BUT JESUS I HATE THAT israeliteY BASTARD SPIELBERG. In Cameron I see stupidity, but in Spielberg I feel disgust at the commercial impetus apparent everywhere.
>In Cameron I see stupidity
How so? He studied physics and now he is invited as an expert in submersibles despite not being en engineer. He kind of became an expert on the topic through experience and passion alone, without being educated in that direction. That's rare as frick
Btw, just from the pics in OP you can see he looks the smartest.
I think every famous as frick director is commercial oriented, otherwise they wouldn't be famous. And that absoulutely applies to Scott's career as well (just going with latest projects we have ME TOO in medieval times, film about powerful family with Lady Gaga as main actress and now Gladiator 2).
Cameron has never made a bad film. His avatar movies might not be as great as his past work but they are still solid films. Spielberg shit out many bad movies, the terminal, kingdom of the crystal skull, hook, lost world. Lucas directed 1 good movie, 2 boring mediocre movies and directed 3 abysmal movies. Ridley has a dodgy track record as well, some master pieces, some terrible films. So I’d say Cameron has the best batting record here
Spielberg has many good movies. Mediocre since the 00s
Cameron has 3 (Aliens, T1 and T2), mediocre since the 90s
Lucas 2.5 (SW OT), but also prequelshit
Scott has 4 (BR, Legend, Gladiator, Alien), but everything else he made is shit. Also Alien prequelshit lmao.
>Scott has 4 (BR, Legend, Gladiator, Alien), but everything else he made is shit. Also Alien prequelshit lmao.
What about Kingdom of Heaven? Blade Runner? Thelma & Louise? IMO hes way better than cameron.
Attractiveness: Cameron>Lucas>Scott>Spielberg
How tough they'd be to fight: Cameron>Scott>Lucas>Spielberg
Movies they've directed that I enjoy (quantity+quality): Cameron>Scott>Spielberg>Lucas
I don't even like Spielberg that much, but the breadth of what he's done is impressive and he's responsible for more inarguable classics. Yes, he's a mass-market entertainer guilty of treacly sentimentalism. He's also simply better.
Without Spielberg and Lucas, the careers of the other two simply wouldn't exist as they do now. Cameron probably wouldn't even be making films without Star Wars.
Cameron > Lucas > Spielberg > Scott
Scott > Lucas > Spielberg > Cameron
BUT JESUS I HATE THAT israeliteY BASTARD SPIELBERG. In Cameron I see stupidity, but in Spielberg I feel disgust at the commercial impetus apparent everywhere.
>In Cameron I see stupidity
How so? He studied physics and now he is invited as an expert in submersibles despite not being en engineer. He kind of became an expert on the topic through experience and passion alone, without being educated in that direction. That's rare as frick
Btw, just from the pics in OP you can see he looks the smartest.
You see commercial impetus in Spielberg but not Lucas?
I think every famous as frick director is commercial oriented, otherwise they wouldn't be famous. And that absoulutely applies to Scott's career as well (just going with latest projects we have ME TOO in medieval times, film about powerful family with Lady Gaga as main actress and now Gladiator 2).
Scott > Cameron > Lucas > Spielberg
1. Scorsese
2. Coppola
3. Zemeckis
4. Tony Scott
5. Nicholas Meyer
Scott > Cameron > Lucas > Spielberg
Spielberg=Cameron>Lucas>
Cameron has never made a bad film. His avatar movies might not be as great as his past work but they are still solid films. Spielberg shit out many bad movies, the terminal, kingdom of the crystal skull, hook, lost world. Lucas directed 1 good movie, 2 boring mediocre movies and directed 3 abysmal movies. Ridley has a dodgy track record as well, some master pieces, some terrible films. So I’d say Cameron has the best batting record here
>hook
what are you gay
>has never made a bad film
Avatar I & II
yup
hmmm...
Scott>Cameron>Spielberg>>>>>>>>>>>
The first three are overrated they made the MCU movies of yesteryear and basically just repackaged old ideas
>they made the MCU movies of yesteryear
moron
Tarkovsky.
Ok, ok.
Scott>Spielberg>Cameron>Lucas.
Has Cameron ever made an intimate film?
Terminator 1
Spielberg has many good movies. Mediocre since the 00s
Cameron has 3 (Aliens, T1 and T2), mediocre since the 90s
Lucas 2.5 (SW OT), but also prequelshit
Scott has 4 (BR, Legend, Gladiator, Alien), but everything else he made is shit. Also Alien prequelshit lmao.
>SW OT
2.5?? Which did he direct? Also American Graffiti
>Scott has 4 (BR, Legend, Gladiator, Alien), but everything else he made is shit. Also Alien prequelshit lmao.
What about Kingdom of Heaven? Blade Runner? Thelma & Louise? IMO hes way better than cameron.
What do you think BR stood for in the comment you replied to?
Villeneuve >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scott > Spielberg > Cameron >>>>> Lucas
Scott >Spielberg>Cameron>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Villenova hasn't made a single good film.
>Villenova hasn't made a single good film.
>DUNC, Arrival and BR:2049 are not good movies!
dumb
> DUNC
> Not shit
Begone moron.
None of those are good. Sicario is the good one.
3,2,4,1
Lucas has literally redefined popular filmmaking several times over.
Cameron built an entire fricking boat just to sink it.
Scott made a sci-fi film that still holds up in terms of special effects to this day, and arguably looks better than anything made with modern tech.
So who is the odd one out here? "Ohhhh he made a movie where the Chosen People suffah!"
"Ohhhhhhhhh he made a movie with tha heckin dinahsauhs!"
Literally frick off.
Oh I see what's happening here.
Miyazaki > Makoto Shinkai > Scorsese > Bong Joon-ho > James Cameron > George Lucas > PTA > Ridley Scott > Coen Brothers > Spielberg > Nolan
Attractiveness: Cameron>Lucas>Scott>Spielberg
How tough they'd be to fight: Cameron>Scott>Lucas>Spielberg
Movies they've directed that I enjoy (quantity+quality): Cameron>Scott>Spielberg>Lucas
sideways bean head
hack hack hack hack
Spielberg > Scott > Cameron > Lucas
I don't even like Spielberg that much, but the breadth of what he's done is impressive and he's responsible for more inarguable classics. Yes, he's a mass-market entertainer guilty of treacly sentimentalism. He's also simply better.
Cameron made avatar so he is automatically better. Idk about the other
Without Spielberg and Lucas, the careers of the other two simply wouldn't exist as they do now. Cameron probably wouldn't even be making films without Star Wars.
Cameron > Spielberg > Scott > Lucas
Cameron and Lucas have done irreparable damage to cinema, so no, I will not rank them.
Lucas doesn't look like a rich guy, despite being one.
Spielberg
Lucas
Scott
Cameron
Spielberg
Cameron
Scott
Lucas
Cameron > Lucas > Spielberg > Scott