Disappointing Directors
I don’t just mean bad directors. (Paul Anderson of Aliens vs. Predator infamy I’m looking at you and trying to figure out how you keep working) I mean directors that have a ton of promise but somehow never quite live up to it.
Now sometimes it’s not the director’s fault. Look at Stephen Norrington who leapt on the scene with a fairly innovative take on vampires and action flicks. He made this even while having to deal with the ego that is Wesley Snipes. Then the studio completely screwed him with The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen so badly that he swore he’d never direct again.
Sadly there are a lot of people like that. But that’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about directors who did do well and then when they have the opportunity to do more they blew it. They’re the film equivalent of one hit wonders. Directors who have at best one or two great films in them.
The poster child for this is of course M. Night Shyamalan who did the immensely popular The Sixth Sense. I think his best film was Unbreakable yet it wasn’t popular with man people. Signs was OK and then it was a quick spiral downward since then. And one can’t say he didn’t have opportunities.
The worst example for me is Joe Carnahan who did a fantastic BMW short film and then this nice little film Narc. I really was hoping he’d be the next big thing. Then he got screwed over by Tom Cruise with Mission Impossible III. Yet inexplicably he followed up with a cheap Tarantino rip off called Smokin’ Aces that had that Meth inspired vibe that Tony Scott got stuck in. (See his BMW short or the film Domino) I’m hoping his Killing Pablo turns out although I’m skeptical.
A different type of disappointing director are the ones who have an amazing streak but then just lose it. The paradigm case is Francis Ford Coppola. He had this amazing streak in the 70′s and early 80′s. The Godfather, The Conversation, The Godfather Pt II, Apocalypse Now, The Outsiders, Rumble Fish and then… A few good but not great films. Cotton Club, Peggy Sue Got Married, and Tucker. After that he needed money, made Godfather III and it was all downhill from there. One of the greatest directors of all time who went to hell about the same time his old business partner George Lucas did.
An other example was the amazing William Friedkin who did The French Connection, The Exorcist and then… Yeah. (Well, I liked To Live and Die in LA)
Related to this was John Frankenheimer who had an amazing streak from the 60′s up through the early 70′s (including doing French Connection II) Then a bunch of crap. (Admittedly he had some misses in his peak) He came back doing some excellent films for the cable industry which was just gaining respect in the mid 90′s. Then he was back on top with Ronin. Sadly he finished it off with the very bad Ben Affleck project Reindeer Games. But it does show people of promise can make a comeback.
Of course Frankenheimer isn’t ideal since he did have about a 15 year run of success.
So who are your big disappointments?
Paul Thomas Anderson is my favorite current director. His films aren’t flawless, but they are tremendously inventive and original. He doesn’t belong anywhere on your list.
Frankenheimer and Robert Altman started in television in the 50s, peaked in films in the 60s and 70s, and then petered out as they got old — it isn’t surprising that their work began to get less relevant.
Curtis Hanson made a very extraordinary film, L.A. Confidential, and hasn’t had much since. He’s the best example of a director who showed huge potential that hasn’t been fulfilled.
Comment by D. Fletcher — August 15, 2008 @ 10:41 am
I agree with D.. Calling Anderson a bad director is flat out wrong. He at least goes for something new and different in every film, even if his films fall short of perfect, he pushes the boundaries of Hollywood convention like very few directors working today. The performances he gets out of his actors are amazing.
Coppola is one of the greatest of all-time. I think the comparison to Lucas is unfair and unflattering.
Although Altman is not one of my favorites, he had a strong resurgence before his death and The Player, Short Cuts, and Gosford Park are all excellent films.
Whenever discussing the great directors of the 60s and 70s I think it’s important to remember that Hollywood went through seismic changes in the 80s and that to a large degree their level of talent didn’t change, but the industry around them did.
Comment by Brian G — August 15, 2008 @ 11:27 am
Clark links to the IMDB page of Paul W.S. Anderson of Alien vs. Preadator and Mortal Kombat fame. It would be crazy if he were referring to P.T.A. I hate There Will Be Blood but I respect it, along with all of P.T.A.’s work that I’ve seen.
Comment by Tom — August 15, 2008 @ 11:43 am
Coppola was the one who dared Lucas to make a “genre” film, which became Star Wars.
There were seismic changes in Hollywood in the late 70s-early 80s, but nothing compared to the bankruptcy of the studios in 60s. Curiously, many of the great Hollywood directors died or retired just at that time, Wyler, Hawks, Stevens, Ford. A few directors stuck around who had known the Hollywood studio system, and also the “freelance” system: Lumet, Altman, Frankenheimer, Norman Jewison, and Stanley Kubrick.
Coppola, Lucas, Spielberg and Scorsese all started in about 1970, and these were the first directors who came out of film schools. Because the studios were so powerless, these directors basically had free reign over their movies, and that’s why the early 70s is a kind of golden era for American movies.
But Spielberg’s big hits (Jaws and Close Encounters) and Lucas’s even bigger hit (Star Wars) returned the power to the studios. Action/adventure movies saved Hollywood.
Coppola was never the same. He just couldn’t work well under studio supervision.
Comment by D. Fletcher — August 15, 2008 @ 11:46 am
What’s the last Spielberg movie that met or exceeded expectations?
Steven Soderbergh comes to mind. I haven’t liked much Tarantino lately, but Inglorious Bastards sounds like it could be fantastic.
The Wachowski Brothers are suffering from Shyamalan syndrome.
Comment by Tim J — August 15, 2008 @ 11:47 am
Thank goodness. Credibility restored.
Comment by Brian G — August 15, 2008 @ 11:48 am
Ben Younger directed what I think is a solid underrated movie, Boiler Room.
He’s followed that up with absolutely nothing I’ve heard of.
Comment by Tim J — August 15, 2008 @ 11:56 am
Oh! It’s a different Paul Anderson?
By the way, I love Soderbergh too.
Spielberg has had a long career now, and he can’t find another “serious” project with the weight of Schindler’s List.
I also think (gulp) that Scorsese doesn’t make movies nearly as interesting as those he did 30 years ago. Good Fellas from 1990 is really his last great work. I liked The Departed, but it’s just another cop film like L.A. Confidential, with a number of similar elements. It doesn’t seem like an “auteur” film, but a well-made genre film.
Comment by D. Fletcher — August 15, 2008 @ 11:58 am
Phil Alden Robinson. Field of Dreams in 1989 and then Sneakers in 1992 which is a personal fave and perhaps the most rewatchable cable movie of all-time. Then he disappears for a decade and resurfaces to direct the not very good Sum of All Fears. Hasn’t done anything since.
While he is far from a disappointing director, I’m hoping Michael Mann rebounds from Miami Vice. Heat, Last of the Mohicans, and The Insider are among my favorite movies and Collateral was good too.
He’s now working on Public Enemies about Dillinger, Baby Face Nelson, etc. He’s got Johnny Depp and Christian Bale starring so I’m expecting good things.
Comment by Tim J — August 15, 2008 @ 12:11 pm
How about Jonathan Demme?
After a peak with Silence of the Lambs, he’s done rock concerts and remakes like The Truth about Charlie (Charade)
and The Manchurian Candidate (The Manchurian Candidate).
Comment by D. Fletcher — August 15, 2008 @ 12:21 pm
For some reason I’m finding this subject fascinating.
One hit wonders:
Tony Kaye (American History X)
John Dahl (Rounders)
Here are two really good examples of good streaks coming to an end.
Richard Donner. Probably one of the more successful for a decad and a half. Directs The Omen, the original Superman, the Lethal Weapon movies, Ladyhawke, Goonies, and then in the early 90′s everything goes downhill. Maverick, Assassins, Conspiracy Theory, Timeline, 16 Blocks. Not offensive material, but I think his problem was a failure to adapt.
John McTiernan. Predator in ’87, Die Hard in ’88, and Hunt for Red October in ’90. Then the list goes Medicine Man, Last Action Hero (ugh), Die Hard 3, 13th Warrior, Thomas Crown Affair, Rollerball(!), and Basic.
Comment by Tim J — August 15, 2008 @ 12:30 pm
I know you’ll all jump on me, but here are two directors whose early promise has gone unfulfilled (to me):
Bryan Singer, The Usual Suspects
Christopher Nolan, Memento
Comment by D. Fletcher — August 15, 2008 @ 12:34 pm
John Dahl directed The Last Seduction, the great underrated neo-noir.
I don’t think Donner and McTiernan are in the same class as Coppola and Scorsese, though I do love Die Hard (the first movie).
Lethal Weapon? Bah. Ladyhawke? Nah.
Comment by D. Fletcher — August 15, 2008 @ 12:37 pm
I’ll give you Singer but not Nolan. While I’m fine if you don’t like the Batman movies, I thought the Prestige and Insomnia were excellent.
Andrew Davis, The Fugitive
Comment by Tim J — August 15, 2008 @ 12:37 pm
I liked Insomnia OK, but it is a remake.
The Prestige was completely terrible, in my opinion. It had very little going for it except a mysterious mood and a clichéd plot about magic acts involving twins.
Twins were also used on Candid Camera back in the 60s.
Comment by D. Fletcher — August 15, 2008 @ 12:46 pm
Michael Bay
While I do like many of the movies that he’s done, I hate his directing style…those stupid same elements that are overexaggerated in EVERY SINGLE MOVIE
And I do find the concept of the “film school” directors vs. the studios in the 70′s. I do think that it was a golden age because it was an age that dared to push the envelope and to explore previously lackluster areas.
The problem I see now is that when a Shamalan comes around, does a great job with ONE movie, he’s under control of the studios. He’s not longer allowed to be himself a director because of the studios and (now with product placement) the bigger corporations.
That’s why I’m starting to love lesser-known movies like “Kings of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters” and “Lars and the Real Girl” … it seems more movie-esque to me
Comment by brandt — August 15, 2008 @ 12:56 pm
Arrggh. I had all these comments and then the server died for a few minutes and they were lost. Ugh.
Point being name one good Coppola film since Godfather 3. I think he had personal issues, went bankrupt, started doing movies purely for the money, and then lost that spark that made his early films so great.
McTiernan isn’t in the Coppola category but he is a very good director. With McTiernan though I think he just demands too much money. He wants to be the “big paid guy” and is quite willing to do crappy movies if he gets a big cheque rather than being willing to do smaller cheaper ones that are good. That explains to me entirely films like Rollerball and so forth. I think he’s still a good director (although admittedly in Rollerball about half the problems were direction).
I really like the Prestige although it’s just not a movie I’d want to see again. I think Nolan does it right though. He does the Eastwood thing of switching between commercial and personal films. Just as with Eastwood some of the personal films won’t be for everyone but they are typically very well done.
Comment by Clark — August 15, 2008 @ 12:58 pm
BTW – Michael Bay never was a great director. He never had promise. All his films are on par with each other.
Bryan Singer to me has lived up to his promise, other than the disappointment of Superman Returns. (Which just wasn’t as bad as some made out) Apt Pupil is great and quite well done. His two X-Men films are great too for the genre. In fact I give credit to Singer for really maturing that genre. As a director/producer he did great on TV as well with House. I still can’t figure out what was up with his take on Superman. But that’s one failure.
Comment by Clark — August 15, 2008 @ 1:00 pm
Oh, on one hit wonders. I’ll completely agree with Rounders and then Boiler Room. Both were good films that obviously weren’t great just given the limits. Other ones I’d add:
Aronosky: Pi, Requiem for a Dream. I figured he’d do something a bit more mainstream and really be the new Fincher. Instead we had a weird take on Batman by Frank Miller and him (set in the 20′s with Batman as the son of a mechanic) that fortunately wasn’t greenlit. Then the overbudget peculiar art house film of The Fountain.
Alex Proyas: The Crow, Dark City. Two great, if flawed, films. He then does a low budget film on garage bands called Garage Days (I think in Australia wasn’t it? I never saw it.) Then he comes out with I, Robot which, even acknowledge all the studio crap he had to put up with, just wasn’t a good movie.
Comment by Clark — August 15, 2008 @ 1:06 pm
I don’t think Coppola has made a good film since Apocalypse Now, in 1979.
He started his own studio. It failed. He made some Hollywood films. They weren’t successful.
Coppola was defeated by the new Hollywood, I’m convinced.
Bryan Singer was a more interesting director with The Usual Suspects. He might have gone on to have a Soderberg-like career. Instead, he did genre action films like everybody else. Obviously, I think these kinds of films are not very important.
Soderbergh, PTAnderson, Nolan with Memento, and Curtis Hanson with LA Confidential — these are my kind of films and my kind of directors.
Comment by D. Fletcher — August 15, 2008 @ 1:07 pm
Oh, Fincher, for sure. Fight Club is a surprisingly good film, and underrated. It’s a black comedy.
Comment by D. Fletcher — August 15, 2008 @ 1:09 pm
You don’t think The Outsiders or Rumblefish were good?
Comment by Clark — August 15, 2008 @ 1:12 pm
Good call with Shyamalan. Unbreakable was my fave too, and Sixth Sense after that. Since then, I’ve just left the theater scratching my head each time. The Village almost got me there, but I could see what was going on long before the film made it obvious. Don’t even get me going on Lady in the Water…
Spielberg overall is totally awesome (Jaws, E.T., Empire of the Sun, Sugarland, Raiders, Schindler’s, Private Ryan, etc.), but a couple films left me wondering why he did it, like Jurassic Park III or Minority Report.
I have kept a watchful eye on Bob Zemeckis (sp?) lately. I adored his 80s stuff and thought he opened up the new century with Cast Away so nicely. He’s got a couple screwballs in there, but overall I dig him.
And I’m so sick of George Lucas I could puke.
Comment by David J — August 15, 2008 @ 1:15 pm
Here’s an interesting one, Rob Reiner.
From Stand By Me, Princess Bride, When Harry Met Sally, Misery, A Few Good Men to North, The Story of Us, Alex & Emma, Rumor Has It, Bucket List.
Comment by Tim J — August 15, 2008 @ 1:15 pm
My vote tentatively goes to Wes Anderson.
Bottle Rocket is a hilarious comedy. Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums were great, although the “let’s talk really slowly.” “…” “Yes. Let’s.” type of dialogue began to get a little bit annoying.
…and then The Life Aquatic came out and seemed to exaggerate every annoying quality of his previous movies, adding nothing good or new.
I never saw the train movie that followed. I don’t know anybody who’s seen it, either. Has he redeemed himself at all?
Comment by Casual Jeff — August 15, 2008 @ 1:29 pm
Guy Ritchie sure has been awfully disappointing of late.
Comment by BTD Greg — August 15, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
David, Spielberg didn’t do Jurassic Park III (although I do think he produced). Not that Part II was any less of a head scratcher. (Even if the homage to Godzilla was a guilty pleasure as was the subversive structure where the ‘villain’ was the only guy who was the least bit praiseworthy)
Jeff, I liked The Darjeeling Limited although it was no where near as good as Tenenbaums or Rushmore. It was much better than Aquatic though (which was also a big disappointment to me)
Guy Ritchie is a huge disappointment after two great movies. I hear his new one might be a return to form although there are rumors about studio support.
Tim, I nearly mentioned Rob Reiner after Coppola since he had the same precipitous fall right although a decade later in the mid-90′s. (Wasn’t it that odd film North that was the end?)
Comment by Clark — August 15, 2008 @ 2:36 pm
What’s the last Spielberg movie that met or exceeded expectations?
Munich.
Before that War of the Worlds wasn’t as good as I was hoping – mainly because of the script (IMO). But where it worked it worked very well.
Before that was the very disappointing The Terminal but the one before that was Catch You If You Can which is arguably among Spielberg’s best and a very, very different style from what we expected.
Comment by Clark — August 15, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
I wonder what Spielberg would say (in private) about The Dark Knight.
Comment by D. Fletcher — August 15, 2008 @ 3:09 pm
Poor Bryan Singer. Seriously, what was the last good movie he made?
Comment by Supergenius — August 15, 2008 @ 3:30 pm
Those BMW shorts are so friggin’ cool. I have them on DVD.
Comment by jjohnsen — August 15, 2008 @ 4:00 pm
Superman Returns wasn’t horrible. I thought the worst part about it was that it was religiously faithful to Richard Donner’s vision. X2 was pretty good, I thought.
The Usual Suspects was a really great movie, but it was a bit of a gimmick movie (in much the same way that The Sixth Sense was). I think it’s probably a tad overrated.
Comment by BTD Greg — August 15, 2008 @ 4:07 pm
The Usual Suspects was a really great movie, but it was a bit of a gimmick movie (in much the same way that The Sixth Sense was). I think it’s probably a tad overrated.
I see where you’re coming from, but I’d argue that Usual Suspects is great in spite of its surprise/twist ending whereas The Sixth Sense is not (in fairness, I’m not a fan of Sixth Sense so I may not be the best person to try and make a comparison between the two).
Comment by Brian V — August 15, 2008 @ 5:14 pm
Now I want to see Apt Pupil. Years ago I thought that was one of Stephen King’s best stories.
Comment by danithew — August 15, 2008 @ 7:18 pm
Alright, everybody can stop commenting.
Whoever mentioned Guy Ritchie wins. I forgot all about that guy.
I’ll have to check out Darjeeling. The trailer didn’t do much for me, but I will admit that Wes Anderson’s American Express commercial was surprisingly awesome.
Comment by Casual Jeff — August 15, 2008 @ 9:56 pm
How can you put Paul Anderson in this discussion? How has he failed to live up to his promise? I think for the most part, the really good directors rise above the ordinary, even with their “lesser” films. A director such as Michael Bay shouldn’t be mentioned in the same breath as Anderson. Anderson is a true “auteur” while Bay just goes through his typical motions collecting his big payday so he can buy another Ferrari.
Comment by Lance Stubblefield — August 16, 2008 @ 2:21 am
What has Guy Ritchie done lately? After Snatch and Lock Stock (which were so awesome they are a genre unto themselves) has he done anything at all except Madonna? You can’t be disappointed in his work if he hasn’t worked.
I was disappointed in Darjeeling, but my wife loved it.
Comment by MCQ — August 16, 2008 @ 2:42 am
I haven’t liked much Tarantino lately, but Inglorious Bastards sounds like it could be fantastic.
What about his just-announced remake of Faster Pussycat, Kill Kill! with Britney Spears in the Tura Satana role?
Comment by Brian V — August 16, 2008 @ 6:41 am
MCQ he had the universally panned remake of Swept Away which many thought killed his career. Then he and Luc Besson (an other guy who disappeared) made Revolver which I heard was good if not great but overly complex. I’ve not seen it. His new one is supposed to be a return to form with RocknRolla although, as I linked above, AICN is saying the studio my dump it without much advertising much like they did Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang (which was a very good Robert Downey Jr. send up of both Hollywood and the old hard core Mickey Spilane like genre)
Comment by Clark — August 16, 2008 @ 8:10 am
Lance, what is a Lesser Paul W. S. Anderson film? Event Horizon? Was it his pissing on Blade Runner with the prequel Soldier? At least Event Horizon managed mood very well even if it was ultimately silly with no place to go. After that he went completely unimaginative and by the numbers. His remake of the old Stallone exploitation flick Death Race doesn’t bode well either.
Comment by Clark — August 16, 2008 @ 8:12 am
I think once again we’re suffering from Paul Anderson confusion.
Comment by Brian G — August 16, 2008 @ 8:19 am
Thank you Brian.
Comment by Lance Stubblefield — August 16, 2008 @ 11:01 am
I loved Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. Fun movie. That character was perfect for RDJr.
Comment by MCQ — August 16, 2008 @ 12:53 pm
I forgot about Swept Away. No one in Hollywood should ever work with their significant other. It never works. Never saw Revolver.
Comment by MCQ — August 16, 2008 @ 12:55 pm
Revolver got 2 stars on the NetFlix reviews. (Out of 5) So it’s probably not very good either.
I honestly can not fathom why the studio killed Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. That was a very clever and enjoyable film with arguably the best performance from Val Kilmer in years.
Comment by Clark — August 16, 2008 @ 4:12 pm
The Tarantino/Faster Pussycat rumor doesn’t seem to hold water.
Comment by BTD Greg — August 16, 2008 @ 8:50 pm
Yeah, I saw something where Spears was denying her involvement, which is frankly a relief. That would’ve been a monumentally bad move, even for Tarantino.
Comment by Brian V — August 17, 2008 @ 6:56 am
We’ll see how Inglorious Bastards turns out. While Kill Bill was fun I think it’s time for Tarantino to jump out of his more surreal appreciation of crappy drive in films from the 70′s. His early stuff was inspired by such films but also much more grounded. (Outside of the second half of From Dusk to Dawn – but that’s also arguably his worst film)
Of course the other problem is that Tarantino is pretty coked up and a little unhinged. We’ll see. Get the guy in rehab and see if he still can produce.
Comment by Clark — August 18, 2008 @ 8:18 am
While Kill Bill was fun I think it’s time for Tarantino to jump out of his more surreal appreciation of crappy drive in films from the 70’s. His early stuff was inspired by such films but also much more grounded.
Or he could make another real movie with real characters that don’t all talk like him and that you genuinely care about as human beings, like Jackie Brown (easily his best work IMO). Of course, it was his least successful film at the box office (until Grindhouse, but I guess he could only be held half responsible for its flop), so I doubt we’ll see another movie like that from him, at least not for awhile.
Comment by Brian V — August 18, 2008 @ 10:27 am
I loved Jackie Brown but it was nowhere near as good as RD or PF. I don’t understand why he dropped out for all those years after JB though. Although KB really was a great film.
I never bothered to see Grindhouse so I don’t know how his film turned out. It had bad memories of From Dusk Till Dawn for me. (Although Clooney was actually pretty great in that – about the only thing that was great other than a killer soundtrack)
Comment by Clark — August 18, 2008 @ 12:07 pm
Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction haven’t aged well at all (for me, anyway). I was kind of embarrassed the last time I tried to watch Pulp Fiction. Jackie Brown still holds up.
Comment by Brian V — August 18, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
MCQ’s comment deserves a post of its own.
“No one in Hollywood should ever work with their significant other. It never works.”
Just put that up, and open comments. It’s a great topic, really.
Comment by Kaimi — August 18, 2008 @ 5:42 pm
Really? I rewatched RD not long ago and was surprised how great it was. PF shook things up so much and now it comes off like more of a cliche than it actually is. Unfortunately that’s true of many groundbreaking films.
Comment by Clark — August 18, 2008 @ 6:10 pm