When Good Directors Do Bad Things.
I want to rant for a minute on two directors that I can't stand. If I could get myself alone in a room with Tarantino and Kevin Smith, I would love to slap the taste out of their mouths. It's funny how much I dislike them, because I generally like their films. The problem is that they have personally spawned a whole new generation of obnoxious gen-x film-makers who want to make cool, yappy, hipster flicks with WAY too much dialogue. I'm all for good dialogue, but film is a visual medium. I want you to show me something interesting, not blather on in a series of extended monologues. I love David Lynch for this reason (among many others). I know the dialogue is cool in Tarantino/Smith pictures, but it isn't something that works in most film. Give it a rest already.
Actually, I can pick more on Smith. Unlike Tarantino, he hasn't been consistant enough with the quality of his films for me to be willing to pardon him for his contribution to the hipster-dialogue problem. I loved Clerks and Chasing Amy, but really I haven't liked anything else he's done very much. It's sad when, outside of the two films I just mentioned, Mallrats is clearly the best thing in your catalog. I know some people really liked Dogma and J&SBSB. Some people also really like the music of John Tesh, Ricky Martin, and Matchbox 20. I honestly didn't laugh more than a couple of times in either of those two films.
With Kevin Smith, I see a bit of "George Lucas Syndrome" lately. That's where a talented writer/director suddenly loses his mind after years of creating modern day classics then starts a-churnin' out the crap, but all of his fans and subordinates are too afraid to tell him (or admit) that what he has sucks and needs to be reworked. I can see it now:
"Yes, Mr. Lucas. I read the script for Episode One today...Oh yeah, I think it's fabulous. That Jar Jar is just too funny. Don't change a thing, sir."
Tarantino, on the other hand, I think generally produces quality work, it just doesn't appeal to me as much as others. I've never been too big on kung-fu, crime, and exploitation flicks, so I'm obviously going to miss out on some of the charm of his films.
I would really like to see these guys stretch themselves a bit with some new styles (Jersey Girl is NOT a good start) in the future. Until then, why are you still reading about this? Go rent Zero Effect. Go on...
Actually, I can pick more on Smith. Unlike Tarantino, he hasn't been consistant enough with the quality of his films for me to be willing to pardon him for his contribution to the hipster-dialogue problem. I loved Clerks and Chasing Amy, but really I haven't liked anything else he's done very much. It's sad when, outside of the two films I just mentioned, Mallrats is clearly the best thing in your catalog. I know some people really liked Dogma and J&SBSB. Some people also really like the music of John Tesh, Ricky Martin, and Matchbox 20. I honestly didn't laugh more than a couple of times in either of those two films.
With Kevin Smith, I see a bit of "George Lucas Syndrome" lately. That's where a talented writer/director suddenly loses his mind after years of creating modern day classics then starts a-churnin' out the crap, but all of his fans and subordinates are too afraid to tell him (or admit) that what he has sucks and needs to be reworked. I can see it now:
"Yes, Mr. Lucas. I read the script for Episode One today...Oh yeah, I think it's fabulous. That Jar Jar is just too funny. Don't change a thing, sir."
Tarantino, on the other hand, I think generally produces quality work, it just doesn't appeal to me as much as others. I've never been too big on kung-fu, crime, and exploitation flicks, so I'm obviously going to miss out on some of the charm of his films.
I would really like to see these guys stretch themselves a bit with some new styles (Jersey Girl is NOT a good start) in the future. Until then, why are you still reading about this? Go rent Zero Effect. Go on...
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home