David Gordon Green is selling out!
#1
David Gordon Green is selling out!
If you know who this young talented director is, then kudos to you! His directorial debut was the terrific George Washington. I just read that he has a new movie coming out that sounds pretty good called Undertow starring Josh Lucas and Dermot Mulroney. But after he's done with that, he's working on A Confederacy of Dunces a comedy starring Will Ferrell and Drew Barrymore. Why David? Aren't you making enough money making artsy films?
#3
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Mouthweathercity, IL.
Posts: 3,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe he is allowed to direct completely after his own liking, without artistic limitations by the producers, actors etc. If so, then more power to him. If not maybe its time to make some money so he can afford making the films he wants later. Then also more power to him. George Washington and All the Real Girls were excellent!!!
Cheers
DVD Smurf
Cheers
DVD Smurf
#4
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
PopcornTreeCt,
Do yourself a favor and read A Confederacy of Dunces.
Do yourself a favor and read A Confederacy of Dunces.
#7
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally posted by conscience
It isn't like he is directing a huge blockbuster Titanic film...
It isn't like he is directing a huge blockbuster Titanic film...
#8
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh geesh he's selling out. Pardon the man for taking a well paying job making doing exactly what he loves to do. So he's not making an arthouse movie with limited commercial appeal that doesn't pay that well. So he's taking a job with a much better payday, improving his career more than likely and giving himself the chance to make bigger films the way he wants.
But nooooo! He's selling out! Cause I mean...all of us here haven't sold out. No no no, we only do things for the love of it. None of us have like jobs and stuff. Not that this is even remotely the same as doing that.
H'es not selling out. He's (assuming the film isn't worthless) making a smart career move that if anything will widen his opportunities as a filmmaker. Not to mention, how do you know this isn't exactly what he's always wanted to do? If anything, him making an another art film like you would want could be the real definition of him selling out.
But nooooo! He's selling out! Cause I mean...all of us here haven't sold out. No no no, we only do things for the love of it. None of us have like jobs and stuff. Not that this is even remotely the same as doing that.
H'es not selling out. He's (assuming the film isn't worthless) making a smart career move that if anything will widen his opportunities as a filmmaker. Not to mention, how do you know this isn't exactly what he's always wanted to do? If anything, him making an another art film like you would want could be the real definition of him selling out.
#12
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally posted by RyoHazuki
I'm pretty sure Jim Cameron wanted to make that film pretty badly. I wouldnt call that selling out.
I'm pretty sure Jim Cameron wanted to make that film pretty badly. I wouldnt call that selling out.
#15
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 10,059
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read that book. While I was reading it, I was thinking that it might make a good movie.
I don't understand how making this movie is selling out though. It's not like he's turning into Michael Bay.
I don't understand how making this movie is selling out though. It's not like he's turning into Michael Bay.
#16
Banned by request
Originally posted by Dan Average
I'm pretty sure A Confederacy of Dunces (the movie) fell through.
I'm pretty sure A Confederacy of Dunces (the movie) fell through.
#17
I have not read the book. I assume it must be pretty good if it won a Pulitzer. The casting of Will Ferrell and Drew Barrymore doesn't sound award-winning in itself. There used to be filmmakers that had near flawless filmographies: Hitchcock, Kubrick, Welles, Ford, they wouldn't taint their body of work just for some extra cash. I guess its probably just that the times have changed as every director has to pay his dues nowadays.
#18
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by PopcornTreeCt
I have not read the book. I assume it must be pretty good if it won a Pulitzer. The casting of Will Ferrell and Drew Barrymore doesn't sound award-winning in itself. There used to be filmmakers that had near flawless filmographies: Hitchcock, Kubrick, Welles, Ford, they wouldn't taint their body of work just for some extra cash. I guess its probably just that the times have changed as every director has to pay his dues nowadays.
I have not read the book. I assume it must be pretty good if it won a Pulitzer. The casting of Will Ferrell and Drew Barrymore doesn't sound award-winning in itself. There used to be filmmakers that had near flawless filmographies: Hitchcock, Kubrick, Welles, Ford, they wouldn't taint their body of work just for some extra cash. I guess its probably just that the times have changed as every director has to pay his dues nowadays.
Times haven't changed...you just named a very select group of directors. Those men turned out some enormously well received (both critically acclaimed and box office earning films) that gave them the ability to make their movies any way they wanted. You'll realize that if you try to expand your list, it's very short. This David Gordon Green...well, his film resume just isn't strong enough that I could see any company just letting him do what he wants with vast amounts of money.
#19
Originally posted by jaeufraser
Well Kubrick turned out quite a few studio pics right up until Spartacus. None of those flicks did he have final cut. Orson Welles is an anomoly: he got final cut on his first major motion picture when he was 25. Nonetheless, everyone has at some point worked on something that wasn't 100% theirs. In fact, I'd venture to say only a couple directors even have the ability to flex that much control over their projects. Spielberg, Lucas, Cameron at this point. But those guys also played studio director too...check out Cameron's Pirahna 2. That's not to mention...just cause Will Ferrell is in it doesn't mean you're selling out.
Times haven't changed...you just named a very select group of directors. Those men turned out some enormously well received (both critically acclaimed and box office earning films) that gave them the ability to make their movies any way they wanted. You'll realize that if you try to expand your list, it's very short. This David Gordon Green...well, his film resume just isn't strong enough that I could see any company just letting him do what he wants with vast amounts of money.
Well Kubrick turned out quite a few studio pics right up until Spartacus. None of those flicks did he have final cut. Orson Welles is an anomoly: he got final cut on his first major motion picture when he was 25. Nonetheless, everyone has at some point worked on something that wasn't 100% theirs. In fact, I'd venture to say only a couple directors even have the ability to flex that much control over their projects. Spielberg, Lucas, Cameron at this point. But those guys also played studio director too...check out Cameron's Pirahna 2. That's not to mention...just cause Will Ferrell is in it doesn't mean you're selling out.
Times haven't changed...you just named a very select group of directors. Those men turned out some enormously well received (both critically acclaimed and box office earning films) that gave them the ability to make their movies any way they wanted. You'll realize that if you try to expand your list, it's very short. This David Gordon Green...well, his film resume just isn't strong enough that I could see any company just letting him do what he wants with vast amounts of money.
#20
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
So when you heard Tarantino was adapting an Elmore Leonard book did you call him a sell-out? Or how about when you heard Anderson was making a movie with Adam Sandler?
#21
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by PopcornTreeCt
You brought up some good points. I know directors have had to pay their dues upfront like Kubrick and James Cameron but Green has estabilished himself as a director with a certain style and he seems to be abandoning that. Paul Thomas Anderson, though a short resume also, has always made his style of films as has Quentin Tarantino.
You brought up some good points. I know directors have had to pay their dues upfront like Kubrick and James Cameron but Green has estabilished himself as a director with a certain style and he seems to be abandoning that. Paul Thomas Anderson, though a short resume also, has always made his style of films as has Quentin Tarantino.
Sure Green could stick it out, but you don't know the film he had in mind here. Was it a betrayal of his previous work? Did Alfonso Cuaron sell out by doing a Harry Potter movie? I for one think he did a wonderful job, and while by all means it put some green into his pocket, and stuck him with some chosen name actors, there's no doubt that he was able to infuse his own artisitc ablities in there.
#22
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hollywood, CA
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firstly, I think it's important to note that the Confederacy of Dunces project is dead in the water.
Soderbergh doesn't even have it on his plate anymore, and rumor has it David's looking to do something else now too. IMDB is just late on the draw taking it down.
Secondly, David is far from a sell-out. I know him personally, and I can tell you that he's a man of integrity. I'm personally looking forward to his next film, The Undertow, which he's already shot and should be coming out this Fall. It's a dark, southern tale starring Dermot Mulroney, Josh Lucas, and Jamie Bell, and could not be in any way perceived as a "sell out" film.
Also, David's kept himself busy shooting a series of anti-smoking public service announcements (the one where all the people are getting their heads shaved in Times Square, others). He's truly one of the most talented new directors we've got. You people are jumping the gun calling him a sell out.
Soderbergh doesn't even have it on his plate anymore, and rumor has it David's looking to do something else now too. IMDB is just late on the draw taking it down.
Secondly, David is far from a sell-out. I know him personally, and I can tell you that he's a man of integrity. I'm personally looking forward to his next film, The Undertow, which he's already shot and should be coming out this Fall. It's a dark, southern tale starring Dermot Mulroney, Josh Lucas, and Jamie Bell, and could not be in any way perceived as a "sell out" film.
Also, David's kept himself busy shooting a series of anti-smoking public service announcements (the one where all the people are getting their heads shaved in Times Square, others). He's truly one of the most talented new directors we've got. You people are jumping the gun calling him a sell out.
#23
Banned by request
Orson Welles, not a sell out?
This is the man who would take work anywhere he would get it to fund other projects or just because he needed some quick cash. Hell, even The Lady From Shanghai was done because he owed the head of the studio.
And, really, David Gordon Green isn't nearly as good as any of the other filmmakers you mention. I mean Hitchcock, Welles, Ford, KUBRICK!? These guys were giants in the industry. Green is, right now, a footnote, and not because he's obscure. He's just not that great. He's got this sort of "Terence Malick meets mindless meandering" thing going on that has yet to deliver a good movie, in my opinion. Even someone like Paul Thomas Anderson, who so far has one very good movie (Hard Eight), one bad movie (Boogie Nights), one terrible movie (Magnolia), and one amazing movie (Punch-Drunk Love) is a more consistently interesting filmmaker than Green.
*Flame suit on*
This is the man who would take work anywhere he would get it to fund other projects or just because he needed some quick cash. Hell, even The Lady From Shanghai was done because he owed the head of the studio.
And, really, David Gordon Green isn't nearly as good as any of the other filmmakers you mention. I mean Hitchcock, Welles, Ford, KUBRICK!? These guys were giants in the industry. Green is, right now, a footnote, and not because he's obscure. He's just not that great. He's got this sort of "Terence Malick meets mindless meandering" thing going on that has yet to deliver a good movie, in my opinion. Even someone like Paul Thomas Anderson, who so far has one very good movie (Hard Eight), one bad movie (Boogie Nights), one terrible movie (Magnolia), and one amazing movie (Punch-Drunk Love) is a more consistently interesting filmmaker than Green.
*Flame suit on*
#24
DVD Talk Hero
Originally posted by Suprmallet
Even someone like Paul Thomas Anderson, who so far has one very good movie (Hard Eight), one bad movie (Boogie Nights), one terrible movie (Magnolia), and one amazing movie (Punch-Drunk Love)
...
*Flame suit on*
Even someone like Paul Thomas Anderson, who so far has one very good movie (Hard Eight), one bad movie (Boogie Nights), one terrible movie (Magnolia), and one amazing movie (Punch-Drunk Love)
...
*Flame suit on*
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Suprmallet
Orson Welles, not a sell out?
This is the man who would take work anywhere he would get it to fund other projects or just because he needed some quick cash. Hell, even The Lady From Shanghai was done because he owed the head of the studio.
And, really, David Gordon Green isn't nearly as good as any of the other filmmakers you mention. I mean Hitchcock, Welles, Ford, KUBRICK!? These guys were giants in the industry. Green is, right now, a footnote, and not because he's obscure. He's just not that great. He's got this sort of "Terence Malick meets mindless meandering" thing going on that has yet to deliver a good movie, in my opinion. Even someone like Paul Thomas Anderson, who so far has one very good movie (Hard Eight), one bad movie (Boogie Nights), one terrible movie (Magnolia), and one amazing movie (Punch-Drunk Love) is a more consistently interesting filmmaker than Green.
*Flame suit on*
Orson Welles, not a sell out?
This is the man who would take work anywhere he would get it to fund other projects or just because he needed some quick cash. Hell, even The Lady From Shanghai was done because he owed the head of the studio.
And, really, David Gordon Green isn't nearly as good as any of the other filmmakers you mention. I mean Hitchcock, Welles, Ford, KUBRICK!? These guys were giants in the industry. Green is, right now, a footnote, and not because he's obscure. He's just not that great. He's got this sort of "Terence Malick meets mindless meandering" thing going on that has yet to deliver a good movie, in my opinion. Even someone like Paul Thomas Anderson, who so far has one very good movie (Hard Eight), one bad movie (Boogie Nights), one terrible movie (Magnolia), and one amazing movie (Punch-Drunk Love) is a more consistently interesting filmmaker than Green.
*Flame suit on*
Granted, I have not seen Hard Eight, but Magnolia Terrible?!?!?!
::rubs eyes::
Yup, still says Magnolia is Terrible.
I'm just in dis-belief.
You just said this to piss people off, right?