What Constitutes A Good Director?

I just came back from watching Skyfall (check my thoughts here), and I love it! This is a different James Bond altogether, but being directed by Sam Mendes, one can expect it to show more of the artistic aspects of the show than any real action. But Sam Mendes did a really good job. He is one director that I like, after his work on "American Beauty", which is one of my favourite movies of all time.

 

Which makes me think, what constitutes a good director? A good director, in my opinion, is someone who is able to capture the essence of the show, brings out the amazing storyline, and makes the movie in such a way that it not only captures the audience, but also gives them a feelgood or reflective feeling about the show.

 

Of course, the opinions differ. Some would think a good director is someone who can come up with action after action after action. Some would think a good director is someone who can come up with scary movies after scary movies (think about the "Paranormal Activity" series). But to me, I think a director who can actually come up with the artistic effects of the show is a much better director because it is the artistic effects that make the show really good, and anyone who can do that is what differentiates between a mediocre director and an excellent one.

 

Like Sam Mendes. "American Beauty" is a simple storyline. Some people would think it scandalous. But the way he made the movie made the show so beautiful, the characters so conflicted yet so real. And that is the whole beauty of the show. Hence "American Beauty", not the beauty of the Mena Suvari's character, whom in my opinion, is not even that pretty in the first place.

 

What about Ron Howard, whose shows never fail? Even though he is not that an artistic director, his shows are normally more dramatic and intense. Just think "Ransom", "Apollo 13", "A Beautiful Mind" and "The Da Vinci Code". And Robert Zemeckis, whose "Forrest Gump" is still my favourite show of all time, not to mention his "Back To The Future" trilogy, and "Who Framed Roger Rabbit"? Even Steven Spielberg, George Lucas and James Cameron, whose shows I will defintiely flock to watch, because these two directors never fail.

 

I have realised that good directors make good shows. Those names above, their shows never fail. In fact, it is good that Ron Howard ventured into directing because I think he makes a much better director than an actor. Hence before any show comes out, I normally see who the producers and directors are. By going with good names, chances are the shows will not let you down.

 

A couple of years back, I went to watch the new version of "The Three Musketeers", where Milla Jovovich is one of the stars. I had a feeling the show would not be good, because it was directed by Paul W. S. Anderson, the guy who directed "Event Horizon", which to me, was the worst show I have ever watched in my life. And I was right! This rendition of "Three Musketeers" was not impressive! I much prefer the older version with the famous song by the threesom - Sting, Rod Stewart and Bryan Adams.

 

There are many good directors around. Those I mentioned are just the creme de la creme, but there are many others who make pretty good shows too. Like Joe Wright, the director who did "Atonement", "Pride and Prejudice" and the upcoming "Anna Karenina". What about the directors Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, the husband and wife team who did "Ruby Sparks" and "Little Miss Sunshine"? Most directors have their own style and genre, and after one or two shows, one can easily recognise which director goes with which style.

 

Problem is, how to discern? Well, it is easy if you are a movie buff. Sometimes the style of the show looks very similar to another show you have watched, then chances are, it is by the same director or producer. And it is all up to the individual which style you prefer.