Directors who totally missed the mark

Jerry Martin19 said:Kubrick!?😕 What on earth are you talking about?

Eyes wide open... 🤮

Chris Morgan67, let’s be a little more careful with your wording... ..thanks.

I'm not sure if anyone else has brought this up yet:
giving the lead role to Leonardo DiCaprio—who, at the time, was basically just a tiny, high-strung kid—in Titanic 🙂
and then pairing him up with Kate Winslet 🙂
I honestly can't tell if it was Cameron who lost his mind, the producers, or just everyone involved in the whole production.

gentlebear8 said:I’m not sure if anyone else has pointed this out yet:
casting the lead role in Titanic to Leonardo DiCaprio—who at the time was basically a tiny, hysterical kid—🙂
and then pairing him up with Kate Winslet...🙂
I have no idea who lost their mind at the studio level, whether it was Cameron or the producers.

And in your opinion, who would have been better? Maybe Leslie Nielsen paired with that actress from Mission: Impossible? 😬

To get things started, I’ll lead by quoting the original thread starter:

Jose Miller17 said:…the question is whether a director can ever truly be forgotten... well, no, they can't... yet I watch how certain directors, who have produced absolutely brilliant films by the way, fall into these slumps... some that last for years on end.😁😁...

@Chris Morgan67 — bringing up someone's mother is entirely unnecessary here; Jerry Martin19 raised a perfectly legitimate point. I am also curious about the answer. If you take a moment to re-read Jose Miller17's opening sentence, then look at your mention of Kubrick, the question from Jerry Martin19, and finally the response from crimsonmoose3, you'll realize the logic just isn't adding up...

@Chris Morgan67 & crimsonmoose3 — even if we were to assume 'Eyes Wide Shut' was a bad film—which it certainly isn't, though perhaps it's a bit softer than his other works—I still fail to see how a single movie could cause someone to completely "blow it." Unfortunately, Kubrick won't be able to step in and prove you wrong...

Kevin Sanders87 said:To start things off, I'll quote the thread starter:
@Chris Morgan67 & crimsonmoose3 - even if 'Eyes Wide Shut' were a bad movie—and it isn't, just a bit weaker than Kubrick's other work—I still don't see how one single film can 'ruin' someone...

How can it not? If a man spends his entire career making masterpieces, only to drop a total disaster as his final act before passing away...

crimsonmoose3 said:So who do you think would have been better? Leslie Nielsen or that actress from Mission: Impossible? 😬

That’s a misplaced question. I’m neither a director nor a producer, 😬

but let me make one thing clear: he completely missed the mark when it came to casting the male lead and pairing him with the female lead. 🙂

Kevin Sanders87 said:Bringing up family is totally unnecessary here; Jerry Martin19 raised a perfectly valid point. I'm looking for an answer too. If you actually look at Jose Miller17's opening line, then your random Kubrick reference, Jerry Martin19's question, and finally crimsonmoose3's response, it’s pretty obvious the logic isn't adding up somewhere...

Good to see someone else actually using their brain for its intended purpose👍 ...

Kubrick unfortunately passed away while working on a project that was, in my opinion, quite subpar. He really could have finished on a much higher note...

Or perhaps I’ve just been spoiled by his earlier masterpieces.
My apologies if anyone took my joking personally. I promise to keep it civil from here on out.

@gentlebear8—I couldn't agree more. Personally, I find almost any film featuring DiCaprio to be lacking, especially since Scorsese pushes him so heavily as if he were the next Robert De Niro. That boyish look and the lack of genuine charisma or edge is something that truly puts me off. 😬

crimsonmoose3 said:Eyes wide open... :rigo:

Point one: Eyes are actually shut (that’s the movie title, "Eyes Wide Shut")...
Point two: It's a great flick. Honestly, Kubrick levels of greatness—might even top "A Clockwork Orange" for me. You can really feel that signature Kubrick vibe. For me, it was just a killer experience...
Pro tip—watch it again...

Jerry Martin19 said:Point one: The title is Eyes Wide Shut.
Point two: The movie is excellent. It’s on par with Stanley Kubrick, maybe even better than A Clockwork Orange. You can really feel that signature Kubrick atmosphere. For me, it was a brilliant experience.
Advice—watch it again.

1. Fair enough, I missed the mark there.
2.For me, it wasn't. It was incredibly dull, featuring a nonsensical plot, tedious pacing, a stupid ending, and a censored orgy scene with zero actual sex...
3.It won't happen again; once was plenty.
4.A Clockwork Orange is a hundred times better than this trash.

crimsonmoose3 said:1. Fair point, I messed up there.
2.Not for me though. It’s mind-numbingly boring, stupid plot, dull pacing, a garbage ending, and an orgy scene that was censored so much there isn't even any actual sex...
3.It's a one-and-done for me.
4.Clockwork Orange is a hundred times better than this trash.

Most of the time I'm on board with what crimsonmoose3 picks regarding directors, actors, or movies, but I can't get behind this one.
Look, you can hate the movie or find it boring—taste is subjective and you don't have to rewatch it—but calling it "trash" is a stretch. No Kubrick film is ever going to be total garbage.
Anyway, take it easy...

Jerry Martin19 said:I've mostly agreed with your picks regarding actors, directors, and films listed under the name Constantine, but I just can't get behind this one.
It’s fine if you don't like the movie, or find it boring (taste is subjective), or simply have no desire to watch it again, but unlike a Kubrick film, this definitely isn't trash.
Best regards,

Then tell me, what is actually good about this film? A wife can't satisfy her husband, so he has to traverse the entire city just to find some excitement? And then, once he finally reaches the debauchery, he can't even join in... 👎 I've found his other films tedious due to the slow pacing, but they appealed to me. This one lacks any controversy, lacks everything... It’s as if Gus Van Sant directed it while under the influence of Jerry...

crimsonmoose3 said:So, what’s even worth watching in this flick? A husband can't satisfy his wife, so he has to trek across the entire city just to find some action? And then, when he finally makes it to the depraved orgy scene, he can't even join in... 👎 Honestly, his stuff used to bore me—slow pacing and all that—but I actually liked those. This one just lacks the edge, the controversy... It’s like Gus Van Sant was filming under some weird influence...

exactly—"husband can't satisfy his wife, so he treks across the city for fun" and then realizes he messed up at the end. The vibe is solid though, pretty creepy (mostly thanks to the soundtrack). You don't need to overanalyze it—everyone sees movies differently. Some people hated it, and clearly you're one of them.

Jerry Martin19 said:—so she can't satisfy her husband, so she has to traverse the entire city just to find some excitement?—only to realize her mistake at the end. The atmosphere is solid, even terrifying (partly thanks to the score). There's no point overanalyzing it—everyone has their own take on cinema and there will always be people who didn't care for this one, and apparently you're one of them.

Precisely. Discussion closed. 🙂

crimsonmoose3 said:I used to find his movies boring—slow pacing and all that—but I actually liked them. This one, though, lacks any controversy, lacks anything at all... It feels like Gus Van Sant directed it under some kind of influence.

If you don't think this film is controversial, then nothing else is. Clearly, you have a soft spot for low-brow cinema. As far as everything else goes, this might just be Kubrick's most high-quality work. It’s layered, subtly brutal, and carries heavy Kafkaesque elements throughout the story.

So, Luna and Almodóvar have finally been exposed. He’s the first one I can actually tolerate. As for Almodóvar, he’s absolutely tanking.

Jerry Morales78 said:If that movie isn't controversial, then nothing else is. Clearly, you're easily swayed by low-brow cinema. As far as quality goes, it might actually be Kubrick's finest work. It’s layered, subtly brutal, and carries those Kafkaesque undertones throughout the narrative.

Sure, but the man gives us The Shining, A Clockwork Orange, Full Metal Jacket, Dr. Strangelove—all absolute masterpieces—and then, right before he passes, he delivers this drama about a man whose wife can't satisfy him, yet he keeps coming back, and she eventually settles for him. If she had any sense, she would have walked away just like he did...

Jerry Morales78 said:If that movie isn't controversial, nothing is. Clearly, you just have a thing for cheap shock value. Honestly, it might be Kubrick's best work. It's layered, subtly brutal, and has those Kafkaesque vibes running through the plot.

I think the film is pretty underrated... plus, Stanley put an insane amount of effort into it, so production-wise, it holds its own against anything else he’s done. I can't even list all the details here without hitting a word limit... anyway, I'll stop before I drift too far off topic. Carry on...

For me, the primary issue with this movie is how grating Tom and Nicole's chemistry feels.

Just absolutely revolting...