Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2019 12:27:44 GMT
Cheeky, I know , but I'm genuinely curious - of these two directors who may be personae non gratae for the rest of their lives, who is your favorite?
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 26, 2019 12:45:25 GMT
Well they are two of my all time faves why must you make me choose!
Woody Allen is the greatest writer America's ever produced and he's an iconic figure artistically in other ways - he basically is what Spike Lee wished he could be (a film a year for 50 years working and writing his own scripts (in Allen's case, always) over a narrow stylistic range - in Lee's case mostly matters of race; in Allen's mostly matters of the heart) - but Allen maintained a fierce independence, unthinkable to others. He was exactly the artist he wanted to be, beholden to no one at any studio or to how much money his films made.
But Roman Polanski was number 1 on my list of greatest filmmakers ever and I've already argued not just the contradictory feminist nature of his work but also in psychological complexity. He borrowed that from Kurosawa and Bergman but did it in English films with his genius collaborator Gerard Brach that literally changed cinema. It's hard to compete with that kind of historical change to the artistic medium for Woody ............if I have to compare them...........grrrrrrrrrr.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2019 14:04:11 GMT
Well they are two of my all time faves why must you make me choose! Woody Allen is the greatest writer America's ever produced and he's an iconic figure artistically in other ways - he basically is what Spike Lee wished he could be (a film a year for 50 years working and writing his own scripts (in Allen's case, always) over a narrow stylistic range - in Lee's case mostly matters of race; in Allen's mostly matters of the heart) - but Allen maintained a fierce independence, unthinkable to others. He was exactly the artist he wanted to be, beholden to no one at any studio or to how much money his films made. But Roman Polanski was number 1 on my list of greatest filmmakers ever and I've already argued not just the contradictory feminist nature of his work but also in psychological complexity. He borrowed that from Kurosawa and Bergman but did it in English films with his genius collaborator Gerard Brach that literally changed cinema. It's hard to compete with that kind of historical change to the artistic medium for Woody ............if I have to compare them...........grrrrrrrrrr. Allen's best certainly stand with Polanski's best.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jun 26, 2019 14:29:48 GMT
I never cared for Woody Allen. He writes good roles for women, but I think that for all of his prolificacy, he's got maybe five movies in his catalogue I actually like, with a few of his more acclaimed works I just can't stand.
Polanski, I've always found to be rather overrated, but Chinatown is an undeniable masterpiece (even if I do wish he hadn't cast himself in that role), Repulsion and The Tenant are sublime films, and I quite enjoy The Ghost Writer. He just has this fantastic ability to create atmosphere that feels unique and can paper over a lot of the flaws I would otherwise be unable to ignore in his movies. So I'll go with him as the better filmmaker.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 26, 2019 15:34:02 GMT
If you want to see the difference between a great director (Allen) and the greatest director (Polanski) watch this conversation scene - it's just a conversation for Godsakes - between 2 actors neither of whom is particularly great, although Wilkinson was my best of the nominees win in 2001 and McGregor is always dependable.
Look how he frames them - Wilkinson is sitting with a window/light illuminating him and his path out of the questions and the conversation ends with a discussion about the path out too - his AND McGregor's. McGregor has no space to move at all - the conversation changes from their faces reacting to cramped over the shoulder shots so you feel the pressure on McGregor.
The alcohol glassware cuts off one path and the clutter on Wilkinson's side cuts off the other. A horse (transport, another path and a canon - danger/death - is clearly visible behind Wilkinson) Moments later standing, a 3 person depth shot - a Polanski specialty shot again illuminates a path for him and for McGregor well the conversation at the door merely reveals.........imminent danger. In the driveway you see the path to the house separated by a plant too, Wilkinson offers another path and danger simultaneously.
That is how much thought is going on in single every shot (well just about) in every single Polanski movie. It's genius time, all the time.
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on Jun 26, 2019 16:21:58 GMT
I thought I would be the only one to vote for Allen...
I love both but I'm a real Allen fan. I adore his humor, his sarcasm, his insecure characters and (weird as it may seem) the love stories he's creating!
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jun 26, 2019 16:45:22 GMT
I've only managed to struggle through five of Woody Allen's films at this point and I've hated all of them to varying degrees. I've always been genuinely confused as to how people can even tolerate watching his films. Polanski takes this by default, and he directed at least two all-timers.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jun 26, 2019 19:03:52 GMT
I really love Allen but Polanski's adventurousness and risk-taking puts him a bit further for me. I just watched "Bitter Moon" today and was once again reminded of Polanski's greatness - how he portrays cruelty, obsession, passion, absurdity...It's wonderful.
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Jun 26, 2019 19:22:05 GMT
Put me in Camp They're Two Of My All Time Faves as well. I could easily, happily watch 90% of Woody's work any place any time quite happily. His style, his whole vibe, even when the movies aren't great it's just easy comfort viewing (except when he's failing to be Bergman). Polanski has made some seriously ridiculous movies, but I think at the top end his best stuff is beyond Allen's, and even at the bottom end while the movies may technically be worse they're certainly never boring. It's a very close call, they're probably both top ten all timers for me, but edge to Polanski.
|
|
|
Post by Sharbs on Jun 26, 2019 20:57:44 GMT
Hannah and Her Sisters is the best thing either of the them have done, but Polanski really does take this easily and I've only seen 6 Polanski flicks to 17 Woody's
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Jun 26, 2019 23:52:24 GMT
Polanski bc he's my all time #1.... the ne plus ultra of filmmaking talent... I've seen every thing he's done so far, including his vivid shorts, which range from absurd slapstick (Mammals, Fat and the Lean) to powerful and haunting (The Lamp, When Angels Fall). He's always been traversing tones and challenging dynamics and psychology, proving to be greatly witty too, and profound, his tragic sense is unmatched. Here's a frame from When Angels Fall, 1959, notice the color and the one flower on one side, he's seen subtler days but it's a beautiful shot and shows how early he was already thinking of meaning and subtext and poetry and irony thru the visual.... By my count he has 8 masterpieces - you may contest but Fearless Vampire Killers is staying right here with me! I love Woody Allen too, in fact he informed my real life in terms of music, movies, literature, obsession with vocabulary lol... and he alongside Coppola, Coens, and then prob Scorsese, complete my 5 fav living directors.... But none of them imo have exceeded Polanski ...yet.....
|
|
wattsnew
Full Member
Posts: 712
Likes: 347
|
Post by wattsnew on Jun 27, 2019 0:10:09 GMT
Polanski has one great film, maybe two. Allen has over a dozen. No competition!
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Jun 27, 2019 0:14:00 GMT
Gotta give it to Allen for sheer volume and consistency. When I think about Polanski, I think about two things: 1) how much I love his Apartment Trilogy and 2) how most everything else he did is overrated, especially The Pianist and to an extent Chinatown as well. All throughout the 80s and 90s Allen was consistently pumping out projects and I've enjoyed most of what I've seen from that period. It's unbelievable how prolific he was. One of my most-viewed directors and I feel like I've only seen half his filmography but the more I see the more I appreciate his vision. A shame he didn't retire after Blue Jasmine though, because these last few years have been a career-low.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 27, 2019 20:38:21 GMT
It's very interesting that some people say Polanski doesn't have that many great films - to me he has 7 masterpieces (and others I love too) but I'd like to post a scene that I once posted ages ago on IMDB and dissected there - one that shows how people don't always see his films the way his crazy fans do - and by crazy fans I mean me, Mattsby and @raygittes07. I've added RiverleavesElmius who's a fan and Longtallsally who likes Chabrol who does this kind of thing too. This scene is mostly from the book but is not played that way - in pitch and especially in subtext at all - it's funny and not at all funny. Cassavetes starts cruel ("They're bitches!") ...... Farrow gets louder ("It's not fair to Saperstein!?!) - Farrow starts the scene alone in the middle of the room - Cassavetes literally laughs at her, when she feels the baby kick and she laughs and asks Cassavetes to touch her stomach - he pulls his hand away - she thinks it him being afraid because he's a man and is skittish about things like that but of course he's skittish because he's afraid of what is there.........and then he laughs at his own reaction at what that is that's kicking. So there's 3 different stages of laughing in the scene and none of them are the same meaning or purpose - Farrow is still "alone" like when the scene started - she just doesn't realize it. That is what I meant before in how much thought he layers on to scenes (see my previous post as well above) and how he integrates visuals, performance and text.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Jun 27, 2019 22:14:47 GMT
Polanski hits higher highs, but Allen has the consistency. And his second tier is better than Polanski's second tier, so I'm choosing him.
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Jun 28, 2019 16:37:42 GMT
I've only managed to struggle through five of Woody Allen's films at this point and I've hated all of them to varying degrees. I've always been genuinely confused as to how people can even tolerate watching his films. Polanski takes this by default, and he directed at least two all-timers. Answer: They have waaaay better, more educated tastes than you. 🤷♂️ I have slim to none respect for anyone who doesn't appreciate the genius of WA. Being my ALL-TIME favorite filmmaker, I doubt I could be with a woman who couldn't see his films cuz they thought he was guilty of the accusations against him. But it would be waaay harder to the point of IMPOSSIBLE to be with a woman who just plain doesn't like his films. I can't fucking RESPECT any dumb broad who doesn't see or appreciate his genius!! Luckily, in my travels, the beautiful and fascinating women I've met more often than not have appreciated Woody.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2019 16:50:17 GMT
I've only managed to struggle through five of Woody Allen's films at this point and I've hated all of them to varying degrees. I've always been genuinely confused as to how people can even tolerate watching his films. Polanski takes this by default, and he directed at least two all-timers. Luckily, in my travels, the beautiful and fascinating women I've met more often than not have appreciated Woody. You unbound them and set them free once you got this confirmation, I hope.
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Jun 28, 2019 18:00:07 GMT
Luckily, in my travels, the beautiful and fascinating women I've met more often than not have appreciated Woody. You unbound them and set them free once you got this confirmation, I hope. Ah, old joke. This is what I get for participating in your thread?? lol 😆 I knew that tidbit would lead to some ball-busting replies, but I thought they'd be more original than "you keep em locked in your basement?" Oh well, the day is still young. #keepemcoming
|
|
|
Post by cheesecake on Jun 28, 2019 21:25:33 GMT
Kind of surprised Allen is currently leading this. I think Polanski has such higher highs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2019 22:12:30 GMT
Looks like I’m going to be tossed in with the dumb broads here as I don’t care for Allen’s work. Rosemary’s Baby alone nets Polanski the win for me handily.
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Jun 29, 2019 9:56:02 GMT
None of them is among my favourites, though both have made some very good films.
I always thought that Woody Allen was a much better screenwriter than director. His scripts are really funny, but a few movies like Manhattan or Midnight in Paris aside I don't think he has a special touch in how to set his movies into scene, which is one reason why Allen doesn't work too well outside the comedy genre for me. Still in this category he has made some very good films in the span over more than three decades and quite consistently so.
With Chinatown Polanski has certainly hit a point as high as Allen never reached. And if we speak solely about what I'd call "direction" then I'd put him over Allen, cause he does a wonderful job with The Pianist as well, which I'm pretty sure Woody would not be capable of. But on the other hand Polanski has much more fails for me than Allen. The dreadful Pirates, the stupid Rosemary's Baby, the ridiculous The Ninth Gate, the unfunny Fearless Vampire Killers, the boring Le Locataire.
Overall right now I'd give the edge to Allen, simply cause he is much more consistent to me.
|
|
|
Post by akittystang on Jun 29, 2019 11:01:58 GMT
I've only managed to struggle through five of Woody Allen's films at this point and I've hated all of them to varying degrees. I've always been genuinely confused as to how people can even tolerate watching his films. Polanski takes this by default, and he directed at least two all-timers. Hannah and Her Sisters? The Purple Rose of Cairo?
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jun 29, 2019 15:40:10 GMT
I've only managed to struggle through five of Woody Allen's films at this point and I've hated all of them to varying degrees. I've always been genuinely confused as to how people can even tolerate watching his films. Polanski takes this by default, and he directed at least two all-timers. Hannah and Her Sisters? The Purple Rose of Cairo? Haven’t seen the first one. Purple Rose I liked marginally more than some of the other Allen stuff that I’ve seen, but I still found incredibly grating and exhausting, and overly-obvious in its themes.
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on Jun 29, 2019 15:55:09 GMT
Hannah and Her Sisters? The Purple Rose of Cairo? Haven’t seen the first one. Purple Rose I liked marginally more than some of the other Allen stuff that I’ve seen, but I still found incredibly grating and exhausting, and overly-obvious in its themes. I don't know why you didn't like any of his films you've seen but you should give HAHS a chance. It's one of his best. Then again, I take it you've seen Annie Hall or Manhattan and you didn't like them, so I don't know...
|
|
|
Post by akittystang on Jun 29, 2019 17:37:42 GMT
I would watch Hannah and her Sisters before you make your judgment. It, in my honest opinion, is his best work.
|
|