Page 2 of 6
Re: Peter Jackson is no where near on par with Nolan
Posted: June 29th, 2009, 8:49 pm
by niniendowarrior
I want to say, first of all, that I enjoyed PJ's Lord of the Rings. That said, since watching that and King Kong, I've noticed that PJ's problem is film time management. He cannot tell a story without taking at least three hours and King Kong was a very slow and plodding movie. Return of the King's ending sequence took 20 minutes and seemed like it was very oddly shot.
I would put Chris Nolan up there over PJ, definitely. By the way, where is this supposed top list of directors?
Re: Peter Jackson is no where near on par with Nolan
Posted: June 30th, 2009, 3:58 am
by ChristopherNolanFan
niniendowarrior wrote:I want to say, first of all, that I enjoyed PJ's Lord of the Rings. That said, since watching that and King Kong, I've noticed that PJ's problem is film time management. He cannot tell a story without taking at least three hours and King Kong was a very slow and plodding movie. Return of the King's ending sequence took 20 minutes and seemed like it was very oddly shot.
I would put Chris Nolan up there over PJ, definitely. By the way, where is this supposed top list of directors?
Entertainment Weekly's 25 Best Active Directors
1. Steven Spielberg
2. Peter Jackson
3. Martin Scorsese
4. Christopher Nolan
5. Steven Soderbergh
6. Ridley Scott
7. Quentin Tarantino
8. Michael Mann
9.James Cameron
10. Joel and Ethan Coen
11. Guillermo del Toro
12. David Fincher
13. Tim Burton
14. Judd Apatow
15. Sam Raimi
16. Zack Snyder
17. Darren Aronofsky
18. Danny Boyle
19. Clint Eastwood
20. Ron Howard
21. Ang Lee
22. Paul Thomas Anderson
23. Paul Greengrass
24. Pedro Almodóvar
25. Jon Favreau
Re: Peter Jackson is no where near on par with Nolan
Posted: June 30th, 2009, 7:55 am
by ek79
Just the order is wrong for me, BUT the best of our time are in this list for sure...
Re: Peter Jackson is no where near on par with Nolan
Posted: June 30th, 2009, 11:45 am
by Erik
Micheal Mann at 8? No M. Night Shyamalan?
Entertainment Weekly sucks!
Re: Peter Jackson is no where near on par with Nolan
Posted: June 30th, 2009, 12:33 pm
by ek79
I do not like Shyamalan, but a lot of critics did not liked his last movies. That´s the reason he is not in the list...
Re: Peter Jackson is no where near on par with Nolan
Posted: July 1st, 2009, 10:07 am
by filmfanatic
ek79 wrote:Just the order is wrong for me, BUT the best of our time are in this list for sure...
Really? Jon Favreau, Sam Raimi, Zack Snyder, Ron Howard, Guillermo del Toro, Danny Boyle, Judd Apatow.... you would consider them some of the best of our time?
Re: Peter Jackson is no where near on par with Nolan
Posted: July 1st, 2009, 12:48 pm
by ek79
No! I, myself no no. Just saying in the comon sense.
I only consider 4 or 5...
Re: Peter Jackson is no where near on par with Nolan
Posted: July 2nd, 2009, 6:08 pm
by dagn96
Chris should be number 2.
Re: Peter Jackson is no where near on par with Nolan
Posted: July 2nd, 2009, 7:23 pm
by Eternalist
I enjoyed The Lord of the Rings trilogy and even enjoyed King Kong. However, the mere fact that Zack Snyder, maker of the groundbreakingly juvenile 300, and Jon Favreau, the creator of the massively overrated Iron Man and (seriously) Elf are on this list automatically discredits it.
Re: Peter Jackson is no where near on par with Nolan
Posted: July 2nd, 2009, 7:52 pm
by dagn96
I really hated King Kong. The effects were decent but something made me not like it. I can't explain it. Maybe it was the plot line.