@Ray if you notice, I didn't say he was a bad director at all. In fact, I think he's a good director. But Expendables was all over the place. It's obvious what the draw was - put a bunch of 80s-90s action heroes in one movie together. I get it. But the story was a mess. Subplots going nowhere....
@Ray if you notice, I didn't say he was a bad director at all. In fact, I think he's a good director. But Expendables was all over the place. It's obvious what the draw was - put a bunch of 80s-90s action heroes in one movie together. I get it. But the story was a mess. Subplots going nowhere. Fight scenes there simply to put two people in a room together and watch them fight. Just not my cup of tea. And I love action movies.
My two cents: I think he's a good director, not a great one, and he's definitely not a good writer. He gets Rocky's story, because if you know Sly's history, you'll know that Rocky, for him, is a "there but for the Grace of God go I" character for Stallone. Even then, a lot of his scripts aren't...
My two cents:
I think he's a good director, not a great one, and he's definitely not a good writer. He gets Rocky's story, because if you know Sly's history, you'll know that Rocky, for him, is a "there but for the Grace of God go I" character for Stallone. Even then, a lot of his scripts aren't very good, like Rocky II (which is Rocky I except Rocky wins) and Rocky IV.
Half his directed films are Rocky films. They're competently shot and he pulls good performances from himself and his cast in Rocky III and Rocky Balboa, but brilliant? Hardly, certainly not up to Spielberg, Scorsese, The Coen Brothers, Clint Eastwood, there are a number of contemporary directors I could name who are better behind the director's chair.
@Ray if you notice, I didn't say he was a bad director at all. In fact, I think he's a good director. But Expendables was all over the place. It's obvious what the draw was - put a bunch of 80s-90s action heroes in one movie together. I get it. But the story was a mess. Subplots going nowhere....
Expand comment@Ray if you notice, I didn't say he was a bad director at all. In fact, I think he's a good director. But Expendables was all over the place. It's obvious what the draw was - put a bunch of 80s-90s action heroes in one movie together. I get it. But the story was a mess. Subplots going nowhere. Fight scenes there simply to put two people in a room together and watch them fight. Just not my cup of tea. And I love action movies.
My two cents: I think he's a good director, not a great one, and he's definitely not a good writer. He gets Rocky's story, because if you know Sly's history, you'll know that Rocky, for him, is a "there but for the Grace of God go I" character for Stallone. Even then, a lot of his scripts aren't...
Expand commentMy two cents: I think he's a good director, not a great one, and he's definitely not a good writer. He gets Rocky's story, because if you know Sly's history, you'll know that Rocky, for him, is a "there but for the Grace of God go I" character for Stallone. Even then, a lot of his scripts aren't very good, like Rocky II (which is Rocky I except Rocky wins) and Rocky IV.
Half his directed films are Rocky films. They're competently shot and he pulls good performances from himself and his cast in Rocky III and Rocky Balboa, but brilliant? Hardly, certainly not up to Spielberg, Scorsese, The Coen Brothers, Clint Eastwood, there are a number of contemporary directors I could name who are better behind the director's chair.