jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (15 posts)

If you were a director in Hollywood, what kind would you be?

  1. Stevennix2001 profile image91
    Stevennix2001posted 7 years ago

    I was just reading a blog online that Kevin Spacey is interested in reprising his role as Lex Luthor again in the new Superman reboot IF WB is even remotely interest.  However, during the blog, I did leave a long comment on there when the comments turned from why or why not spacey should even be considered to...who's a better superman..Brandon Routh or Tom Welling.  Anyways, this is what I said:

    In the end, I doubt both Welling and Routh will be picked as Superman, as I’ve heard recently WB is still auditioning other actors. Therefore, that should be a clear sign right there how much confidence they have in either one of them to play superman on the big screen. Routh, I doubt seriously will be back because of the luke warm reception of SR.

    I personally don’t think it’s fair because Routh was only playing superman the way Singer wanted him to. You see boys and girls, there’s two types of directors that make movies. a collaborative one, and a Dictator one. a collaborative one allows actors to develop their own interpretations of the character and make it their own. Take Nolan for instance. When he made DK, he allowed Heath Ledger to do as little and as much research on Joker that he wanted. This not only allowed Heath to portray his own version of the joker, it allowed him to own that character as well.

    Then we get to Singer, who is a dictator. A dictator director is pretty much everything has to be his/her way or the highway. They never allow the actors to gain their own points of view on the characters they play outside of their own. In fact, Hugh Jackman even admitted this during the filming of X3. He said that when they made the first two x-men films, Singer not only didn’t want any of the cast to read any of the x-men comics, he also highly discouraged it. Saying that he wanted them to portray the characters EXACTLY the way he wanted them to. Therefore, you combine that with the fact that Singer said he based his SR movie off Donner’s superman and the old max fleischer cartoons, and you have your reason why it came out the way it did.

    I think for the record if Routh and Spacey had been allowed to do research and portray the characters the way they wanted, then it might’ve ended up improving sr. However, it’s too little too late. Is it fair? No, but that’s life.

    Then we get to Tom Welling. Don’t get me wrong, I like Smallville. Great show. Great cast, and interesting use of liberties with the Superman mythos. however, tom welling is a tv actor, and nothing more. trust me, there is a difference. tv actors are severely limited in terms of acting range, and often lack the charisma to carry a film. Tom Welling is such an actor. Take his roles in “Cheaper by the Dozen”, as Steve Martin’s son. Granted, he has a small role, in the films, but he barely stands out. Not only that, but he portrays his character in those movies almost exactly the same way he does Clark in smallville, minus the superpowers. Get my point? The point is he’s a good tv actor, but he’s a horrible movie actor. I’m sure WB knows this too. Hence, you’ll notice they’re auditioning other actors for the role of Superman. Seriously, if Welling had the potential to be a movie actor, then we wouldn’t be having this debate as the role would be his already.

    Anyways, having said all that, I would like to know from you folks.  What kind of director would YOU be if you were directing a movie.  A dictator where everything has to be your way or the highway, and none of the actors should even have a say on the characters they play.  OR, would you be a collaborative one that was open to various suggestions from your actors?  Please discuss. big_smile

    1. Julie2 profile image61
      Julie2posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I'd be collaborative. Definitely Science Fiction though. A collaberative director gets more respect from the actors I think. It also makes them want to work with you again.

      1. Stevennix2001 profile image91
        Stevennix2001posted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Yeah, that's true. I'd probably be the same way.  Plus, I think with the current times, colloborative directors seem to work the best anyway.

  2. Friendlyword profile image59
    Friendlywordposted 7 years ago

    Hi Stevie! You are a very smart, and serious, and a passionate follower of everthing related to the critique of Movies and movie making. Help me understand; or start reserching this question that has been bothering me for years. If producers and directors are now able to make movies like Avatar, and Tron; Why hasn't anyone made THE BAD PLACE (DEAN KOONTZ) into a movie yet? I been waiting for years for the movie industry to get the technology needed to make this a movie! It's just the best book ever written, and the story needs to be on the big screen where it belongs(I'm not sure how it could made tame enough to get a R rating but, the hell with the details!) The time is right!
    I guess you and I will have to do it. I'll be completely collabarative...as long as you do exactly what I say!

    1. Stevennix2001 profile image91
      Stevennix2001posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Well seeing as you just said it would have to be toned down to even get a "R" rating, then you pretty much answered your own question.  Believe it or not, most "R" rated movies don't typically make a lot of money in comparison to lower rated films that are "pg-13" and under, as they're more accessible to a larger audience base. 

      In fact, the highest grossing "r" film was "passion of the christ" that generated 250 million domestically.  Therefore, seeing as how "Avatar's" CGI method cost almost 300 million to make, then I doubt seriously a company is going to invest into making "the bad place" a movie.  Granted, I haven't read the book, nor heard of it until now, but I do know how the movie industry works.  most movie execs won't take a gamble on something like that unless they know it's a shoe in to make money. 

      Granted, you can argue saying that execs had no idea that "Avatar" would be as successful as it was, but there's a lot factors that come into play.  One, it had James Cameron directing.  A guy that previously made the "Titanic", the former highest grossing film of all time.  Therefore, you know he has clout to convince producers and studios to give him the budget he needs.  Plus, it was rated "Pg-13", so Hollywood didn't feel too much pressure giving Cameron the money he needed.  Therefore, unless someone like Quentin Tarantino or Christopher Nolan decides to take up the project, then it'll probably never happen.  sorry. 

      As far as me and you working together, I wouldn't mind.  Sure.  Although, I don't know how that would work, as I can be a bit of a control freak at times.  lol.  j/k.

  3. KoffeeKlatch Gals profile image77
    KoffeeKlatch Galsposted 7 years ago

    If I were a director, I believe I would direct suspense movies.  They are the kind I like to watch.  Not the scream fest ones, but the good old-fashioned ones that really make you think.

    1. Stevennix2001 profile image91
      Stevennix2001posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      good choice. smile

  4. IntimatEvolution profile image79
    IntimatEvolutionposted 7 years ago

    I'd be a director of documentary films and programs.

    1. Stevennix2001 profile image91
      Stevennix2001posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      you know based on your forum posts, that doesn't surprise me.  I think you'd be great at it, as it seems like you have a very open mind to probing the truth.

  5. Don Ship profile image79
    Don Shipposted 7 years ago

    I'd want to direct a romantic movie. tongue

  6. chrissie123 profile image60
    chrissie123posted 7 years ago

    If I was a director I would really want to re do the resident evil movies I am such a huge fan I know I could have done a way better job! big_smile

  7. Jeff Berndt profile image87
    Jeff Berndtposted 7 years ago

    I'd be a terrible director. I'd make a ton of mistakes, and I'd have to do a lot of re-shoots because I'd want to change a bunch of stuff after seeing the dailies...Don't ask me to direct a feature--everyone would hate me after it was finished. smile

  8. Kangaroo_Jase profile image81
    Kangaroo_Jaseposted 7 years ago

    Ok, great stuff guys and dolls, glad you  have all warmed up now...... Right.....ready?.........roll film.............record sound................aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand....ACTION!!!!

  9. Flightkeeper profile image71
    Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago

    Stevie, I would be interested in animation if I were a director.  I think I would still be collaborative because I want input from the animators and the storytellers and so forth but the vision would still be mine.

  10. Rafini profile image90
    Rafiniposted 7 years ago

    Interesting question. 

    I'd choose to be a collaborative director, however, I think I'd want to leave room in my career to be a dictator director just in case a movie came along that I felt would work best with my singular vision rather than a hodge podge effort.