1. Christopher Nolan
This choice is likely to attract the most criticism, so I'll go into more depth. I'd also like to state that I'm a big fan of Christopher Nolan, though that doesn't mean I don't think he's vastly overrated. Plainly speaking, the man has an unrelenting barricade of hype following him around at all times, so, really, how he could not be considered overrated? Yes, the English-American director has directed some of the best-loved films of the 21st century, has been tagged
the modern Kubrick on a number of occassions, and has amassed a dedicated fanbase the world over. Right now, the world is Christopher Nolan's oyster. Kubrick? I'm sorry, but
no. Nowhere near. For starters, Kubrick was a genuine master with his camera, and knew where to place it and what to do with at all times. Instinctively, he never put out a dud shot. Kubrick also conjured up new techniques and innovated cinema on a number of levels. Though Nolan may have tricked modern audiences into thinking that his clean, crisp style is the mark of an assured professional, the man's grasp of continuity is all over the place, his films lack
true visual flair, and he can't direct a close-combat fight sequence to save his life. Don't believe me? Check out this video that movie critic Jim Emerson put together to get an idea of the kind of things I'm talking about: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=801sR_U1Xkw Thing is, Christopher Nolan certainly deserves credit for filling cineplexes with a new wave of interesting, exciting pictures, and for giving the "dumb" blockbuster scene the kick in the butt it so sorely needed. At the end of the day, though, that's all Nolan's films are: great blockbusters. And that's
fine, as long as we aren't blindly praising him as some kind of cinematic genius who can do no wrong.
Inception isn't an intelligent movie (Will Self, novelist and comedian, actually said it was "a stupid person's idea of an intelligent movie" - ouch). It's a well-crafted, exciting, and, of course, complicated (not the same as complex), but there aren't truly any big ideas at work. It's not "about" anything. Despite the way the narrative structure makes you feel,
Inception is almost pulp-like (and great pulp at that). The fact that audiences emerged from theatres blown away by its "complexities" and "intelligence" is astounding.
The Matrix - the movie that Nolan cites as inspiring
Inception in the first place - is a far more intelligent picture, one that actually attempts to explore several philosophical themes and make them work for the narrative. Does Nolan think
Inception is an intelligent movie? I'd bet not, given that he thinks the same of
2001: A Space Odyssey. The point is, Christopher Nolan is great, but he's way more flawed than most movie-goers would care to admit. Should he consider refining his technique and working with a script that isn't simply 140 pages of exposition and has
actual characters in it instead, I've no doubt that he could make a film worthy of Kubrick someday. And if he wants to stick with making blockbusters... well, that's fine, too. I'll be the first in line to see 'em.
Agree or disagree with this article? Let us know your own choices for most overrated directors of modern times in the comments section below.