His career reminds me of Kevin Smith
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Robert Rodriguez
lmtopeka — 11 years ago(August 24, 2014 08:41 PM)
They both got lucky by making super low budget movies that became cult hits, than moved on to some decent success and then blew it making terrible movies which bombed. They are both movie fan boys who are probably better at talking about old movies and the history of film than they are at making movies. Like Smith I doubt we see Rodriguez making2000 any more big budget movies anytime soon.
-
Nriks — 11 years ago(August 27, 2014 07:06 AM)
They both stink but at least Rodriguez is an actual moviemaker. His stuff is visual and cinematic, even if it's also adolescent, moronic and self-indulgent. Smith's just a fat stand up comedian who sets up a camera and records the results.
-
theblackestmagic — 11 years ago(October 01, 2014 10:31 PM)
I tend to agree. They're all primarily movie fanboys turned directors who've become tremendously overhyped by the movie going public and, in Tarantino's case, the majority of critics. All 3 also have a rabid fanbase of worshippers who believe them to be as essential to life as the oxygen we all need to live and breath.
And what are we to expect from Tarentino next exactly? Perhaps yet another revenge fantasy of an oppressed group or individual getting back at their oppressors? This particular plotline has basically become Tarentino's entire schtick since 'Kill Bill'. I read an interview he gave for 'DU' where he said that he was interested in doing a film about, if I remember correctly, black WWII soldiers returning home from the war and getting revenge on a bunch of white racists. Okay. Now is this a case of a filmmaker being stuck in a real rut, or just one whose plainly out of any sort of new and fresh ideas or material? Or is Tarentino simply taking his love of blaxploitation films way too far and much too seriously? And on top of it all he continues to receive numerous accolades and undeserved nominations for these types of pictures, mostly due to having made 'Pulp Fiction' IMO. I mean did either 'Inglorious Basterds' or 'Django Unchained' REALLY deserve best picture nods? What were they really other than glorified exploitation films which, it could be argued, is exactly what the majority of his pictures are after all.
My apologies as I know this was a post about RR. However I just decided to include a personal observation regarding his very close pal as well. -
zero1733 — 11 years ago(October 08, 2014 08:09 AM)
IMO, Smith and Rodriguez are similar in the way that the more money you give them, the less interesting the movie they create - The 1st Sin City movie, and Dogma being the only exceptions in their combined catalogues that had done something worthwhile on a higher budget than they're used to.
They're at their best when they're forced to be creative with a tight budget. It is the reason that I found Rodriguez so interesting early in his career, however, it seems to be something that he has really lost sight of.
Smith recently did something interesting (IMO) with "Red State". After years of underwhelming flops, he was practically pushed into re-inventing himself, and into making a movie that few expected from him.
The overwhelming flop, that is Sin City 2, is most likely going to force Rodriguez into a similar predicament, since no one is going to give him more than 10 million to make another movie until he rebuilds his credibility to the point that he becomes a worthwhile risk16d0 again.
I'd predict that Rodriguez's next movie is going to display a desire that we haven't seen from him since the mid-90s. It better, since his career is desperately in need of something that reminds fans why they became fans in the first place. -
Ocelot006-X3 — 11 years ago(December 17, 2014 03:24 AM)
I'd say artistically Smith is currently doing much better for himself.
Red State and Tusk were the perfect step outside of the comfort zone.
Rodriguez doesn't know how to step out.
Porch Monkey 4 Life.