The Criterion Collection

[jw007]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

I watched Knight of Cups, and I am afraid to say we had lost Malick, I was as frustrated by this as watching Goodbye to Language, wondering why the hell I kept watching it, pretty images without any meaning at all, I don't think it is better than To The Wonder .

It's basically

[Show spoiler]the sequel to The Tree of Life with only the bits with Sean Penn for the whole movie

.

Is it quite possible that Terrence Malick is the new M. Night Shyamalan? Both directors fell from grace in terms of their quality of output in every subsequent film they've made since. I've not yet seen Shyamalan's most recent movie The Visit, but the only good thing he's done since The Sixth Sense was that tv show Wayward Pines, which I quite enjoyed.

Here's another question... while everyone is listing the most important, living directors today, I have a better question: Name 5 good directors who have gone downhill in terms of their quality of films over their career?

I'll start:

1. Terrence Malick
2. M. Night Shyamalan
3. Brian De Palma
4. John Carpenter
5. Francis Ford Coppola

Wildcard: Tim Burton

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by jw007

Is it quite possible that Terrence Malick is the new M. Night Shyamalan? Both directors fell from grace in terms of their quality of output in every subsequent film they've made since. I've not yet seen Shyamalan's most recent movie The Visit, but the only good thing he's done since The Sixth Sense was that tv show Wayward Pines, which I quite enjoyed.

Here's another question... while everyone is listing the most important, living directors today, I have a better question: Name 5 good directors who have gone downhill in terms of their quality of films over their career?

I'll start:

1. Terrence Malick
2. M. Night Shyamalan
3. Brian De Palma
4. John Carpenter
5. Francis Ford Coppola

Wildcard: Tim Burton

But I don't think Shyamalan made enough great movies to be considered, Hmm I think Cronenberg hasn't done anything great since Eastern Promises, Ridley Scott would be the perfect candidate if not for his comeback with The Martian.

As for Malick, I am sure I will be waiting to see his next film in about 3 years when the editing is finished.

Actually just yesterday I watched this video talking about this, some questionable choices in my opinion but was interesting:

[Show spoiler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbL0jIl-NY8

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by jw007

Is it quite possible that Terrence Malick is the new M. Night Shyamalan? Both directors fell from grace in terms of their quality of output in every subsequent film they've made since. I've not yet seen Shyamalan's most recent movie The Visit, but the only good thing he's done since The Sixth Sense was that tv show Wayward Pines, which I quite enjoyed.

Here's another question... while everyone is listing the most important, living directors today, I have a better question: Name 5 good directors who have gone downhill in terms of their quality of films over their career?

I'll start:

1. Terrence Malick
2. M. Night Shyamalan
3. Brian De Palma
4. John Carpenter
5. Francis Ford Coppola

Wildcard: Tim Burton

I would move Burton into the actual list there. Gonna think on this though.

[mja345]

My list of directors whose work declined over time would be (in no particular order)...
1) Sidney Lumet
2) Robert Altman
3) Woody Allen
4) Alfred Hitchcock
5) Michael Mann
6) William Friedkin

I notice a lot of directors tend to have a drop in quality of work as they get older. Quentin Tarantino has often talked about how he wants to retire relatively young so he avoids an inevitable fall from grace. A lot of directors who were making masterpieces in their primes start making average to good films, while directors who were good to average start making complete shit. It's hard to find many directors whose work gets better as they get older. I mean, Scorsese is still great, but post 1990 Scorsese is miles away from Scorsese in the 70s, 80s and in '90 with "Goodfellas". I think Scorsese's best 7 or 8 films were made before '91.

Look at Sidney Lumet's filmography following "The Verdict". "Daniel", "Garbo Talks", "Power", "Running on Empty", "Family Business", "Q & A", "A Stranger Among Us", "Guilty As Sin", "Night Falls on Manhattan", "Critical Care", "Gloria", "Strip Search", "Find Me Guilty", and "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead". An incredible drop in quality.

Robert Altman's another good example. His filmography post "Short Cuts" is pretty awful outside of "Kansas City" and "Gosford Park". In fact, my three least favorite Altman movies by far ("Dr. T and the Women", "Ready to Wear" and "The Gingerbread Man") came late in his career.

Or Woody Allen. Last Woody movie I really liked was "Deconstructing Harry". Best movie he's made since? "Blue Jasmine" or "Match Point maybe? But I wouldn't even put those in his top 10 films. I'd put Hitchcock in this category as well. Hitchcock post-"Psycho" clearly wasn't the same director. "Frenzy" is his only film post "Psycho" that I really like.

As far as Michael Mann, his last few films have been an enormous drop off from his work in the 80s and 90s. "Miami Vice", Public Enemies" and "Blackhat", while not awful, are not up to the quality of his earlier work. Friedkin is interesting. I think he made four genuinely great films in "The French Connection", "The Exorcist", "To Live and Die in LA", and "Sorcerer". I think "Crusing" is a very underrated film that was haunted by all of the controversy it generated. It's hard to find a creepier, more atmospheric or uncompromising thriller than "Cruising". But he made movies in the 90s like "Jade" and "Blue Chips". Although he did have a bit of a comeback with the very good "Killer Joe".

De Palma is a director I always felt was incredibly inconsistent even in his prime. He mixed in "Wise Guys", "Bonfire of the Vanities and "Raising Cain" even when he was producing some great films. I think Malick took so much time off between "Days of Heaven" and "The Thin Red Line" that he changed as a filmmaker. I don't think it was that noticeable with "The Thin Red Line", but his subsequent films have dropped off. Although I enjoy "Tree of Life" and "The New World", IMO they lack the magic of his first three films.

I think this applies to actors as well. DeNiro went from playing Travis Bickle, Jake LaMotta, young Vito, Rupert Pupkin, etc. to doing a bunch of Focker movies. Or Gary Oldman goes from being one of the most interesting actors out there in his prime to playing thankless roles in "Batman" and the pointless "Robocop" reboot. Or Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau go from doing classic after classic to variations of the "Grumpy Old Men" roles.

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by mja345

I think Malick took so much time off between "Days of Heaven" and "The Thin Red Line" that he changed as a filmmaker. I don't think it was that noticeable with "The Thin Red Line", but his subsequent films have dropped off. Although I enjoy "Tree of Life" and "The New World", IMO they lack the magic of his first three films.

I'm the complete opposite, to me Malick's best are The Tree of Life and The Thin Red Line, and I much prefer his later works - including To The Wonder. Badlands and Days of Heaven are undoubtedly great films, but I watch them now and I think of them as proto-Malick; they lack the spark, the spirituality and mystery of his recent films.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by lemonski

I'm the complete opposite, to me Malick's best are The Tree of Life and The Thin Red Line, and I much prefer his later works - including To The Wonder. Badlands and Days of Heaven are undoubtedly great films, but I watch them now and I think of them as proto-Malick; they lack the spark, the spirituality and mystery of his recent films.

His first three films are my personal favorites by far. My biggest problem with "To the Wonder" was it almost seemed like a Christian film at times. If you took Malick's name off it, put a no-name cast in it, and took away some of the visual flair, it could almost pass for a movie made by an evangelical production company. After watching it, I felt like I'd watched a Christian film with touches of Malick. I liken it to listening to one of Bob Dylan's Christian albums from the early 80s like "Shot of Love". I did like "The Tree of Life" quite a bit, but it doesn't touch his first three films for me. But I've talked to a lot of people who love "The Tree of Life" as much as you do.

[theater dreamer]

It's really odd how M. Night Shyamalan just fell off the cliff after such a promising start. The Sixth Sense, obviously, is the film everybody will remember him for, Unbreakable resonates with me most of all. I was born with the same disease Samuel L Jackson's character endures. But beyond that, I just found the movie enjoyable. Not a masterpiece, but a good film to spend a few hours on.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by mja345

My list of directors whose work declined over time would be (in no particular order)...
1) Sidney Lumet
2) Robert Altman
3) Woody Allen
4) Alfred Hitchcock
5) Michael Mann
6) William Friedkin

I notice a lot of directors tend to have a drop in quality of work as they get older. Quentin Tarantino has often talked about how he wants to retire relatively young so he avoids an inevitable fall from grace. A lot of directors who were making masterpieces in their primes start making average to good films, while directors who were good to average start making complete shit. It's hard to find many directors whose work gets better as they get older. I mean, Scorsese is still great, but post 1990 Scorsese is miles away from Scorsese in the 70s, 80s and in '90 with "Goodfellas". I think Scorsese's best 7 or 8 films were made before '91.

Look at Sidney Lumet's filmography following "The Verdict". "Daniel", "Garbo Talks", "Power", "Running on Empty", "Family Business", "Q & A", "A Stranger Among Us", "Guilty As Sin", "Night Falls on Manhattan", "Critical Care", "Gloria", "Strip Search", "Find Me Guilty", and "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead". An incredible drop in quality.

Robert Altman's another good example. His filmography post "Short Cuts" is pretty awful outside of "Kansas City" and "Gosford Park". In fact, my three least favorite Altman movies by far ("Dr. T and the Women", "Ready to Wear" and "The Gingerbread Man") came late in his career.

Or Woody Allen. Last Woody movie I really liked was "Deconstructing Harry". Best movie he's made since? "Blue Jasmine" or "Match Point maybe? But I wouldn't even put those in his top 10 films. I'd put Hitchcock in this category as well. Hitchcock post-"Psycho" clearly wasn't the same director. "Frenzy" is his only film post "Psycho" that I really like.

As far as Michael Mann, his last few films have been an enormous drop off from his work in the 80s and 90s. "Miami Vice", Public Enemies" and "Blackhat", while not awful, are not up to the quality of his earlier work. Friedkin is interesting. I think he made four genuinely great films in "The French Connection", "The Exorcist", "To Live and Die in LA", and "Sorcerer". I think "Crusing" is a very underrated film that was haunted by all of the controversy it generated. It's hard to find a creepier, more atmospheric or uncompromising thriller than "Cruising". But he made movies in the 90s like "Jade" and "Blue Chips". Although he did have a bit of a comeback with the very good "Killer Joe".

De Palma is a director I always felt was incredibly inconsistent even in his prime. He mixed in "Wise Guys", "Bonfire of the Vanities and "Raising Cain" even when he was producing some great films. I think Malick took so much time off between "Days of Heaven" and "The Thin Red Line" that he changed as a filmmaker. I don't think it was that noticeable with "The Thin Red Line", but his subsequent films have dropped off. Although I enjoy "Tree of Life" and "The New World", IMO they lack the magic of his first three films.

I think this applies to actors as well. DeNiro went from playing Travis Bickle, Jake LaMotta, young Vito, Rupert Pupkin, etc. to doing a bunch of Focker movies. Or Gary Oldman goes from being one of the most interesting actors out there in his prime to playing thankless roles in "Batman" and the pointless "Robocop" reboot. Or Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau go from doing classic after classic to variations of the "Grumpy Old Men" roles.

I totally overlooked Michael Mann!

You're absolutely right...his quality of work has gone down dramatically ever since Collateral (2004), which is one of my top 50 favorite movies of all time (and Heat (1995) being one of my top 20 favorites).

While I liked Miami Vice, Public Enemies and Blackhat, I agree that these are not up to par with his older movies. Much like Malick, Mann tends to beat a dead horse in terms of similar motifs, themes and emotions. I think these 2 directors in particular should go way outside their usual themes (Michael Mann directing a crime-sci fi movie in outer space would be an example that I'd love to see), if they are seeking cinematic revitalization.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by lemonski

I'm the complete opposite, to me Malick's best are The Tree of Life and The Thin Red Line, and I much prefer his later works - including To The Wonder. Badlands and Days of Heaven are undoubtedly great films, but I watch them now and I think of them as proto-Malick; they lack the spark, the spirituality and mystery of his recent films.

I'd have to say that only Badlands lacks that spirituality and poetry of his later movies. Days of Heaven is still quite poetic, but everything from The Thin Red Line is basically a blueprint for every subsequent film of his in terms of spiritual tone poems.

[pro-bassoonist]

The Kid Blu-ray REVIEW



The definitive release of Charlie Chaplin's The Kid has arrived.

An outstanding 4K restoration that is guaranteed to have a reserved spot on all prestigious Top 10 lists at the end of 2016. The bonus features are also very impressive. Fans of silent cinema should be quite pleased with Ben Model's technical analysis. Fantastic.

Buy this release, folks

Pro-B

[jw007]

Originally Posted by mja345

De Palma is a director I always felt was incredibly inconsistent even in his prime. He mixed in "Wise Guys", "Bonfire of the Vanities and "Raising Cain" even when he was producing some great films.

Yes, I agree. To be honest, I never considered De Palma a truly great director. I loved Scarface and Carlito's Way, but those are the only 2 films of his I admire. Dressed to Kill and Blowout are good films but Al Pacino was the best thing that ever happened to De Palma.

[theater dreamer]

Originally Posted by jw007

Yes, I agree. To be honest, I never considered De Palma a truly great director. I loved Scarface and Carlito's Way, but those are the only 2 films of his I admire. Dressed to Kill and Blowout are good films but Al Pacino was the best thing that ever happened to De Palma.

What about The Untouchables? That's probably my favorite film by De Palma. I'd put Carlito's Way a close second, and then Scarface a step behind the other two.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

What about The Untouchables? That's probably my favorite film by De Palma. I'd put Carlito's Way a close second, and then Scarface a step behind the other two.

It's been forever since I've seen The Untouchables. You're right though, that's a good film. I want to revisit Casualties of War too, but the film isn't available on blu-ray in the U.S.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by jw007

Yes, I agree. To be honest, I never considered De Palma a truly great director. I loved Scarface and Carlito's Way, but those are the only 2 films of his I admire. Dressed to Kill and Blowout are good films but Al Pacino was the best thing that ever happened to De Palma.

I agree that De Palma can't be considered great like a Coppola or Altman or Allen or Malick, who we've brought up, but I like a lot of De Palma's films. I think "Phantom of the Paradise" and "Carrie" are terrific. I think "Body Double", if you can settle in with the sleazy 80s vibe, is very good. It's an homage to Hitchcock like "Dressed to Kill" is, but it's done so well that it's hard not to admire the stylistic choices. I actually prefer it to the much more widely praised "Blow Out". "Casualties of War" is another De Palma film that is very powerful. But there's no doubt he's thrown in some real stinkers.

I'm a big Altman fan, and I've been shocked at how many movies that are considered lesser Altman films (Quintet, A Perfect Couple, Popeye, Buffalo Bill, Streamers) are actually awesome. Altman is one of those directors that once you get a feel of his style, you start to get really into his films. That's why I'm really harsh on a lot of his late 90s/2000s films, because they kind of betrayed who he was stylistically. I thought "Kansas City" was the last true Altman film, even though I enjoy watching "Gosford Park".

[ShellOilJunior]

This discussion seems to be veering into X, Y and Z aren't making the types of films I liked X years ago so they fell off.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

The Kid Blu-ray REVIEW



The definitive release of Charlie Chaplin's The Kid has arrived.

An outstanding 4K restoration that is guaranteed to have a reserved spot on all prestigious Top 10 lists at the end of 2016. The bonus features are also very impressive. Fans of silent cinema should be quite pleased with Ben Model's technical analysis. Fantastic.

Buy this release, folks

Pro-B

This looks like an absolute must-buy. Criterion has done an incredible job bringing Chaplin's films to the collection over the last 5 years. Amazing work.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

This discussion seems to be veering into X, Y and Z aren't making the types of films I liked X years ago so they fell off.

Not at all man. The directors I brought up are/were actually making the same kind of films they were earlier in their careers, but in far inferior ways. Malick is a different case, in that he's clearly changed. I think Malick is making films that veer far more into overt Christianity, which will bother some viewers more than others. "Badlands" and "Days of Heaven" never really veered into that territory, as Malick was clearly in a different place in the 70s. Directors like Altman, Lumet, Mann, Hitchcock, Woody, and Friedkin kept doing what they did all along, but in lesser variations in their later years. I mean, if there's a director who's changed less than Allen or Hitchcock in terms of the type of films they direct, I don't know who it is.

[scottpcusa]

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

The Kid Blu-ray REVIEW



The definitive release of Charlie Chaplin's The Kid has arrived.

An outstanding 4K restoration that is guaranteed to have a reserved spot on all prestigious Top 10 lists at the end of 2016. The bonus features are also very impressive. Fans of silent cinema should be quite pleased with Ben Model's technical analysis. Fantastic.

Buy this release, folks

Pro-B

I am highly anticipating this one! Great review!

[Fabs]

Originally Posted by jw007

Here's another question... while everyone is listing the most important, living directors today, I have a better question: Name 5 good directors who have gone downhill in terms of their quality of films over their career?

Steven Spielberg and Ridley Scott come to mind for myself. I would add in Wong Kar-wai, as much as it pains me to say him.

[kuro_sawa]

Originally Posted by jw007

Yes, I agree. To be honest, I never considered De Palma a truly great director. I loved Scarface and Carlito's Way, but those are the only 2 films of his I admire. Dressed to Kill and Blowout are good films but Al Pacino was the best thing that ever happened to De Palma.

I think he's a great director, and he knows a lot about crafting a film. He has definitely had an up and down track record though. One of my favs of his is actually one of his first, "Hi, Mom!".