The worst filmmakers ever...

[nathan alexander]

Name the worst filmmakers of all time... I won't pick on the obvious: Kevin Reynolds, Renny Harlin, Paul Anderson, Kevin Costner. Their films were awful for many different reasons... I'm talking about filmmakers who have been elevated to a God status by film critics and so called movie experts for many years.
I name Steven Soderbergh, Alfred Hitchcock, and I throw in Roman Polanski as well.
Try watching Psycho. Even imagine you have never seen it before. Forget everything that has been said about it. You will find it is just a piece of cinematographic shit. The same goes for all Hitchcocks films.
Mention Steven Soderbergh to any film critic, and you get an immediate orgasm. Have you seen Traffic?!! It's SHIT!!!
Ocean's 11, 12, Solaris, they are all unwatchable pieces of SHIT.
Roman Polanski is the same. Loved by the critics, but his films are awful. Rosemary's Baby has to be one of the worst films of the last 50 years. There is one exception for Polanski, that is The Fearless Vampire Killers. Apart from that, nothing.
I wouldn't advise any of their movies to film students. Academy Awards for directors have no meaning any more.
It's the Box Office that determines greatness, and in that regard, Michael Bay has to be one of the best.

[nelson]

I name Steven Soderbergh, Alfred Hitchcock, and I throw in Roman Polanski as well.


Dude, no disrespect, but those are some of the best in their genres. It's OK you might not like their movies, but Hitchcock and Polanski are some of the best ever. The Piano is one of the best in recent years.

I can also enjoy a Steven Soderberg flick line the Oceans flicks.

But there are worse directors out there who try to do these type of flicks and fail. I won't mention any names, but one is the daughter of a famous director.

[OmarB]

A thread who's purpose is to sling mud at filmmakers, yeah, that's a good idea. Seriously man, what you think may suck maybe somebody else's favorite movie, it might even be your favorite in a couple years after you've grown and matured enough. You can say that it's not your taste but worst as a criteria based solely on your taste does not cut it.

[xXRavenXx]

I name Steven Soderbergh, Alfred Hitchcock, and I throw in Roman Polanski as well.


Dude, no disrespect, but those are some of the best in their genres. It's OK you might not like their movies, but Hitchcock and Polanski are some of the best ever. The Piano is one of the best in recent years.

I can also enjoy a Steven Soderberg flick line the Oceans flicks.

But there are worse directors out there who try to do these type of flicks and fail. I won't mention any names, but one is the daughter of a famous director.

I agree 100% with Nelson on this. Soderberg has a unique style, and is one of the best at what he does, Hitchcock... WTH he's the king of suspense. Same with Polanski.

If you wanna talk about bad directors talk about Ed Wood, Paul W.S. Anderson, and (Blue Velvet Director/Inland Empire Director). Those guys are off their rocker. Costner is Great. He's got a touch of realism that most fail to achieve.

@nelson as far as a daughter... Hmmmm. Shall we let her eat cake?

@ALEX: Did you know psycho was done with Hitchcocks film crew from the TV series (Against studio wishes), and that films like Rear Window are probably the greatest films ever. Also not to say Hitchcock invented the failed, but new 10 minute take. He was a generous. He insisted on strangelation that he get the reaction of the actors/actresses in their eyes. The eyes tell the story. Look at Megan Fox in TF vs Shia's. The eyes DO lie. Hitchcock changed that. Check out an ED WOOD FLICK, Depp's representation was accurate all the way to Legosi.

[nathan alexander]

Hitting out at Ed Wood is a cheap shot. I'm talking about directors who have support, financial backing, and advantageous critical reviews from a fawning press... and still manage to fail. You talk about Hitchcock as the master of suspense... have you ever seen The Haunting by Robert Wise?
Hitchcock is slow, heavy handed, and predictable. The acting is atrocious. Joan Fontaine's performance in Rebecca makes me want to open my veins... (and guess what? she got an Oscar nomination).
If film students are studying Soderbergh, Hitchcock, Polanski, or even Kevin Costner, then god help the future of cinema...

[xAgonyxScenex]

i'm going to go with Uwe Boll and try my hardest not to respond directly to the OP =)

[alexsm]

According to everything i read i should say Uwe Boll, but i didn't saw any of his movies, so i can't judge him.

I'll say Ridley Scott. He made two terrific movies (Alien, Blade Runner) and then lots of crap.

Kubric, the master of boredom. All his films are filled with outrageous false depth.

Alejandro González Iñárritu. I felt completely swindled while I saw Babel.

McG. Charlie's Angels and Charlie's Angels Full Trottle, no words needed.

Terence Malik. Kubrick part 2.

Luis Llosa. He's movies are just bad.

[xAgonyxScenex]

According to everything i read i should say Uwe Boll, but i didn't saw any of his movies, so i can't judge him.

I'll say Ridley Scott. He made two terrific movies (Alien, Blade Runner) and then lots of crap.

Kubric, the master of boredom. All his films are filled with outrageous false depth.

Alejandro González Iñárritu. I felt completely swindled while I saw Babel.

McG. Charlie's Angels and Charlie's Angels Full Trottle, no words needed.

Terence Malik. Kubrick part 2.

Luis Llosa. He's movies are just bad.

I haven't seen any Kubrick outside of 2001: A Space Odyssey, and i thought that movie was complete shit. I'm sorry but I think this movie is one of those rare moments in history where a LOT of people call it great because other people have. not because it warrants that praise. The movie was absurdly bad.

[LadiesMan217]

Hitchcock, Mallick, Kubrick etc. are all awesome.

I've only seen one Larry Clark-flick in my life but I guess all of them are about depressing teenagers having sex, doing drugs etc. Ken Park was just fuckin' pointless, ridiculous, shallow, unrealistic and so desperately trying to be deep, provocative and controversial, without much success. Hated that movie.

[moe]

According to everything i read i should say Uwe Boll, but i didn't saw any of his movies, so i can't judge him.

I'll say Ridley Scott. He made two terrific movies (Alien, Blade Runner) and then lots of crap.

Kubric, the master of boredom. All his films are filled with outrageous false depth.

Alejandro González Iñárritu. I felt completely swindled while I saw Babel.

McG. Charlie's Angels and Charlie's Angels Full Trottle, no words needed.

Terence Malik. Kubrick part 2.

Luis Llosa. He's movies are just bad.
your pictures are beautiful : )

[kevski]

Try watching Psycho. Even imagine you have never seen it before. Forget everything that has been said about it. You will find it is just a piece of cinematographic shit. The same goes for all Hitchcocks films.


Step back from the keyboard.

Get out of your chair.

Walk out your front door.

Walk in that (points) direction.

Keep walking.

No keep walking.

That's it a little further.

And keep walking.

[nathan alexander]

Step back from the keyboard.

Get out of your chair.

Walk out your front door.

Walk in that (points) direction.

Keep walking.

No keep walking.

That's it a little further.

And keep walking.

For a moment there I thought you were going to tell me to throw myself in front of a truck or something...;)

So I followed your advice... I left my computer... walked out of my room... went out into the street... started walking... continued walking... I'm kind of fat, out of condition, and I smoke too much... so it was a bit of a shock...:p
It started to rain... I'd forgotten my umbrella... I got very wet...:(
I finally reached the other side of town... took a deep breath... and went home again...
During my journey I had lots of time to meditate... and you know what...?!!

It doesn't change anything... I still consider Psycho and all of Hitchcock's movies to be totally uninteresting. Maybe without the hype, and the huge media acclaim surrounding his films, I would be more lenient towards him? I just can't understand why directors like Hitchcock, Polanski, and even Sam Peckinpah for the same reasons, continue to be named among the all time greats.

[harrysaxaphone]

Holy ship in a bottle. You have no taste in films whatsoever! You honestly think Alfred Hitchcock is a bad director? What do you even know about cinema anyway? Why don't you just call Albert Einstein a "retard" and be done with it already?