Author Topic: The Ratings Project: Directors  (Read 28262 times)


PeacefulAnarchy

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1985
    • Criticker reviews
Re: The Ratings Project: Directors - Group 1
« Reply #11 on: May 31, 2015, 03:06:45 AM »
I hope we can change our ratings later, because I'm just going by gut feel and since I'm vacation don't have too much time to put into a rating system.
I hope to do like pixote and post results in a week - this case would be Monday June 8 - but you can change your ratings until the end of the project.
Sounds good, I'll vote as we go if I can, then in mid July I'll check to make sure my ratings are at least consistent.

pixote

  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 32344
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: The Ratings Project: Directors
« Reply #12 on: May 31, 2015, 10:45:00 AM »
Am I the only one who read BHC3 in Bondi's post and thought, "They made a third Beverly Hills Chihuahua film?!?!"

pixote
I think I'd love how awkward it'd be, or how awkward it should be.

MartinTeller

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 15542
  • martinteller.wordpress.com
    • my movie blog
Re: The Ratings Project: Directors - Group 1
« Reply #13 on: May 31, 2015, 10:57:07 AM »
The tricky thing about this is figuring how much you should factor in the movies you didn't see because they look like crap.  Rating people is very different from rating individual movies.

Also, it feels weird to give mediocre scores to people who have films in my top 100.

Group 1
Allen, Woody - 7
Almodovar, Pedro - 9
Brooks, James L. - 4
Burton, Tim - 4
Cameron, James - 6
Carpenter, John - 5
Coen, Joel and Ethan - 8
Coppola, Francis Ford - 8
Craven, Wes - 5
Cronenberg, David - 6
De Palma, Brian - 6
Demme, Jonathan - 8
Donner, Richard - 3
Eastwood, Clint - 7
Forman, Milos - 8
Friedkin, William - 7
Godard, Jean-Luc - 3
Herzog, Werner - 10
Howard, Ron - 3
Jackson, Peter - 7
Jarmusch, Jim - 6
Landis, John - 7
Lee, Ang - 8
Lee, Spike - 8
Leigh, Mike - 8
Lucas, George - 4
Lynch, David - 10
Malick, Terrence - 10
Mann, Michael - 6
Miyazaki, Hayao - 9
Polanski, Roman - 8
Reitman, Ivan - 2
Romero, George - 5
Scorsese, Martin - 9
Scott, Ridley - 8
Soderbergh, Steven - 8
Spielberg, Steven - 8
Stone, Oliver - 6
Tarantino, Quentin - 8
Verhoeven, Paul - 6
Von Trier, Lars - 7
Weir, Peter - 7
Wong, Kar-Wai - 8
Zemeckis, Robert - 5

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 20009
Re: The Ratings Project: Directors
« Reply #14 on: May 31, 2015, 11:37:48 AM »
Am I the only one who read BHC3 in Bondi's post and thought, "They made a third Beverly Hills Chihuahua film?!?!"

pixote

Justified, as they did:

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 28990
  • Marathon Man
Re: The Ratings Project: Directors - Group 1
« Reply #15 on: May 31, 2015, 02:21:18 PM »
Donner, Richard - 5 (still working?)
I don't really know and didn't think about it, but he's still alive so I guess it's possible.


The tricky thing about this is figuring how much you should factor in the movies you didn't see because they look like crap.  Rating people is very different from rating individual movies.
It is, which is why I wanted to try it and why a lot of the ratings are coming in the 6-8 range. Coppola was a deciding factor in this list for how I rated directors. Do I favor him for the few masterpieces or do I go low for an overall rather poor career.

Also, it feels weird to give mediocre scores to people who have films in my top 100.
I have many favorite films from directors with mediocre careers. Fernando Meirelles direction of City of God was brilliant, which makes his output since then completely confounding.


Based on the early numbers, I could've made a very tough Deathmatch Poll if I put the Coen Brothers up against Hayao Miyazaki.

Knocked Out Loaded

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1209
  • All temperatures are in centigrades.
Re: The Ratings Project: Directors
« Reply #16 on: June 01, 2015, 04:05:43 AM »
Group 1

Allen, Woody (46) - 7
Almodovar, Pedro (11) - 5
Brooks, James L. (3) - 3.5
Burton, Tim (10) - 2
Cameron, James (2) - 1.5

Carpenter, John (0) -
Coen, Joel and Ethan (17) - 6
Coppola, Francis Ford (12) - 7.5
Craven, Wes (1) - 1
Cronenberg, David (7) - 4

De Palma, Brian (5) - 3.5
Demme, Jonathan (7) - 5
Donner, Richard (0) -
Eastwood, Clint (15) - 5
Forman, Milos (9) - 5.5

Friedkin, William (3) - 4
Godard, Jean-Luc (22) - 9
Herzog, Werner (13) - 8
Howard, Ron (6) - 3
Jackson, Peter (2) - 2

Jarmusch, Jim (11) - 7.5
Landis, John (3) - 1
Lee, Ang (10) - 6
Lee, Spike (5) - 5.5
Leigh, Mike (7) - 8.5

Lucas, George (4) - 4
Lynch, David (7) - 7.5
Malick, Terrence (5) - 8.5
Mann, Michael (6) - 4.5
Miyazaki, Hayao (4) - 6

Polanski, Roman (13) - 7.5
Reitman, Ivan (1) - 1
Romero, George (1) - 2.5
Scorsese, Martin (21) - 7
Scott, Ridley (7) - 4.5

Soderbergh, Steven (15) - 7
Spielberg, Steven (16) - 4
Stone, Oliver (9) - 4
Tarantino, Quentin (6) - 3
Verhoeven, Paul (5) - 4

Von Trier, Lars (10) - 7
Weir, Peter (7) - 7.5
Wong, Kar-Wai (2) - 7.5
Zemeckis, Robert (4) - 3

Sometimes I think I vote for a director's entire oeuvre and sometimes the films in question I've seen.
I might remember it all differently tomorrow.

chardy999

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3551
Re: The Ratings Project: Directors
« Reply #17 on: June 01, 2015, 05:31:18 AM »
Spielberg, Steven (16) - 4

Once you've seen 15 from someone and are giving him a 4/10, how on Earth are you choosing to watch the 16th?
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
- Groucho Marx

DarkeningHumour

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 9788
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: The Ratings Project: Directors
« Reply #18 on: June 01, 2015, 06:25:22 AM »
This is difficult. There are those who are mostly okay but make a brilliant movie once in a while (Woody), those who are usually meh or even bad but have one or two masterpieces under their belts (Coppola), those I have only seen a couple of movies of, those I have been careful only to watch the good stuff, etc. With no time to devise a perfect rational rating system, and conscious that there can be no such thing, I am mostly voting with my gut. As a rule, I rated everyone I had seen one movie of, however unfair that may be.

Anyway, here are my ratings in spreadsheet fashion.

Apparently my ratings are averaging 7.1/10 at the moment. I may be a tad to generous.
Society is dumb. Art is everything. - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Knocked Out Loaded

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1209
  • All temperatures are in centigrades.
Re: The Ratings Project: Directors
« Reply #19 on: June 01, 2015, 07:05:00 AM »
Spielberg, Steven (16) - 4

Once you've seen 15 from someone and are giving him a 4/10, how on Earth are you choosing to watch the 16th?

Partly I guess it depends on how your scale is weighted and in my book a 4 equals a Fair grade. I suspect that a 4 in your book is something less flattering?!

In Spielberg's case I could paraphrase Whiplash ("There are no two words in the English language more harmful than 'good job'.") and in that sense give him a "Good" label. He rarely takes any chances and make movies that are much more entertainment than art. Thanks for disputing the grading, though. It helps me understand myself a bit better!

The Adventures Of Tintin was the 16th Spielberg movie I saw and I actually took the time to see it theatrically. It was a disappointment.
I might remember it all differently tomorrow.