Miss Kilcher was not the ONLY thing about “The New World”. I felt all the main players did a good job. Plus the film has stunning visuals and highly effective music. But let’s be honest: how many other “new” actresses in Hollywood in the past ten years have made an impression like QK? She’s a big piece of the puzzle.
Malick is NOT the most overrated film director in the world today. I don’t have to read his name every time it’s Oscar season or whenever I pick up a movie magazine. Aronofsky, on the other hand…he really got his name out there with “The Wrestler” and “Black Swan”. Don’t even get me started about Quentin You-Know-Who and his buddy Robert You-Know-Him-Too.
Back to Malick, if you wish to look at his least impressive film, that would be “Tree of Life”. Not sure why anyone would rate it above “The New World”. That said, I don’t think he’s necessarily peaked right now.
PS: Just got through seeing all of TM’s films on the big screen (and with Malick you SERIOUSLY need to see ‘em this way) a few months ago, in a retrospective in relatively short order. I’d go with “Badlands” being his best effort with “The New World” second…“The Thin Red Line” would be third and then “Days of Heaven” and “Tree of Life”.
Let’s not turned this into yet another “overrated” thread.
This thread is overrated!!!!!!!!
I think Matt’s comments are underrated.
Santino’s comments are like Nirvana, overrated but many, underrated by the rest, and never fully appreciated for what they are.
ahahahah – that made me laugh out loud.
Most certainly Michael Haneke.
Best of the 00s? Haneke is certainly a master and one of the best we have, his films are unforgettable even if they are tough views. His movies channel a divisiveness with viewers (the few who seek out his pictures) that harkens back to Antonioni, same can be said for Terry Malick.
Claire Denis (Trouble Every Day, The Intruder, 35 Shots of Rum, White Material) is my choice.
Pedro Almodovar (Volver, Bad Reputation, Talk to Her, Broken Embraces) and Hayao Miyazakai (Spirited Away, Howwls Moving Castle, Ponyo) also did fine work.
I would say Steven Soderbergh (with Chan-Wook Park in close 2nd). Soderbergh kicked off millenium and never slowed down. While all his films aren’t amazing (some are though), but he’s always trying something new and it’s always at least interesting. He never shys away from experimenting with new media and markets. He’s a forward thinking man in a time of major technological and economical change. Soderbergh is the director of the 2000s.
P.S. Haneke’s movies are better, though.
Lynch. Mulholland Drive and Inland Empire alone are enough to guarantee his supremacy over this decade.
Danny Boyle – The Beach, 28 Days Later, Millions, Sunshine, Slumdog Millionnaire, 127 Hours
Quentin Tarantino – Kill Bill Vol. 1, Kill Bill Vol. 2, Death Proof, Inglourious Basterds
Is this a thread for worst directors of the 00s?
Oh, then please enlighten us on who the best is.
No opinion really, other than my own. But even with that being said, Boyle’s gotta be up there for one of the worst. Slumdog Millionaire and 127 Hours are both quite bad, and not in any good ways. 127 is especially gimmicky, with one of the worst endings I’ve seen on a big screen in some time. It was a glorified made-for-TV movie. I got no problem with Tarantino in particular. He can be pretty good sometimes. Even Boyle used to be all right. I even like The Beach, even though it seems many people don’t. But he’s just not been on a good track record in recent memory. Oy.
what’s your opinion love?
127 Hours somewhat disappointed me, and I don’t love Slumdog, but I don’t see why the latter is so hated on the internets. It possesses too much brio and craft for me to consider it any less than even a tepid “good”.
I’ll grant that Boyle is a visual wonder. His style has always been his most consistent trait as a filmmaker, but whereas it was a strong suit in films like Shallow Grave and Trainspotting, it becomes an annoyance in 127 Hours. It’s almost too in-your-face about the reality of the event. I get what Boyle was going for, but Neil Marshall in The Descent did a much better job of creating a claustrophobic effect, and that was even before Marshall broke out the underground freaks of nature to wreak havoc. Plus, Boyle’s gotten into a bad habit of turning on the fireworks towards the end of his films. This worked great in 28 Days Later, but jesus christ it’s like every time there’s ten minutes left in one of his movies now, he has to turn up the soundtrack and get all over-dramatic. I guess that’s the reason why he was perfect for the Olympic opening ceremonies.
Peacock, then offer your opinion about who is the best, you disagree with Boyle and Tarantino, I certainly have no love for Tarantino’s work, but offer another name instead of scoffing at the opinions of others.
I didn’t scoff. I started a discussion. See?
Now, anyone can scoff the shit outta my picks if they want. Ain’t gonna bother me none.
apichatpong was one of my earlier choices as well.
oy, nice aggressive approach
Scoff. I realise now that I have hardly seen anything from th ‘00s or ’10s. The most recent film I’ve seen is Park’s Thirst from ’09 I bleev..
I think I’d go with Haneke , Noé, Weerasethakul, Kar-wai, Lynch, Mallick ,Reygadas, Zhangke, Tarr, Almodovar, P. T. Anderson, and Van Sant.
That said, some other great directors like Scorcese and Kiarostami, which have a fenomenal body of work, made good films since the 2000’s, but not quit enough to stand out against the above.
It’s really between Apichatpong Weerasethakul, Claire Denis, and Michael Mann.