Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Ashamed_Ladder6161 t1_j6ik6yt wrote

Reply to comment by gee_gra in I just finally watched Bone Tomahawk last night by utopiandiorama

You can make a violent movie well or you can make it very very badly. He shows a very good command of his budget and he always gets a good performance from his cast. He’s only a hand full of movies into his career, he shows a huge amount of talent.

5

gee_gra t1_j6imqnu wrote

I mean, those are all good qualities for a director to have, but kind of a low bar to set

−3

Ashamed_Ladder6161 t1_j6infr8 wrote

If you say so. I mean, firstly, there’s not that much violence in his films, it’s just the moments are memorable and make an impact because they often feel out of place, but violent directors include Tarantino, Lynch, Fincher, Cronenberg, Pekinpah, Verhovan, De Palmer, Miike, Stone, Scorsese, Noe, and Haneke. I think you’re pressed to say the bar is low just because a film has violent parts in it. This isn’t an argument to say he deserves to be in the above tier of directors, but I’d argue he is more than he isn’t. Compare him to the hundreds of other violent directors the world has already forgotten because they have no talent, I think he has a promising back catalogue.

0

gee_gra t1_j6iwf4q wrote

>not that much violence

If you mean like, in terms of number of acts of violence — yeah I guess, but the way he presents violence is intense and lurid in a way that comes off as "there for the sake of it" at certain points for me

1

Ashamed_Ladder6161 t1_j6jiqa8 wrote

I think they’re repulsive, and a lot of the time that’s what it’s supposed to make you feel; revulsion. Given how little there is of it, and that it rarely lingers, it didn’t feel gratuitous to me. But to each their own.

1

SwimmingLaddersWings t1_j6iornc wrote

Have you seen todays filmmakers? It’s really not a low bar when most of them can’t even do that

0

gee_gra t1_j6iq1ep wrote

>todays filmmakers

That's pretty fuckin vague pal hahaha, who in particular has earned your emnity? I'd also say there's plenty of directors who can get actors to act and can utilise their budget well

2

SwimmingLaddersWings t1_j6itq4s wrote

I would say most of them aren’t good lately. I can name plenty of names. Richard Linklater, Jennifer Kent, Rian Johnson, Ryan Coogler ever since Disney bought him, Martin McDonagh, Pablo Larrain, David Lowery, Julia Ducournau, Sean Baker, Chloe Zhao, Alice Wu, list goes on and on

These new filmmakers are shit. The Safdies and Zahler are maybe some of the few ones that have talent.

−2

gee_gra t1_j6ivyij wrote

I think this is just a matter of taste cuz you've listed some fucking terrific filmmakers imho hahah

7

Ashamed_Ladder6161 t1_j6jhocd wrote

Of course it’s a matter of taste. But you can’t have it both ways. He named a bunch of action directors as being very poor, you counter many of them are really good, while also arguing the bar is low. That’s counter intuitive.

−3

gee_gra t1_j6jiiw6 wrote

Well, he named one person who you could contend is an action director with Coogler. I'm not sure what you mean by "it's counter intuitive" — most of those directors have gotten good performances from their actors and seem to have handled their budgets well, they've crossed that low bar, and managed to make good films while doing it.

I'll also add that the guy I responded to seems to be some kinda lunatic so there's no much to be mined there

1

Ashamed_Ladder6161 t1_j6jjbn6 wrote

I’m not sure I’d agree many of them handle their budgets well, although they certainly have bigger ones, and I’ve seen plenty of weak performances in their catalogues, but I think we’re just going to have to politely accept we see this differently.

1