Fave 70's "New Hollywood" director

..and why not?

Fave 70's 'new hollywood' director

Hal Ashby
3
9%
Brian De Palma
0
No votes
Arthur Penn
1
3%
Roman Polanski
3
9%
Martin Scorsese
14
41%
Robert Altman
4
12%
Bob Rafaelson
0
No votes
Terrence Malick
3
9%
Francis Ford Coppola
5
15%
Michael Cimeno
1
3%
 
Total votes: 34

The Modernist

Fave 70's "New Hollywood" director

Postby The Modernist » 31 Aug 2004, 21:33

I did a similar poll a month back on directors of the classic studio era which went down well so I thought it might be interesting to discuss seventies American cinema. Many people see this as a golden age for adult, courageous film making. The last period before the moneymen took hold of the creative reigns forever.
In truth it was probably a combination of commercial desperation and sheer incompetence (Hollywood had gone through so many mergers that there was a vacuum of power at the top) that saw directors, briefly for a ten year period weald more creative power than before or since.
Anyway I've listed who I think werre the main players (and no apologies for the omission of spielberg, that was a political decision).

Edit: I did include an other option but ballsed up adding the extra field. Anyway please state any alternative selections, I'm aware that I've omitted some notables but will explain my rationale as and when.

User avatar
Penk!
Midnight to Six Man
Posts: 35784
Joined: 07 Aug 2004, 20:12
Location: Stockholm

Postby Penk! » 31 Aug 2004, 21:37

Michael Cimino may have directed The Deer Hunter, which in my opinion is as close as anything to the greatest film of all time, but, let's be honest here, he did fuck all else. Likewise, while Scorsese did make a couple of great films in the 70s, there's also some of his work which does nothing for me.
For me, Coppola is the only one on the list who made nothing but great films in the 70s.
fange wrote:One of the things i really dislike in this life is people raising their voices in German.

The Modernist

Postby The Modernist » 31 Aug 2004, 21:43

Ken_Korda wrote:Michael Cimino may have directed The Deer Hunter, which in my opinion is as close as anything to the greatest film of all time, but, let's be honest here, he did fuck all else. Likewise, while Scorsese did make a couple of great films in the 70s, there's also some of his work which does nothing for me.
For me, Coppola is the only one on the list who made nothing but great films in the 70s.


I guess my criteria was at least two real noteworthy films from the era. Cimino was included for Heavens Gate as well as The Deerhunter. Heaven's Gate came at the end of this era and is usually seen as one of the final nails in the coffin of this era of film making, however it is enjoying a notable critical revival, especially since Cimino's intended cut has been made available.
I guess i should have included Peckinpah here as well, he certainly deserves to be on the list.

User avatar
Penk!
Midnight to Six Man
Posts: 35784
Joined: 07 Aug 2004, 20:12
Location: Stockholm

Postby Penk! » 31 Aug 2004, 21:45

TheModernist wrote:
Ken_Korda wrote:Michael Cimino may have directed The Deer Hunter, which in my opinion is as close as anything to the greatest film of all time, but, let's be honest here, he did fuck all else. Likewise, while Scorsese did make a couple of great films in the 70s, there's also some of his work which does nothing for me.
For me, Coppola is the only one on the list who made nothing but great films in the 70s.


I guess my criteria was at least two real noteworthy films from the era. Cimino was included for Heavens Gate as well as The Deerhunter. Heaven's Gate came at the end of this era and is usually seen as one of the final nails in the coffin of this era of film making, however it is enjoying a notable critical revival, especially since Cimino's intended cut has been made available.
I guess i should have included Peckinpah here as well, he certainly deserves to be on the list.


When I said he did fuck all else, I was kind of referring to Heaven's Gate anyway...
fange wrote:One of the things i really dislike in this life is people raising their voices in German.

The Modernist

Postby The Modernist » 31 Aug 2004, 23:00

Bloody hell, a pitiful response so far. Who knew Hot Tuna would be more popular?

User avatar
Jeff K
The Original K
Posts: 32699
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 23:08
Location: Pennsylvania USA
Contact:

Postby Jeff K » 31 Aug 2004, 23:05

ummm...shouldn't Spielberg be included on that list?
the science eel experiment wrote:Jesus Christ can't save BCB, i believe i can.

The Modernist

Postby The Modernist » 31 Aug 2004, 23:12

Jeff K wrote:ummm...shouldn't Spielberg be included on that list?


No. He destroyed that generation of filmmakers by bringing back commercial genre films (although I liked Jaws). He was of the same movie brat generation but in retrospect his films were the antithesis of the aforementioned directors. Lucas is excluded for similar reasons.

User avatar
Jeff K
The Original K
Posts: 32699
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 23:08
Location: Pennsylvania USA
Contact:

Postby Jeff K » 31 Aug 2004, 23:17

TheModernist wrote:
Jeff K wrote:ummm...shouldn't Spielberg be included on that list?


No. He destroyed that generation of filmmakers by bringing back commercial genre films (although I liked Jaws). He was of the same movie brat generation but in retrospect his films were the antithesis of the aforementioned directors. Lucas is excluded for similar reasons.


So you're looking for the rebel? Hal Ashby carried on the spirit of the 60's well into the 70's. The Last Detail, Harold and Maude, Shampoo, Bound For Glory, Coming Home and Being There are all excellent (and anti-establishment) films. Very under-rated filmaker.
the science eel experiment wrote:Jesus Christ can't save BCB, i believe i can.

User avatar
Ranking Ted
Posts: 12751
Joined: 03 Feb 2004, 22:13
Location: Northern Britain

Postby Ranking Ted » 31 Aug 2004, 23:20

Would probably have to go for Scorsese, just for the sheer number of classics he's been responsible for. They've (mostly) all had their moments though.

I'd like a side shout for the great Hal Ashby, though: responsible for 2 of my favourite ever films, the hysterically funny yet achingly sad The Last Detail, and the swansong of a hero of mine, Being There.

User avatar
Ranking Ted
Posts: 12751
Joined: 03 Feb 2004, 22:13
Location: Northern Britain

Postby Ranking Ted » 31 Aug 2004, 23:21

Jeff K, award yourself a gold star and 5 points!

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 31 Aug 2004, 23:59

I'm the only guy who's picked Altman so far?
Just for that I'm gonna make you read my post out loud at the same time someone else reads a post out loud.

Serves you right.

User avatar
Quaco
F R double E
Posts: 47382
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 19:41

Postby Quaco » 01 Sep 2004, 00:04

I don't know if he fits your criteria, but I'd vote for John Cassavetes. He himself would probably have said that much of the credit should go to his actors. Like Altman, he was very much an "actor's director" -- working over the scripts with them long beforehand, getting them to add their own autobiographical details and things to make it more true. Cassavetes almost always dictated his scripts, in order to get the dialogue sounding more natural. He also used to write eight, ten, twelve drafts of scripts if necessary as a film changed during production. And actors who worked with him (e.g., Peter Falk, Tim Carey, Ben Gazzara) usually wanted to do so again and again.

Some find his movies too long, but I think it's just that they don't have the same kind of regular payoffs that films have. I think their most marked characteristic is that they deliberately eschew the kind of "encoded" style used by almost every other director. By which I mean that in his films, someone looks at his watch to know what time it is, not to signal the audience that he is the kind of character who's always looking at his watch. Cassavetes's characters are never idealized or symbolic, which can make it less fun for viewers. After all, part of the fun of films is to figure out who is good and who is bad, and at the end, get a message you can carry around with you afterward. Cassavetes's films are scripted, but have such realism -- perhaps "truth" is a better word, because sometimes unlikely things happen but they feel right -- that to me, a convert, I really think they make the majority of films look completely phoney in comparison.

Shadows
Faces
Husbands
Minnie and Moskowitz
A Woman Under the Influence
The Killing of a Chinese Bookie
Opening Night
Love Streams

Overall, this is my favorite ouevre the new generation ('60s and '70s). Not to be confused with films Cassavetes directed but did not conceive (like Gloria) which don't tend to be as good.

I do like the other directors listed in the poll (those that I know anyway), just thought John Cassavetes is the most stimulating.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

marios

Postby marios » 01 Sep 2004, 01:30

If we're talking strictly about their 70s output then i have to go with Coppola. The Godfather Parts I & II, Conversation, Apocalypse Now.

If i was to base my decision on one film only then perhaps i'd go with Polanski. Chinatown is a classic in every meaning of the word.

Scorsese did a promising film (Mean Streets) and a masterpiece (Taxi Driver). The rest of his 70s work isn't that memorable (Alice and Last Waltz could also be exceptions...hmmm).

Hal Ashby is also a very interesting case. Harold And Maude, The Last Detail, Bound For Glory, Coming Home and of course Being There. He certainly kept busy during the 70s.

Arthur Penn did Little Big Man, The Missouri Breaks and Night Moves. A worthy candidate but not what it takes to be #1.

I would probably agree about Cassavettes but i have only seen a couple of those films he made with Gazzara and Falk during the 70s. Seems like a wonderful run though: Husbands, Minnie & Moskowitz, Woman Under The Influence, The Killing Of A Chinese Bookie and Opening Night. Impressive!

But, as i said, the man of that decade for me was Coppola. He wrote and directed 4 excellent films (2 of them are always quite high on critics' lists - and most people's lists actually) and wrote the screenplay for Patton, as Matt pointed out.




Now, if you want to talk about their careers overall then i'd probably have to go with Scorsese.
Last edited by marios on 01 Sep 2004, 04:11, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 32515
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Postby Matt Wilson » 01 Sep 2004, 02:20

Yeah, I couldn't cast a vote because I couldn't decide between these:

Scorsese--Classics would be Mean Streets and Taxi Driver. Good films would be Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore, and The Last Waltz.

Coppola--Classics would be Godfather, Godfather II, and Apocalypse Now. Good film would be The Conversation. He also won an oscar for the Patton screenplay and produced American Graffiti.

Altman--Classics would be MASH and Nashville. Good films would be The Long Goodbye and California Split. Plus, he made maybe four more films which are at least interesting (all better than Scorsese's film with DeNiro and Liza Minnelli for instance).

For work only done in the '70s Coppola and Altman would come out on top but Scorsese made more quality films in subsequent decades so it's a tough one... None of the other directors listed made enough great movies during that ten-year span to really qualify. You didn't include Woody Allen, who didn't rate much of a mention in the book Easy Riders, Raging Bulls but made the great Annie Hall and Manhattan as well as the good Love and Death and Sleeper. Not to mention a couple more which are at least interesting.

User avatar
geoffcowgill
exceptionally nondescript
Posts: 3380
Joined: 23 Oct 2003, 23:43

Postby geoffcowgill » 01 Sep 2004, 03:13

I agree that Coppola was more or less untouchable during the 70s, but the quality of his filmmaking fell off drastically after filming "Apocalypse Now". In the long run, he looks more like a fluke.

Altman is something of a genius, I think, but not a consistent craftsman. Even during his glory years of the 70s, he had a few misfires, like "Buffalo Bill & The Indians" and "Quartet" (though that may have been the early 80s-- and not that I have anything against Paul Newman). His misfires have multiplied exponentially since then, but unlike Coppola, he has proven his gift is still at least intermittently intact with great films like the criminally under-rated "Vincent & Theo" and "Kansas City".

Scorsese has been uncannily consistent for the longest period of time and is in many respects the most impressive filmmaker there has ever been. He's not, by any means, the most innovative or influential, but to me he is simply the best. I truly believe he hasn't made a bad film, though some may have obvious flaws. The man seems to understand the medium better than any other director around. He simply knows what works and how to achieve it. Sure, he cribs from the sources he loves (which appears to be every movie ever made), but he does so in creative ways that serve the story he tells, doesn't overwhelm or distract from it.
That said, I hope his apparent recent pursuit of some perfect blend of artistic and commercial success (geared towards the little statue it may appear) isn't going to be a never-ending quixotic quest.

Many of the other people on the list produced some sterling work, but these three are the only really serious contenders, it seems to me.

User avatar
geoffcowgill
exceptionally nondescript
Posts: 3380
Joined: 23 Oct 2003, 23:43

Postby geoffcowgill » 01 Sep 2004, 03:19

Wait, I just noticed Polanski was on your list too. He's pretty friggin' great. I'd probably double my comments about Altman concerning him.

User avatar
geoffcowgill
exceptionally nondescript
Posts: 3380
Joined: 23 Oct 2003, 23:43

Postby geoffcowgill » 01 Sep 2004, 03:21

We should have a second poll to anticipate how Ced will vote before he wakes up.

User avatar
The Write Profile
2017 BCB Cup Champ
Posts: 14755
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 10:55
Location: Today, Tomorrow, Timaru
Contact:

Postby The Write Profile » 01 Sep 2004, 03:21

Matt Wilson wrote:Altman--Classics would be MASH and Nashville. Good films would be The Long Goodbye and California Split. Plus, he made maybe four more films which are at least interesting (all better than Scorsese's film with DeNiro and Liza Minnelli for instance).

.



I always thought that McCabe & Mrs Miller was his best film (and Roger Ebert agrees with me). I have problems with his freewheeling, overlapping approach which he doesn't curb as much as he should--c.f. the love-in that was Gosford Park. It seems that he's actually better concentrating on a few characters, and that was what made McCabe & Mrs Miller equally revoloutionary, and far more poignant.

The Leonard Cohen soundtrack was great too, really sparse. I don't think he ever acheived a better shot than the one of McCabe dying in the snow.

Personally, it's Scorsese for me, pipping out Coppola. Then again, my favourite Coppola film was The Coversation--particularly for Walter Munich's superb use of sound editing (a lot of the "brat pack"'s great films have to in some way be credited to their editors--Scorsese had Thelda Schumacher, for instance)

Apocalypse Now and Heaven's Gate did as much to destroy the "movement" as anything--both were facicial, budget blowouts. It's no wonder the studios never let Coppola make anything as mad, beuatiful and as pretentious as Apocalypse Now again...and it's no wonder htat he's repeated its success, artistcially or commercially.

So my rank order would be as of the moment...

Scorsese
Coppola
Asby
Altman
Last edited by The Write Profile on 01 Sep 2004, 03:34, edited 1 time in total.
It's before my time but I've been told, he never came back from Karangahape Road.

User avatar
DaFringeElement
Posts: 293
Joined: 22 Mar 2004, 04:37
Location: ATL, Dirty South
Contact:

Postby DaFringeElement » 01 Sep 2004, 03:30

No votes for Polanski? That's a bit shocking. I voted for Scorsese, only because he's my favorite director of all time...but Polanski would be my other favorite 70s director.

And good post about Cassavetes BTW.
Image

User avatar
Kenji
Otaku
Posts: 22639
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 02:59
Location: Tokyo

Postby Kenji » 01 Sep 2004, 03:33

Mr. Jim wrote:I don't know if he fits your criteria, but I'd vote for John Cassavetes. He himself would probably have said that much of the credit should go to his actors. Like Altman, he was very much an "actor's director" -- working over the scripts with them long beforehand, getting them to add their own autobiographical details and things to make it more true. Cassavetes almost always dictated his scripts, in order to get the dialogue sounding more natural. He also used to write eight, ten, twelve drafts of scripts if necessary as a film changed during production. And actors who worked with him (e.g., Peter Falk, Tim Carey, Ben Gazzara) usually wanted to do so again and again.

Some find his movies too long, but I think it's just that they don't have the same kind of regular payoffs that films have. I think their most marked characteristic is that they deliberately eschew the kind of "encoded" style used by almost every other director. By which I mean that in his films, someone looks at his watch to know what time it is, not to signal the audience that he is the kind of character who's always looking at his watch. Cassavetes's characters are never idealized or symbolic, which can make it less fun for viewers. After all, part of the fun of films is to figure out who is good and who is bad, and at the end, get a message you can carry around with you afterward. Cassavetes's films are scripted, but have such realism -- perhaps "truth" is a better word, because sometimes unlikely things happen but they feel right -- that to me, a convert, I really think they make the majority of films look completely phoney in comparison.

Shadows
Faces
Husbands
Minnie and Moskowitz
A Woman Under the Influence
The Killing of a Chinese Bookie
Opening Night
Love Streams

Overall, this is my favorite ouevre the new generation ('60s and '70s). Not to be confused with films Cassavetes directed but did not conceive (like Gloria) which don't tend to be as good.

I do like the other directors listed in the poll (those that I know anyway), just thought John Cassavetes is the most stimulating.


I agree!


Return to “Screenadelica”