Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,161 
Likes: 1,562
|
Post by Nikan on Jan 11, 2024 15:06:52 GMT
Make one film or two every decade, but make sure they're interesting.  Malick must've been the undisputed king of this, before burning this rep by that trilogy of self-parody 2012-2017... *Ah, should've included Whit Stillman too. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 11, 2024 15:09:30 GMT
I haven't seen Zone of Interest yet, but thus far:
1. Under the Skin
2. Foxcatcher
3. In the Bedroom
4. Sexy Beast
5. TAR
6. Birth
7. Little Children
8. Moneyball
9. Capote
Glazer reigns supreme for me. Field is very good but he's not quite hit that "masterpiece" that I know he's capable of. It feels like it's just bubbling under the surface. And then there's Bennett Miller, whose first two films do absolutely nothing for me but who came out hard with a near-perfect movie with Foxcatcher. If you replace Wheezy Joe with a different (better) actor in that role, it might be #1.
|
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Jan 11, 2024 16:20:21 GMT
Not Field, good as he is. I love the other two, I'm a diehard fan of both. Refuse to pick between them.
|
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jan 11, 2024 16:23:54 GMT
The poll results lie, Field's the best one.
|
|
tep
Full Member
formerly known as Ban
Posts: 577
Likes: 149
|
Post by tep on Jan 11, 2024 17:43:10 GMT
Haven't seen Capote, the Zone of Interest or In the Bedroom. Based on what I have seen...
Torn on Miller. Really liked Foxcatcher, didn't care for Moneyball.
I like Field, thought both Tar and Little Children were solid.
Glazer is easily my favorite. All 3 of his films that I've seen were great.
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 1,562
|
Post by Nikan on Jan 11, 2024 17:46:25 GMT
I love the other two, I'm a diehard fan of both. Refuse to pick between them. How helpful, sonny. |
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 1,562
|
Post by Nikan on Jan 11, 2024 17:52:53 GMT
Are we all pretending Birth is just great? I think it's easily a misfire.
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jan 11, 2024 17:53:34 GMT
I think I could argue Tar and In the Bedroom as closer to masterpieces than anything else - except maybe Foxcatcher - all are ~ 9's ...........everythng else a bit less or further behind ........those 3 movies get better when thought upon and they stick with you big time.......In THe Bedroom and Tar were 8's and then I felt like I had shortchanged them at a certain point
Haven't seen Zone of Interest .......
|
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Jan 11, 2024 18:13:28 GMT
Are we all pretending Birth is just great? I think it's easily a misfire. YOU’RE easily a misfire! |
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 1,562
|
Post by Nikan on Jan 11, 2024 18:30:00 GMT
Are we all pretending Birth is just great? I think it's easily a misfire. YOU’RE easily a misfire! GOOD COMEBACK but what is it even about |
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Jan 11, 2024 19:13:54 GMT
Under the Skin slightly beats out Tar as the best movie here for me so I'll go Glazer.
As a side note what has Bennet Miller been doing the past nine years? Field is a character actor and Glazer is a commercial and music video director and they'll once in a while do a film. Miller can't have made enough money from directing those few films to have just been chilling for the past decade.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Jan 11, 2024 19:15:45 GMT
haven't seen Zone yet but pre-2023 Glazer had made exactly one masterpiece and Miller's made three, so Miller it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by notacrook on Jan 11, 2024 20:15:47 GMT
Field has two pretty much perfect films with In the Bedroom and Tar. The latter in particular has become one of my all-time favourites. Little Children has some strong elements but is easily his weakest.
Glazer hasn't missed with me. Birth is very flawed, but Kidman is so great in it that she really elevates everything around her. Sexy Beast is intense and confident, and Under the Skin is his masterpiece (to date - very excited for Zone of Interest).
Miller is eaisly my least favourite of these three from what I've seen. Capote did nothing for me, and I turned Moneyball off midway through. I may go back to it one day, but it's certainly not a priority. I've been meaning to get to Foxcatcher for a long time.
Between Field and Glazer, I'll go Todd for now, but if Zone is as good as it looks, I think Jonathan could take it.
|
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Jan 11, 2024 20:58:32 GMT
Under the Skin slightly beats out Tar as the best movie here for me so I'll go Glazer. As a side note what has Bennet Miller been doing the past nine years? Field is a character actor and Glazer is a commercial and music video director and they'll once in a while do a film. Miller can't have made enough money from directing those few films to have just been chilling for the past decade. This is the great question of our time. There was a picture of him hanging out with Channing Tatum a few years ago. That's the last I saw of him. He was trying to do A Christmas Carol post-Foxcatcher, but that presumably fell apart. It's criminal. |
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Jan 11, 2024 21:43:44 GMT
Field is a character actorI believe you mean the mastermind behind Big League Chew. |
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Jan 12, 2024 4:29:38 GMT
Under the Skin is the best movie between the 3 of them and both In the Bedroom and Tár are great movies, but I'm going with Miller. Why? 
|
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Jan 12, 2024 4:42:18 GMT
Glazer sucks. Last easily. Sexy Beast and Under the Skin are the kind of films that make "art film" a dirty word. He's an unrepentant pretentious douche. He's like the worst impulses of PTA magnified.
Foxcatcher is nonsense, but Capote is good and Moneyball even better. First easily.
In the Bedroom is interesting. Field is overrated but he comes from an honest place, unlike Glazer. Second.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord_Buscemi on Jan 12, 2024 13:32:37 GMT
Glazer sucks. Last easily. Sexy Beast and Under the Skin are the kind of films that make "art film" a dirty word. He's an unrepentant pretentious douche. He's like the worst impulses of PTA magnified. Foxcatcher is nonsense, but Capote is good and Moneyball even better. First easily. In the Bedroom is interesting. Field is overrated but he comes from an honest place, unlike Glazer. Second. How the hell is Sexy Beast an art film? You waffle absolute nonsense sometimes on this board. It's a black comedy and propa fackin brit'esh geezer gangster film, pretty much as unpretentious as it gets. |
|
|
|
Post by Allenism on Jan 19, 2024 22:30:03 GMT
Tar and Foxcatcher are basically matched in their excellence, but Miller's other ouput firmly surpasses the rest of Field's, IMO. I've only seen Birth and Under the Skin from Glazer, but just on the basis of those two, I'd place him in the middle of the pack.
|
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Jan 20, 2024 7:32:26 GMT
Glazer sucks. Last easily. Sexy Beast and Under the Skin are the kind of films that make "art film" a dirty word. He's an unrepentant pretentious douche. He's like the worst impulses of PTA magnified. Foxcatcher is nonsense, but Capote is good and Moneyball even better. First easily. In the Bedroom is interesting. Field is overrated but he comes from an honest place, unlike Glazer. Second. How the hell is Sexy Beast an art film? You waffle absolute nonsense sometimes on this board. It's a black comedy and propa fackin brit'esh geezer gangster film, pretty much as unpretentious as it gets. The rhythms of Sexy Beast are appalling. It's an "art movie" based on that alone. Unwatchable tripe. You have to be kidding me with this as unpretentious as it gets bullshit. It's a horrible movie, and taxes the patience of any sane member of society. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord_Buscemi on Jan 20, 2024 10:37:24 GMT
How the hell is Sexy Beast an art film? You waffle absolute nonsense sometimes on this board. It's a black comedy and propa fackin brit'esh geezer gangster film, pretty much as unpretentious as it gets. The rhythms of Sexy Beast are appalling. It's an "art movie" based on that alone. Unwatchable tripe. You have to be kidding me with this as unpretentious as it gets bullshit. It's a horrible movie, and taxes the patience of any sane member of society. It's jumpy, proto-Edgar Wright editing, so by no means an artsy or inaccessible style to mainstream audiences. Where are the heavy and introspective themes? Where is the experimental and surreal style? Where is the methodical and sombre pacing/tone? Patience-testing is subjective, but it's clearly no Michael Snow joint lmao. Better start calling Guy Ritchie pretentious next. |
|
