Movies You Thought Took A "Wrong" Approach

American Gangster and The Place Beyond the Pines, I am convinced, could have been modern crime classics and possible successors to The Godfather (if in scope, if not in stature) had they been two films. The former should have been released with the first film about Lucas's rise (and maybe not even have Roberts as anything more than a minor background character) and the second about Roberts's pursuit and Lucas's ultimate downfall. With Pines, the first film should've been entirely about the fathers and the second about their sons. But in compressing the stories, it saps them of their power and potential.

I, Tonya could have been something like Foxcatcher
Gangs of New York should have been something other than a "revenge movie"

I think Che is fine as it is, but I suppose I could see some tightening here and there.

I just saw I, Tonya and considering how much I've talked about how crappy I thought this year was, it was the first film since Blade Runner 2049 to even make a dent in my line-ups. It's my #10 of the year, and while the style is very much like Goodfellas, I wouldn't say there's humor to it. Some people might find it funny (if they're awful people I guess), but I think the way it handles the abuse in the film still makes you hate Stan's and Janney's characters without the need for Precious-type moments. It's a film basically shown through Tonya Harding's eyes, so for her the abuse is just another day in the life (as sad as that is/was). That being said, I'm sure the story itself could have worked as a super serious Bennett Miller-style film, too, but as is I had no qualms.

I also thought War Dogs was pretty underrated as well and aside from maybe one or two moments, there was very little humor in the film (that I thought anyway). It actually takes itself pretty seriously while remaining entertaining (think more like Lord of War).

The most recent example I can think of is The Greatest Showman. It had the potential to be a pretty inspiring, if factually untrue and totally made-for-Hollywood cheese, but the choice to do modern pop songs while trying to maintain this "essence" of taking place in the 1800s felt so fucking off, which managed to surpass Alien: Covenant as my second least favorite film of the year. Had they merely changed the style of music to something more suitable for that time period (hell, just call Justin Hurwitz for more classic-Hollywood-age musical numbers) or changed the style of the film itself so it worked with the style of music, it would've been a solid 5/10 at least. Then again, the film has so many more problems beyond the music, but the music itself pretty much ruined the film as a whole for me.

I find blaming Kenneth Lonergan for all things is good for the soul.

I agree. I don't know if you've seen this video yet, but there are some interesting points.

I second Catrician but we may prefer different directions and I'd broaden this to most religious/biblical films in general. Godard's Hail Mary definitely could have been way better.

Seconding all the Passengers talk, and the video in particular. Flipping the order of the first two acts would've been a much better approach to take.

Also on the topic of misjudged gender dynamics, I don't think many will have seen this because I've hardly heard any talk at all about it after Cannes, but Michel Hazanavicius made so, so many glaring mistakes in writing and directing Le Redoutable that I think it warrants a mention here. If you're gonna take Anne Wiazemsky's memoir about her relationship with Godard and make a romantic comedy about it, then don't open it with a narration from your lead actress that sets it up as being about her and told from her perspective only to have her stand in the background and do absolutely nothing for the following 90+ minutes with the exception of a handful of montages here and there where she takes her clothes off and gets licked by the camera. (Watching this is like getting hit in the face a hundred times with a printed out copy of this article.) The non-stop pastiche of Godard/Nouvelle Vague tropes and the character assassination pissed a lot of cinephiles off, so many would tell you that everything was wrong about Hazanavicius' approach from the get-go, but honestly it was the way that he completely tossed Stacy Martin aside to make it revolve 100% around Godard (and his unbearable ego) that truly rubbed me the wrong way. Either focus on her character or stop pretending it's an adaptation of her memoir.

How about "Fur" - the fictionalized Diane Arbus movie with Kidman and Downey - I hated that movie. Like her real (fascinating) life wasn't enough for your movie you had to construct a lie to "illustrate" it.

Grrrrrrr

I think Black Swan would've been more successful if it went full-tilt into horror. Apparently earlier drafts of the script were much more macabre. I realize that would've alienated the Academy, though...it's still a bit surprising how well it fared with mainstream awards bodies.

I agree, but considering what he pulled off in mother! I'd be curious to know if his true vision for BS was stymied by studio execs. 

From what I recall of the script that had been circulating a year or so before the film had been released, there wasn't that much readily different (although I think there might've been a bit more of the Barbara Hershey stuff added into the finished product). I think it's just that Aronofsky is just a very surface-level filmmaker who goes through the motions of being deep and people kind of buy into it. He's basically the cinematic equivalent of the guy who runs that "Chupacabra in a jar" exhibit at the circus. You pay ten bucks, get shoved through a tent, get half a glimpse of something twisted and distorted, and you come out rationalizing the amount of money you spent by telling yourself it was worth it.