson

File: Prj8V.gif (992KB, 500x308px) Image search: [Google]

992KB, 500x308px

>>86953673
And yet he constantly denies it.

PTA is best waifu

File: merleauponty.jpg (279KB, 1000x1596px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 1000x1596px

>>86953490
First, this guy is correct.

>>86953350
Second, this is a loaded question. Who is the "next Kubrick?" I will say that of the people on your list, Villeneuve is most like him in my opinion. His oeuvre grips me like Kubrick's did. That said, there is no "next" Kubrick. He was unique, like every other artist.

PTA is almost done. He's getting old and settling into making movies for fun. He's basically Altman.

Villeneuve is the next Ridley Scott. With a great script, he's awesome. Without that, he just makes really mediocre shit that looks pretty.

Nolan is Michael Bay except British and with less depth.

David Benioff is a pretty funny name to put on the list.


I think Hollywood is dying as far as great directors go. There's better foreign directors out there.

>>86954000
What are your favorite foreign directors?

>>86954000
I don't agree about PTA, he seems really passionate about his projects. I really hope you're wrong about him being done. The Altman comparison is fair.

Nolan is a really capable filmmaker, he just proved himself again. He should cut on blockbustery bullshit tho.

Which foreign director would you consider to be great (contemporary)?

>>86954084
There's a lot of movies I really like, but I haven't really followed individual newer foreign directors, but here's a few that I've been keeping my eye on:

Apichatpong Weerasethakul (I know, but it's a real name)

Céline Sciamma

Hong-jin Na

They've all done recent films that have felt genuinely new and innovative to me.

>>86954000
>Villeneuve is the next Ridley Scott. With a great script, he's awesome. Without that, he just makes really mediocre shit that looks pretty.

Bullshit. Go watch Enemy. The script is sparse as fuck, his direction (and Gyllenhall's genius) completely made that film.

File: 314.jpg (47KB, 680x378px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 680x378px

>>86953350
> DAVID BENIOFF

DA FUCKING BOOOOOOOOOOOAR

>>86954191
I'm not saying he isn't passionate about his films. I just mean he's less interested in making a great film per say and more in just making something for fun. Like Inherent Vice was great, but the only reason he made it was to do Pynchon and make a 70's movie again. It was a great film, but his earlier stuff was breaking new ground. I don't mean it as a slight against him. He's just following that trajectory that most directors take when their careers are close to ending.

Nolan is technically capable like Bay is, but all that technique is so shallow. He's a competent blockbuster filmmaker, but people pretend like he's more than that. Which he just really isn't. He says so himself.

I posted his name in another post I did, but Hong-jin Na has made some amazing stuff and is really overlooked.

>>86953350
>Kuckbrick

Brett Ratner actually

>>86954452
I love Enemy, and the script is great in that. Arrival is stupid and the script is hamfisted. Scorpio was super mediocre. They all are the quality they are from the scripts, imo. Enemy had a great script. His direction is competent enough, but he doesn't seem to be consistent with his writers. His visuals are usually neat though.

>>86953350
>PTA
Maybe
>Villeneuve
No
>Nolan
No way
>Benioff
Fuck off, memer.

>>86954000
>Nolan is Michael Bay except British and with less depth
What did he mean by this?

>>86954748
Memester

Nolan is like Spielberg on the blockbuster level with some cheese sprinkled it.
He obviously took Kubrick to hearth tho when it comes to the technical side of his films

>>86954612
>Arrival is stupid
So, what you're really saying is that you are stupid, right?

>>86954748
Bay has an actual reason for why he films the way he does. Nolan is just trying to reference shit and doing filmschool level copycat shots of other iconic directors to make what is essentially the same product that Bay makes. I unironically think Michael Bay is more skilled and more of an Auteur than Christopher Nolan is. Not even meme'ing.

>>86954870
Arrival completely falls apart in the second half.

>>86954870
That movie fucking hits you in the face with how you're supposed to feel and over explains the "twist". Also that fucking Chinese diplomat subplot was fucking stupid and unnecessary.

>>86954499
Interesting observation (about PTA and older directors) I was really hoping he'd make films until he can't physically anymore. Ah well : (

>>86953350
How hard can it be to emulate Kubrick, steady isometric shots, slow cold acting. I think Only God Forgives is the closest thing to a Kube-clone

>>86955040
It's not about cloning tho. It's about being able to thematically and technically to achieve something with a similar depth

>>86954962
I mean the dude is really old now. He's also been a dad for a while now.

>>86955134
He's only 47 tho : (
He doesn't need be like Eastwood or Scott. but at least his mid 60s

>>86955104
Maybe Spielberg with A.I. but the acting wasn't cold enough.

>>86954932
So it's not subtle - so what?
The movie treated it's subjet matter, contact with alien, sentient lifeforms, intelligently and IMO realistically.

>>86953490
>Villanueve is probably making some of the most interesting films
Over PTA? No. Even Refn produces more worthwhile film than Villeneuve.

>>86955497
I agree.
Villeneuve needs more time to prove himself

>>86955408
Yeah, but I think that's more to the credit of the story its based on. I wouldn't have a problem with the lack of subtlety if it wasn't made in a way that tried to make it seem subtle. There's a bunch of lines of dialog in it that feel like some shitty blockbuster sci-fi thing and then it has these quiet meditative scenes. It doesn't gel for me.

>>86955626
He needs to stay away from Sci Fi and just make smaller films, I feel.

>>86955720
Sicario and Prisoners were perfect.
I fear for the new Blade Runner

>>86954870
Arrival was idiotic. Not just the premise, but every step of the narrative was dumb on the level of CHAPPiE using a brainscanning helmet to scan his own robot head.

t. Army intel who has worked with linguists

>>86953350
Nolan technically.
PTA thematically
Villeneueve stylistically

Fincher with his addiction to take so many takes and attention to detail of Kubrick

>>86956239
>>86956102
Should've added it to the list. Nolan is super efficient, only with 1 or 2 takes

>>86953446
This in quality and consistency
>>86956239
This in work ethic

File: Kojima.jpg (123KB, 1391x844px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1391x844px

>>86953350
Kojima.
He's the Kubrick of the video game industry

>>86953350
me

Seriously though, dude became obsessed with photography and was great at it before he was out of high school. In his early 20s he quit his job at Look magazine to get into making movies with no prior experience and minimal connections. He worked his way up because he was already doing innovative things with the camera and film narrative and by his early 30s was directing big Hollywood epics. Then he bailed on Hollywood because he couldn't get the artistic control he wanted and went to England to make a run of groundbreaking, massively influential movies arguably unmatched by any other individual, being intensely particular about every detail and the principle creative force in every aspect of production from writing to editing.

There won't ever be another Kubrick because great artists are singular by definition, and committed to carrying out their vision however difficult it is. There won't be another David Lynch either, or Sergio Leone or Peckinpah, or any of the dozen or so others in the same league. Fatuous thread OP, made me reply.

>Nolan technically.
>PTA thematically
>Villeneueve stylistically
>FIncher work ethic wise
>The Coen Brothers' consistency and quality


I think we build the perfect contemporary Kubrick. Thank you for participating.

/thread

>>86953485
Uwe Boll best girl, fite m8

>>86956293
>>86956383
i remember an interview with Neil Patrick Harriss on Gone Girl where Fincher made him do 60 takes of him pulling the driverway

He isn't not even close to Kubricks level but Nicholas Winding Refn has my favorite Kubrick trait


- hidden red pills

>>86956678
There was the only in Zodiac where Gyllenhaal had to throw a notebook on his car seat over a 100 times

>>86956713
Elaborate please