Directors who cut out vital story info and character bits because of "muh pacing"

seriously should be discredited

If a film needs heavy cuts for pacing then the script must not have been written well to begin with.

Really gets my goat.

Easy way to catch plebs
Pro tip, Tarkovsky movies had 2 specialists, the one in place and Tarkovsky himself
Directors actually don't do much framing and spacial configuration

Name 5 times this has happened

No matter cutting plot and exposition is fine. Cutting character bits happens since the entire movie is filled with them yes sometimes pacing does come into play and less is more

Peter jackson made two shitty lotr movies because he can't direct with focus, can't edit and can't pace himself normally

What about directors who cut THE COMPLETE FUCKING POINT OF THE. MOVIE because it makes them think too hard? (I'm looking right the fuck at you, I Am Legend.)

That is, it makes test audiences think too hard.

American History X is an even better example of this.

I still don't get that movie.

Pretty sure that was a studio decision.

This happens a lot too.

I bullshitted a paper sophomore year in sociology and got an A. Completely bullshited it I couldn't tell you anything I even said in the paper about the film

a few scenes (namely the dinner table scenes) also make white nationalism seem intelligent/justified but then tries to poison the well by having the WN characters engage in extreme and/or pointless violence soon after.

but yeah, I am under the impression that the moral of the movie is RACISM IS BAD, but it expresses that moral in an extremely confusing way

I think the point was some flimsy "violence begets violence, and their are bad people on both sides" message

Did you do your paper on Mein Kampf?

You can get straight As in any non-stem degree program just by bullshitting.

I get it. I kind of find it weird that action movie directors get credited for what action scene directors did.

To be fair though, the director should get credit for making all of it cohesive. Everyone has a individual unique style and combining all of those styles to relate to every single member of the audience is pretty impressive.

Like when people say that Ridley Scott was the brains behind Alien.

...

That was an example of the studio butchering the movie. Tony (((Kaye))) was locked out of editing and went on a tirade and demanded his name be pulled from the credits when he saw the studio cut.


That was essentially supposed to be original ending. After Danny gets shot, there was supposed to be a final scene with Derrick shaving his head and becoming a nazi again.

You're basically correct. All monster movies really need is a heart. Geiger (and O'Bannon and Rambaldi) was the heart.

That's the Studio, not the director.

i was like this in my teen. credited oliver stone for bob richardson's cinematography. that style is pretty played out now but in early 90's those were exciting aesthetics. chaotic and garish yet crisp and elegant.
oliver stone pretty much fell apart as a director after the end of his collab with richardson (tho any given sunday has some balls and is pretty entertaining, the last classic oliver stone movie), wonder if richardson was actually responsible than more than just stock and framing on the set. anyone know the story why they stopped collaborating, feud?