Director's Roundtable

Director's Roundtable

youtube.com/watch?v=Msl6C77MNcs

Other urls found in this thread:

abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/curtain-art-successful-oscar-campaign/story?id=45666466
youtu.be/j0T2mMAfsx8
youtu.be/7a6YFwC2zKA
youtube.com/watch?v=Y1OwvcGLGaM
youtube.com/watch?v=eRlY1LkPRbQ
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>no Nolan

As it should be.

>5 hacks and 1 noob getting lauded because she has a cunt
riveting

The only good female (((director))) is sophia coppola and she learned everything she knows from her more famous dad.

>could have had nolan and pta
>nah we need whamen

those guys are hacks though

Seriously, why Patty fucking Jenkins? When will this "WONDAH WOAH-MAN WOZ GUD" meme end? Even going off of the direction alone, it looked like complete shit and fell apart by the third act

I hate Paul Feig as much as the next guy, but he should teach these people how to dress.

Why do they keep making these when the won't beat the 2009 table?
>Cameron
>Jackson
>Tarantino
>Bigelow
>Reitman
>Lee Daniels for comic relief

>no Paul King with his Paddington Kino Bear

What I like about the past director's roundtable was they actually talked about their craft and process of making the film. It was so different from the actress roundtables where they kept crying about equality and strong women. Now that they've forced diversity on it, it's back to talking about women issues.

The cinematography is a good one but again, once they invited a woman in it, "dude how is it like being a woman".

>*Smashes the patriarchy*

Once again, angelina jolie continues to act like a director and direct like an actor.

Greta is a cute

>2006 : Lesbian oscar baiting indie film
>2017 : Capeshit produced by Zack Snyder
Wow, what a career

Based Denis and Guillermo suffering through a conversation with these hack plebs. I bet every time they took a break the two of them would retreat to the corner and have a private Kino discussion.

25 seconds in Jolie already sexually assaulting ChunkyLover53.

When Warner stops buying the publicity. It was all part of the Oscar campaign.

abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/curtain-art-successful-oscar-campaign/story?id=45666466

That is so goddamn cute

Greta actually deserves to be there desu but Jenkins and Jolie definitely don't.

Considering his last film, he's probabaly gay

She did start on WW in 2006. It was just he studio were convinced.

Watched it already.

The worst one they've ever had. Hugely disappointing.

Hopefully the cinematographer one makes up for it.

Del Toro and Villy can't speak English, and don't have anything interesting to say anyway due to the nature of the conversation and the questions.

Joe Wright didn't have much of interest to say.

Gerwig and Jolie were embarrassing.

Fucking unbelievably the only one who had anything of note to say was Patty Jenkins.

my goodness that plump booty

Watch the interview.

She's literally the only one worth listening to.

Not only that - Get Out got nominated. Wonder Woman might have been a shit film, but in terms of direction it was at least a real film, and not a glorified netflix short.

Yup.

I hate Del Toro as a filmmaker and person, but every time he or Jenkins tried to talk about the actual craft, fucking Angelina Jolie and the interviewer would go on some fucking ramble about Buddhist Monks Cleansing The Forrest Of Ghosts or whatever the fuck.

To be fair Monster is a 9/10 film and better than anything Del Toro, Jolie, Wright or Gerwig have ever made.

No. Villy was dull as dishwater and just talked stupid nonsense.

Del Toro tried to talk about filmmaking, but kept getting derailed.

Jenkins was interesting when talking about how she runs a set, but in terms of her "creative" decisions it was pretentious nonsense.

>You gotta, like, hold the romance, like, right here, like in your hand, and then, uh...

>Del Toro and Villy can't speak English, and don't have anything interesting to say anyway due to the nature of the conversation and the questions.
Del Toro speaks English very well, and his point about film (in contrast to television) being the only medium capable of "mythological imagery" was one of the most interesting things ever said in one of these roundtables.

Can they bring back Cuckintino and have him in an interview with Nolan? I wanna see the schlock master try to converse with the most pretentious faggot in the industry. Last time I saw Cuckintino in this show years ago he had this really pretentious cartoonishly snooty guy who directed Les Miserables, every time Tarantula opened his mouth the guy tilted his head back and looked down his nose with condescending eyes.

He speaks it exceptionally poorly in this interview.

>and his point about film (in contrast to television) being the only medium capable of "mythological imagery" was one of the most interesting things ever said in one of these roundtables.

It's pretentious babble.

Nolan and Tarantino would just circle jerk each other about being cinematic luddites.

>He speaks it exceptionally poorly
Oh the irony

you had nothing interest to say

Looking forward to that thing Del Toro is doing with Mann and Miller about the craft of filmmaking itself, great picks hope it turns out good.

You're confusing accent with diction and vocabulary. Del Toro speaks very, very well, he just speaks with a thick accent.

>it's pretentious babble
No, it gets to the heart of the entire reason we watch movies in the age of television. He's absolutely right that we think of films visually and aesthetically, but of television narratively.

No Christopher Nolan?

No, thanks.

Why have Gerwig on the roundtable? Lady Bird honestly looked like a Kevin Smith film. There was no direction involved there, just camera pointing.

Jenkins was surprisingly good. She wasn't too political. Del Toro was amazing. Even if he's only ever made one great film (Pan's Labyrinth), he communicates the hows and whys of cinema better than anyone else. Greta Getwig needs to learn from Jenkins and get off her ideological high horse. The point about most programmers being women once is a feminist myth. Villeneuve is a good filmmaker but he barely speaks English. Angelina Jolie is boring eye candy, and her comment about the "ghosts" in Cambodian death fields was laughable. Joe Wright was as non-presence. I would like to hear him talk more about Pan's failure, though.

What's David Duchovny doing there?

Here's a good Q&A with one of the best responses of Nolan on the question of does he worry if the general audience will not grasp the three part narrative of Dunkirk
youtu.be/j0T2mMAfsx8

The question starts at 14:19

Villeneuve admits he miscast one actor in BR2049 where he simply couldn’t get the proper performance out of him/her in any way. Who was it?

I think it's that one eyed Freysa character, such a flat one dimensional performance

>"muh equal representation" kept us from having Del Taco, Nolan, and PTA in the same room together
thanks feminism

It has to be Jared Leto. His performance, however you feel about it, stood out from the rest of the film, and not necessarily in a good way.

>yfw someone starts talking about all the honest narrative arcs in their film

one day we will have our own entry level imdb awards and get them in the same room, Sup Forumsrother

>No Kevin Smith

>i'd rather have token directors of superhero flicks and middlebrow dramas than "entry-level" filmmakers with obnoxious fanbases
good afternoon, reddit

I wouldn't say that, he talks in other interviews how Leto was pretty generous in his performance, what he is saying here is that one actor was underperforming, literally unable to get to the right level of the character, while Leto if anything is overperforming in the film. He's just a badly written character with rather cheesy lines, people often mistake that for a bad performance

>"entry-level"
And you have the gall to call me reddit and especially after that entry level taste?

Harrison

He's not right, and hasn't been for about ten years.

Jordan Peele is up for a director Oscar this year.

Can someone separate out all Denis parts?

The "the actor isn't bad, his part is just poorly written" nonsense didn't hold water when people were defending Hayden Christensen either. He gave an awkward performance. The part was written for David Bowie. Imagine Bowie reading those lines, and how different it would've been to the mannered theatricality of Leto's performance. Leto was in an entirely different movie, and most of the reviews for the film pointed that out.

By the way, "generous" is a backhanded compliment. It's basically a synonym for "patient," which makes me think that Villeneuve kept asking him for more takes because he was unhappy with what he was giving him.

It's not worth it. He doesn't speak English.

Leto wasn't even bad. But when you think of the lines and the performance, but picture Bowie in them, it seems to make more sense. He probably should have reconceived the character somewhat or cast a more Bowie like presence for the role. I guess he thought Leto WAS like that, rather than getting, I dunno, an Eddie Redmayne sort.

There isn't a single episode of television that's visually on-par with the best cinema has to offer. It's the nature of how television is scheduled and budgeted; it needs to focus on narrative over form.

>Jordan Peele is up for a director Oscar this year.
What does this have to do with anything? Get Out wasn't a television show.

I think he meant underperforming in the sense that he wasn't up to the job.

I wouldn't think that was Leto either really. To be honest everyone seemed fine. Could have simply been one of the bit players. I mean, I thought Bautista, but he was fine too.

Entry-level doesn't mean bad, it means entry-level. As in the part where you enter. It's an indication of underdeveloped taste, not bad taste.

>On par with the best

No but it's certainly on par with what's being widely accepted as passable and even "great" in cinema right now.

See my remark about Peele being nominated for best director, for work that would be ADEQUATE on television.

If that's good enough for the industry to praise as great cinema, then it's certainly no longer far above television.

Reminder that Denis already made 5 classics (including Polytechnique and excluding Arrival)

Let this sink in!

When did Sup Forums fill up with people that have such terrible pleb taste?

Completely disagree. There was a far subtler way that character could have been played and Leto entirely missed it. The grandiose, god-complex angle could have worked coming a colder sociopathic personality that didn't even realize the absurd nature of their ambitions. Leto made the choice to play it as someone larping as a god and it shows and makes all the line readings sound corny as hell. That performance sticks out like a sore thumb, I think it's far easier to assume that Leto just butchered it rather than Denis having some uncharacteristic lapse in judgment.

>all shit directors
lel

Hes basically Nolan, now that Nolan isnt cool anymore.

I assumed Denis was going for this.

youtu.be/7a6YFwC2zKA

Del Toro wasn't talking about the state of cinema per se, he was talking about what cinema is capable of as a medium. Its time economy necessities a different sort of story-telling. You only get two hours when you're making a movie, but you get a lot more money for each individual minute of time in film than you do for television. Film needs to be more visual, and at its height it IS more visual.

>I'm a raging neocinebuff pleb: the post
rebbit is >>>

Nolan isn't half the filmmaker that Denis is and I don't even hate Nolan as much as most here. Nolan got a hold of a big blockbuster franchise and made The Dark Knight, Denis got a hold of a big blockbuster franchise and made Blade Runner 2049. You have to be able to see how those two are clearly operating on different levels.

In terms of capability it's not more capable of what he describes than television.

>A different sort of story-telling

Except you also have anthology television, mini-series and television movies and you're not bound by those rules anyway.

Nolan is operating at a much higher level than Denis. Sure, his action sequences are embarrassing, his writing is frequently a clunky mess and he's got a very dull imagination, but he's making mass appeal blockbusters.

Denis made an amazing movie in Blade Runner 2049, but at no point was that ever going to reach audiences. If he could have made a very good film AND reached audiences, that would have been something comparable to Nolan.

In that regard Denis is probably more like Ridley - commercial success often seems to be an accident with him.

lel. The only things Villenureddit does better are action and dialogue, but not by much. He is pure mediocre hack, just as Nolan is. Pleb.

If this movie is actually good and not just an oscar baiting lesbian flick, why didn't she direct anything until Zack Snyder pulled her out of the sewers to make a point about female empowerment. He didn't even give her the opportunity to choose the main actress because she was in no position of choosing anything. Does her movie look like Monster or like any other Znyder film? Be honest.

Not capability in literal terms, but in actuality. Miniseries and anthology series are both bound by having to stretch a particular budget out to cover more narrative ground than it would in film. The most expensive show of all time is The Crown. It cost $13 million per episode. That's $13 million for an hour of footage. The most expensive films, on the other hand, can end up costing over $100 million per hour of footage. That gives films much more money to put into elements that make up the frame (set design, special effects, costumes, lighting rigs). And we're just talking about budget. Time is another factor. A movie often takes more than a year to make. A season of a show takes about as long, but that production time has to cover many more hours of footage.

>Monster
>better than Pan's Labyrinth
Come on dude. It was a middlebrow crime drama.

>but he's making mass appeal blockbusters.
I don't for a second believe that Nolan thinks he's making mass appeal blockbusters. That motherfucker absolutely believes he is making art films that happen to capture the masses attention like Kubrick. Dunkirk is the closest he's come to that ideal and it shows but that man still oozes pretension at every moment.

I mean clearly this wasn't the metric I was judging them by in the first place but whatever. As people have pointed out here the fact that 2049 bombed is appropriately in line with the original Blade Runner. And I don't get the Ridley comparison since I think he's been very clearly making films for audiences for the past couple decades. If anything he'd be way closer to Nolan.

Nice le edgy contrarian persona. You do realize we're posting anonymously right?

>shitting on either Nolan or Denis
can't you people save your energy for genuine hacks, like Snyder?

Patty Jenkins is actually really smart and should be heading the DCEU if they wanted to continue with that, she added all the character touches that made people enjoy WW and Steves romance so much.

Sure, but now you're backtracking again. Is it capable of it? Yes.

Is it happening in actuality? Not yet - but considering how well received poorly made movies are now, and how well made some television is, it's not inconceivable in the future.

After all, Amazon's budget for the LOTR series is 1 billion dollars.

Now obviously, that's probably going to cover something like 30 episodes, but as a production the budgets won't be evenly divided. One season will be like a particularly long movie, and will theoretically resemble a 200 million dollar budgeted picture.

I think Monster is a near masterpiece. I think Pan's is unmitigated junk, like everything Del Toro makes.

I hate his goofy, cartoony visual style, I hate his pretentions to serious cinema by virtue of adding edgy violence and political elements, while doing nothing with them, and I hate his derivative, lazy fantasy appropriations.

Oh look, it's another film in which a little girl enters a fantasy world that is actually a reflection of her real world, and it's fantastical but also daaaark and scary.

If you had tossed a Nazi wrap around story onto the ends of Return To Oz, you'd have a movie ten times as good as Pan's.

Plus, I have to stress, I loathe his visual "style". It's like the worst of Tim Burton or Terry Gilliam.

He's lucky Inarritu exists to take some of the pressure off of him as Mexico's contribution to hack fraud cinema.

He's good at pandering to fans at conventions and in interviews though. I'll give him that much.

This should have been th roundtable:

>Villenueve
>Del Toro
>Gerwing
>PTA
>Nolan
>McDonagh

M O M M Y

>I don't for a second believe that Nolan thinks he's making mass appeal blockbusters.

He cites (and clearly demonstrates a horrid attraction for) Michael Bay as an influence on his direction. He's definitely not completely unaware that he makes plebbusters.

Ridley has always made films for Ridley. Sometimes he doesn't get to fuck them up too much (The Martian), but generally he has been directing his films in the same manner the whole time. Sometimes they connect, sometimes they don't.

There was a chance Gladiator could have just gone the way of Kingdom Of Heaven or 1492.

Guillermo wasn't talking in hypothetical terms, though. He was talking about the differences between film and television in actuality. Television's length (putting aside time and budget restraints) lends it better to long-arc drams that focus on the narrative aspects of storytelling. A visual film like 2001 might work for 2 and a half hours, but it's not going to work for an entire season of television. One day we might get something like that, but that wouldn't change the fact that in general film and television are different.

In actuality his movie had the same budget as an episode of The Crown though.

>2001
>Entire Season Of Telelvison

Television is not entire seasons of episodic drama. That's just one limited facet of it. If that's all Del Toro thinks it is, he's just demonstrating his ignorance.

Dennis and Guillermo are the only good ones there.

Harrison Ford

mostly this but del toro is pretty likeable

>tfw no ridley to fuck shit up

youtube.com/watch?v=Y1OwvcGLGaM

why is Angelina literally the worst person on this Roundtable?

she looks so happy here

The most subjective aspect of filmmaking isn't tone or pace like people think it is, it's aesthetic. When I look at Blade II and The Shape of Water, I think what you think. I see corny design, obnoxious color-grading, and clashes in style that don't work. But to me Pan's Labyrinth is Jodorowsky-levels of hispanic creativity. Seeing pic related in a nearly-full cinema when I was like 14 left an indelible mark on me, and it's one of the reasons why I love film to this day. That overdone contrast between the horrific real and the fantastical (Brazil did it better and earlier) just worked for me. I can't defend it beyond that. Some movies work on you in ways you can't articulate

wait, I thought the teddy bear thing was just a meme

Well, maybe you're part hispanic, because Del Toro, Inarritu and to a lesser extent Cuaron do nothing for me.

>14

I was an adult when I saw Pan's, and I had already a number of the films he had ripped off (like Jodorowsky and The Spirit Of The Beehive).

Interstingly, I hate Del Toro, yet happily tolerate Jeunet, who directs in a similar manner, and I rememver The City Of Lost Children having a huge impact on me when I saw it in the cinema.

Kelly Reichardt is the only good female director

>In actuality his movie had the same budget as an episode of The Crown though.
The Crown also took a year to produce 9 or 10 hours of footage, while The Shape of Water took well over a year to produce two hours of footage. Again, those time differences lead to distinct creative choices.

>Television is not entire seasons of episodic drama.
What else is it? A miniseries has many of the same constrains that long-arc drama does. A made-for-tv movie doesn't apply because it's identical to film in its form; it's not its own distinct medium. What other forms of television are you thinking of?

youtube.com/watch?v=eRlY1LkPRbQ

>2018 Animation Roundtable features the imaginative Kyle Balda ('Despicable Me 3'), Chris McKay ('The LEGO Batman Movie'), Lee Unkrich ('Coco'), Lore Forti ('Ferdinand'), Nora Twomey ('The Breadwinner'), and Tom McGrath ('Baby Boss')

the absolute state of art

>have to wait till march for this roundtable
WHY EVEN LIVE

that's garbage too
>armie hammer the obnoxious faggot
>some fat sheboon
>literally who on the left

nice meme kid (i’m suggesting you’re under the age of 15)