Well he has a perfect filmography
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Paul Thomas Anderson
gravyheart13 — 10 years ago(April 13, 2015 11:42 PM)
I just looked at every director and honestly he has no bad movies so far. Argue what you want but this guy has made sure every film is awesome. Name any director and I will tell you a dud he has made. It may be early in his career but so what that guy sucks.
-
gravyheart13 — 10 years ago(May 05, 2015 09:54 PM)
Wait what are you basing this on? About the actors that is, and who is the best director of actor before him?
Not that I don't agree, since Kubrick is more technical, Wes is more set orientated, Marty is well, he's close and Tarantino is so dang tallky. I know there are more directors out there that can be considered. Woody Allen just got one for Cate. But who came back in the 60's better than Paul? -
rallyinthestreets — 10 years ago(November 30, 2015 03:22 PM)
Cassavetes and Kazan before him.
Stanley Kubrick called Kazan "without question, the best director we have in America, [and] capable of performing miracles with the actors he uses."
Though, I'd say Paul is getting to be on par with them. -
!!!deleted!!! (63057267) — 9 years ago(May 28, 2016 05:27 PM)
The man is one of the biggest and most shameless thieves in cinema history. BOOGIE NIGHTS owes far too much to Scorsese and Altman to be taken seriously. MAGNOLIA is a superficial rip-of2000f of Altman's NASHVILLE and especially SHORT CUTS. I could go on, but neither Anderson - or you - are worth the time. If you think he's a genius or a great artist, you're the one with the low I.Q.
-
rallyinthestreets — 9 years ago(May 29, 2016 05:36 AM)
Actually, you couldn't go on, and every great filmmaker takes influence from other artists especially early in their career.
And isn't it funny that Scorsese and Altman both have the utmost respect for PTA (as do Coppola, Spielberg, Bergman, etc)? I guess they all must have low IQs, and you're the genius. Lmao. -
!!!deleted!!! (63057267) — 9 years ago(May 29, 2016 10:04 AM)
You'll need to prove that the late Bergman was impressed by Anderson's work, and you'll need to do so immediately. Also, you shouldn't attempt to ridicule someone's intelligence level, only to follow it with "lmao".
-
rallyinthestreets — 9 years ago(May 31, 2016 05:24 PM)
Internet lingo is not representative of intelligence. You remind me of a quote from Stephen Fry who sagely noted that the least intelligent people are the ones who police language. You've already been exposed as being utterly clueless. All of the other directors which you and I previously mentioned have been effusive in their praise of PTA. Bergman had praise for Magnolia in an interview he gave late in his life:
http://m.imdb.com/board/20000005/quotes -
!!!deleted!!! (63057267) — 9 years ago(May 31, 2016 05:38 PM)
"You've already been exposed as being utterly clueless."
Sorry, but you've failed in your quest to accomplish that. However, one thing is painfully clear: You've been exposed as having lousy taste in cinema.
Regarding Bergman's praise of MAGNOLIA: Dementia is a sad thing, as further evidenced by the horrendously poor SARABAND. Also, it's obvious that he wasn't up on his Altman. Neither are you, plainly.
Oh, and by the way: Anderson is laughing at you, as you own all of his turds on Blu-Ray and you sing his praises so loudly that he's getting a fortune's worth of free advertising for what he likely knows are paper-thin non-events that he clumsily slopped onto celluloid. Hell, I'm laughing right along with him. Sucker. -
rallyinthestreets — 9 years ago(June 01, 2016 05:43 PM)
Nothing which you said was true, but all of it was tinged with an innate sadness, unable to admit even when you're wrong. I guess you'll have to learn the lessons of Saraband the hard way, in old age after all your cards have already been played.
Take care. -
!!!deleted!!! (63057267) — 9 years ago(June 02, 2016 10:07 AM)
Yeah, I'll think on that. Meanwhile, I strongly suggest catching up on the great movies campaign of yesteryear that you so obviously missed. You're sorely in need of Cassavetes, Altman (clearly), Bergman (from '61 to '82, as you hold SARABAND in high esteem) and the whole of Buuel's output. If you survive it'll serve as the dawn of your much-needed education in film. Good luck with those movies, thinker. Something tells me you'll need it.
-
rallyinthestreets — 9 years ago(June 06, 2016 04:21 PM)
Altman was a big fan of PTA's work, a fact which you've conspicuously ignored. Your criticisms of Saraband and late-career Bergman were facile and spurious (a running theme of yours so far), and that's coming from someone who's not even a huge fan of that film. Cassavetes and Buuel are practically mainstream in the arthouse realm, and I have seen much of their work, so try again.
-
!!!deleted!!! (63057267) — 9 years ago(June 07, 2016 11:23 AM)
Try again? Nah, you're too far gone. Besides, Altman was a known egomaniac, so of course he was going to champion anyone who aped his work. He did the same for Alan Rudolph.
By the way, I find it odd that you could like Bunuel and Cassavetes yet still be an Anderson fan. Something tells me you don't understand their films. Tell the truth: You hold Anderson in higher regard than them, don't you?