Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted December 5, 2002 You know what to do. Like someone suggested, I'm shaking things up. Alfred Hitchcock vs Billy Wilder (my 2 favorites) Steven Spielberg vs Howard Hawks Francis Ford Coppola vs Martin Scorsece Orson Welles vs John Huston Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Lethargic Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Hitchcock vs Billy Wilder - That damn Billy Wilder!!!! Steven Spielberg vs Howard Hawks Francis Ford Coppola vs Martin Scorsece - I'm more of a Goodfellas man than a Godfather man. Orson Welles vs John Huston It's gonna be Welles vs Hitch. Why not just go ahead and skip to it? ha Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MDH257 Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Hitchcock Steven Spielberg Martin Scorsese Orson Wells Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest WrestlingDeacon Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Hitchcock vs Billy Wilder Steven Spielberg vs Howard Hawks Francis Ford Coppola vs Martin Scorsece Orson Welles vs John Huston That actually proved easier than I thought to pick. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest ArkhamGlobe Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Hitchcock vs Billy Wilder Steven Spielberg vs Howard Hawks Francis Ford Coppola vs Martin Scorsese Orson Welles vs John Huston Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest LooseCannon Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Hitchcock Hawks Scorsese Welles Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Kurosawa lost? Damn you. Damn you all. Alfred Hitchcock vs Billy Wilder Steven Spielberg vs Howard Hawks Francis Ford Coppola vs Martin Scorsece Orson Welles vs John Huston Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ravenbomb Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Scorsese beat Kurosawa? *Whew* that was the closest pairing yet in this tourny to my knowledge. Anywho... Alfred Hitchcock vs Billy Wilder Steven Spielberg vs Howard Hawks Francis Ford Coppola vs Martin Scorsese Orson Welles vs John Huston Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest C.H.U.D. Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Hitchcock Spielberg Scorsese Welles Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Gamengiri2002 Report post Posted December 6, 2002 All right Alfred Hitchcock vs. Billy Wilder Al finally has some competition. Wilder will probably still end up getting smoked here though. Steven Speilberg vs. Howard Hawks Praise be Jesus!! Francis Ford Coppola vs. Martin Scorsese Really easy. After the 70's were over with and done. Coppola fizzled. Scorsese has remained consistent, with a few missteps. Orson Welles vs. John Huston I thought huston should have been gone two rounds ago. Why do I feel like I will be the only guy voting against Welles in the next round. I make my against against Welles now in hopes of inspiring others to follow me. Both Welles and (who looks to be his opponent) Scorsese have very disceranble and original styles. And yes Welles with "Citizen Kane" changed movie making for the rest of time. But Welles directed only 15 films. Two of which were great (Kane and "Touch of Evil") He did some good Shakespeare adaptations, and a vastly overrated "Lady From Shanghai". Outside of that most his work failed to be remarkable. Scorsese, his likely opponent, produced three films considered by most film goers as classics ("Goodfellas" "Taxi Driver" and "Raging Bull") the rest of his body of work is either well recieved ("Mean Streets"<--I think just as good as the previous three, "Casino" and "Cape Fear" "Last Temptation of Christ") or met with a mixture of warmth and indifference. His only real clunker was "Boxcar Bertha". In addition, Scorsese has proven an effective documentarian ("The Last Waltz" "Il Mio Viaggo in Italia" the relatively overlooked "Italianamerican") And documentaries included Scorsese's body of work is only 9 films longer than Welles'. Plus, and some may disagree on this, I feel there is a greater presence of self in Scorsese's films and they seem to be handled with more care. I beg of you, all of you, do not look at the legacy of "Citizen Kane" and the acting (and writing) prowess of Welles and be overcome. Remember, this is a director's tournament. And, as such, Welles is simply out done. I would like to apologize for casting my predictions for the outcome of this round, but, in most cases, is there really any doubt? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest WrestlingDeacon Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Welles has three films that are considered all time classics including The Magnificent Ambersons with Kane and Evil. Most of the rest of his work including Lady from Shangai, The Trial and his Shakesperean work recieve fairly good notices and are warmly recieved. Putting him on par with Scorsese in your criteria. While Welles has had a few clunkers such as The Stranger and Mr. Arkadin which still have some style and flash to them despite not being great movies, Scrosese has a few more poor films than you mention outside of Boxcar Bertha. Kundun and Bringing Out the Dead were both moderate critical hits that vanished quickly after their release. After Hours is a horrible movie and The King of Comedy is fairly dull and lifeless. You also overlook Welles' documentary work with It's All True and F for Fake. Just presenting the other side of the argument. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Gamengiri2002 Report post Posted December 6, 2002 The only "clunker" I believe Scorsese has produced was "Boxcar Bertha". He had some unremarkable films, although I find "Bringing Out the Dead" to be well underrated. I did overlook Welles documentary work. But unless, "It's all true" is better (haven't seen it) he should hardly even try to win in that arena. I'm really making the case for the number of "Classics" or even "pseudo-Classics" that Scorsese has over Welles. If this were a contest for "Most Influential Personality in Cinema" Welles would beat Scorsese half to death. And I don't mean to sound like a Welles detractor. I just have a feeling that this contest isn't going to be nearly as close as it SHOULD be. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest WrestlingDeacon Report post Posted December 6, 2002 I'm not trying to be a Scorsese detractor myself, just pitching Welles. In fact, Color of Money, who most people don't consider his best work, is my second favorite film of all time. And I think considering influential personality and affect on directing should be considered as that is part of their directing talent and legacy. Scorsese probably does beat Welles to hell in documentary work simply because he's done more and had more backing. And have you seen After Hours? That's a clunker. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Gamengiri2002 Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Amazingly, I didn't mind After Hours. Didn't love it. But I didn't despise it. Didn't even know it was Scorsese's originally. But then again, I like Griffin Dunne, so what do I know? I'm glad you have a strong background for use in supporting Welles. I am afraid most people will just vote for him for reputation alone. I also fight hard for Scorsese because he's my favorite director (Kurosawa running a strong second--wouldn't ya know it). I think Welles is more obscure to the current public mindset which makes him more popular a choice for best director. Perhaps it's true that a director's impact can't be felt completely until he is no longer active. And, for some unexplainable reason, I really like "Mr. Arkadin" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Lethargic Report post Posted December 6, 2002 I'd agree with you totally if Welles vs Hitchcock was next for the same reasons you suggest. Welles did a few really great movies but not as many, but if it's Welles vs Scorcese, I'm sticking with Welles because besides Goodfellas and Casino there's not much else I like and 2 movies don't come anywhere near the amount of good movies Welles did. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest spiny norman Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Hitchcock Steven Spielberg Francis Ford Coppola Orson Welles Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest godthedog Report post Posted December 6, 2002 hitchcock hawks scorsese welles Why do I feel like I will be the only guy voting against Welles in the next round. I make my against against Welles now in hopes of inspiring others to follow me. Both Welles and (who looks to be his opponent) Scorsese have very disceranble and original styles. And yes Welles with "Citizen Kane" changed movie making for the rest of time. But Welles directed only 15 films. Two of which were great (Kane and "Touch of Evil") He did some good Shakespeare adaptations, and a vastly overrated "Lady From Shanghai". Outside of that most his work failed to be remarkable. Scorsese, his likely opponent, produced three films considered by most film goers as classics ("Goodfellas" "Taxi Driver" and "Raging Bull") the rest of his body of work is either well recieved ("Mean Streets"<--I think just as good as the previous three, "Casino" and "Cape Fear" "Last Temptation of Christ") or met with a mixture of warmth and indifference. His only real clunker was "Boxcar Bertha". In addition, Scorsese has proven an effective documentarian ("The Last Waltz" "Il Mio Viaggo in Italia" the relatively overlooked "Italianamerican") And documentaries included Scorsese's body of work is only 9 films longer than Welles'. Plus, and some may disagree on this, I feel there is a greater presence of self in Scorsese's films and they seem to be handled with more care. I beg of you, all of you, do not look at the legacy of "Citizen Kane" and the acting (and writing) prowess of Welles and be overcome. Remember, this is a director's tournament. And, as such, Welles is simply out done. first, it's not quite fair to say that welles has only directed 2 great movies & that most of his other work has been unremarkable. by my count, he's done 5: kane, ambersons, touch of evil, falstaff & the trial. maybe even othello, but i haven't seen it in years so i can't make a judgment. ambersons would probably be considered another one of the best movies ever made if not for the STUPID STUPID ending, and nobody should even try to blame welles for that. and why is it a flaw for him to only have directed 15 movies? it isn't as if this was his fault. kubrick only made...what, 12? that WAS his fault, and i don't think anybody holds it against him. scorsese's also done 5 great movies by my count: mean streets, taxi driver, raging bull, goodfellas & temptation. by my count, both also really only have one bad movie: the stranger & new york new york, respectively. both are equally painful to watch. so they seem evenly matched at first, but i prefer welles because: 1) welles was more gifted in using the advantages and testing the limits of the cinema as a medium. he loved long takes, and to work around that his framing was always ingenious. his use of light & shadows is amazing, especially in his american movies. he used depth of field better than ANY director, ever. his use of sound (when he could afford it) likewise always amazed. and when he had to rely on editing (as in falstaff), he did it as well as anybody else has ever done it. scorsese just can't touch all those accomplishments. he has great fluid camera movements & i love the way he uses existing pieces of music, but...as far as techincal things goes, that's really about it. welles's style > scorsese's style. 2) welles's best work is generally better than scorsese's best work. in my opinion, the only scorsese movie that really has as much depth to it as kane or touch of evil is raging bull. goodfellas comes pretty close, but even that still can't really touch the unity and attention to detail welles put into his films. 3) welles changed filmmaking forever. scorsese...well, he didn't. if welles won only on kane's reputation, as you're suggesting it will, it would be pretty stupid. but kane isn't even welles's best movie. taken as a whole, his movies have more to love and appreciate than scorsese's. this isn't a knock towards scorsese at all. he's still one of the best ever. but orson was THE best. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kahran Ramsus Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Hitchcock vs Billy Wilder Steven Spielberg vs Howard Hawks Francis Ford Coppola vs Martin Scorsece Orson Welles vs John Huston Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest godthedog Report post Posted December 6, 2002 incidentally, i really liked 'after hours'. i also liked 'mr arkadin'. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest WrestlingDeacon Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Wow, maybe I need to rewatch After Hours and Mr. Arkadin, it's been a few years for both, but I don't remember being that impressed with either one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest godthedog Report post Posted December 6, 2002 i wouldn't get too worked up about it. arkadin has some cool touch of evil-like weirdness going on with the supporting characters, but that's really about it. and after hours generally has gotten a very mixed reaction, & not everybody would be impressed with it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Hitchcock Howard Hawks Martin Scorsece Orson Welles Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ozymandias Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Hitchcock Steven Spielberg Martin Scorsece Orson Welles Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Downhome Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Mark my words, over time, the name Christopher Nolan will be admist these greats, I assure you even if you doubt me! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Youth N Asia Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Hitchcock vs Billy Wilder Steven Spielberg vs Howard Hawks Francis Ford Coppola vs Martin Scorsece Orson Welles vs John Huston Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Mole Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Steven Martin Orson Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Will Scarlet Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Alfred Hitchcock Howard Hawks Martin Scorsece Orson Welles Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted December 6, 2002 My man Billy Wilder hasn't gotten a single vote. Could he at least get a pity vote. Bless you Jingus Christ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ozymandias Report post Posted December 6, 2002 I don't think anyone would mind if you voted. It's not like you would be accused of rigging things or whatever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted December 6, 2002 Sorry i just can't pick him over Alfred Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
