Hitchcock Overrated? Dear Ben Shapiro….
by Sonny BunchBen Shapiro’s recent list of the ten most overrated directors has kicked up quite the controversy: Disparaging blog posts (including one from myself) and more than 300 (mostly negative) comments from Big Hollywood’s lovely readers took Mr. Shapiro to task for, amongst other things, daring to label Alfred Hitchcock as the most overrated director of all time.
My problem with the list wasn’t so much the subjective nature of it. Taste is personal, and our likes and dislikes are informed by our life experiences. If he had made a list of critically acclaimed directors that he didn’t much care for, well, that would’ve been different. But by framing his list as an assault on the auteur theory and a discussion of which directors have been unduly praised, Mr. Shapiro changes the game. Furthermore, by placing Alfred Hitchcock at the top of that list – a man who directed a half-dozen of the greatest films in the history of the American cinema, helped reinvent the language of cinema and is one of the most widely imitated directors in the history of filmmaking – Mr. Shapiro’s list mutates from purely subjective to (at least partially) objective, and opens him up to some serious criticism.
Let’s leave aside the quality of his choices for a moment, however, and take a look at the actual criticism: It is dedicated mostly to his feelings and largely bereft of any discussion of the actual filmmaking these directors have done during their time in Hollywood. Consider his take on Ridley Scott, for example. Blade Runner is “bizarre” and “massively overpraised.” Thelma and Louise is “liberal tripe.” And, my favorite: Alien is “slow.”
Alien is too slow? I guess I can see his point: I mean, why would you want to slowly build tension and create a sense of horrific claustrophobia by indulging in little things like “character development” or “spatial understanding” when you can just blow stuff up real good? Why waste two hours on Alien when you can pick up Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem on Netflix, am I right? And, briefly, being “liberal” is no more a signifier of quality than being “conservative.” There are good liberal films and terrible conservative films, and vice versa.
Then there’s his criticism of Michael Mann, which comes down to four words: “All style, no substance.” Beyond being a cliched, lazy takedown of Mr. Mann – the skilled director behind the tense thrillers Heat, The Insider, Manhunter and Collateral – it ignores the fact that style is the substance when he is the director in question. There is, simply, no filmmaker working today with a better intuitive grasp of the setpiece. I would ask Mr. Shapiro to grapple with the central dilemma of Mann’s body of work – “Does Mr. Mann’s astonishing technical skills and amazing visual dexterity overwhelm his sometimes-stilted scripting?” — rather than glibly dismiss such a skilled technical force with four little words.
The treatment of Martin Scorsese isn’t much better: The brilliant Italian-American’s finest films are derided as “gross” because they make the author want to “take a shower.” Well, okay, but that’s kind of the point: Goodfellas and Raging Bull are movies that deal with distinctly unpleasant people living a distinctly unpleasant lifestyle. If those movies make you feel a little dirty, it means that Scorsese’s done his job right. And, again: No discussion of Scorsese’s storytelling skills or technical prowess or impact on the field of filmmaking at large. It’s just a gut reaction.
So, objectively speaking, there’s not that much “there” there? Subjectively speaking, I only have one strong objection: Alfred Hitchcock.
It’s hard to say just how wrongheaded Mr. Shapiro is in this regard. Hitch was a hit with audiences and critics; he made at least a half-dozen of the most influential films in the history of Hollywood; he is one of the most-copied filmmakers of all time and one of the most-referenced. It’s literally impossible to understand broad swathes of American (and international) cinema without at least a basic knowledge of Hitchcok’s oeuvre. If we want to get lowbrow for a second, there are more than a dozen Simpsons episodes that are seriously damaged without having seen the rotund Brit’s greatest hits. That’s more than half of a season!
Seriously, though, dismissing Hitchcock in the manner that Mr. Shapiro did is unfathomable. He writes, for example, that “Notorious is the same movie as Rebecca.” To quote a friend of mine, the Rightwing Film GeekVictor Morton, “wtf does that even mean? Is Olivier in the Rains role or the Grant role? IDIOTIC!!” (We were on Twitter, so you’ll have to excuse the brevity.) What Mr. Shapiro’s disdain mostly comes down to is his distaste for slowly developing action: Anyone who reaches for the remote to speed Rear Window up and eliminate that delicious tension has a taste that is, shall we say, unrefined.
And you know what? That’s fine! If Mr. Shapiro had simply said “Hey, I don’t like Hitchcock,” I wouldn’t have thought much more than “My, my that poor boy has terrible taste.” I certainly wouldn’t have reeled off almost 1,000 words in response. I can appreciate, if disagree, with the fact that he doesn’t jibe with the great film critic Manny Farber, who admired Hitchcock for “filling his movies with what he is really interested in, and what is interesting to an audience – the use of the camera to tell more about people and a situation than that a muddle arose and was straightened out at the end.”
But to say that Hitchcock is overrated? It’s not just egregiously silly: It’s objectively incorrect.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
142 Comments
"Notorious is the same movie as Rebecca."
I think what he meant was Notorious is the same as The Birds. No, Psycho. No, wait, The Trouble With Harry. No…
Hear, hear.
When I read his piece I thought…what a moron. And, after reading your piece I haven't changed that opinion. You're right, taste IS subjective…and people like what they like and sometimes with no concrete reason. But the way his piece is presented, it's more like he's calling people out for liking anyone he deems "overrated". Well…pffffffft. Rear Window is probably my favorite movie ever. And Ben Shapiro can kiss my rear window.
Thank you.
Thank God for you sir! Finally, someone said something of substance. The fact that Shapiro wrote this then had some other writer on this site commend him really made me question BigHollywood's standards.
You are right. If Shapiro said he did not like them is one thing, to say they are overrated merely based on your tastes is, as you say, "unrefined".
I'm sure Shapiro will respond after he's done watching "The Fast and The Furious". Vroom! Vroom!
That being said…
It would be nice to see Mr. Shapiro's top 10 list of GOOD directors. Maybe Danny Leiner (White Castle, Dude Where's My Car)? Rob Reiner? Harold Ramis? Paul Weitz? Matt Reeves?
Mr. Shapiro is not unlike the guys in High Fidelity. He's totally elitist. He feels like the unappreciated scholar, so he sh!ts onto people who know lesser than he.
Ben Shapiro was drumming up traffic for Big Hollywood. And he succeeded magnificently.
"Notorious is the same movie as Rebecca"
That sentence proves that Shapiro:
has not seen either movie
or
doesn't know what he's talking about.
I agreed with several, well most of his other picks, and there are some Hitchcock films I think are over-rated IMHO Vertigo, Rear Window, To Catch a Thief…but some of his films are wonderful. I will always watch them when they are on TCM.
How could he have ignored James Cameron for Alfred Hitchcock? The kid has a screw loose somewhere that he should tighten a little before writing any more "overrated of all time" articles.
Bravo, Sonny!
You've single-handedly restored my faith in Big Hollywood, and convinced me that Shapiro and Nolte are two cinema philistines separated by a generation.
Shapiro's a post-pubescent attorney with some considerable sexual hang-ups, and Nolte's defense of the original post, coupled with his inability to separate politics from film have proven him to be perhaps the single most cynical film industry professional since Hearst.
Your post, therefore, reminds me that the cream does indeed rise to the top. My thanks, sir.
Ditto!
Wow. An actual thoughtful, well-written, level-headed, insightful, rational, and logical article on Big Hollywood? I never thought I would see the day. Kudos, good sir. You made this site worth reading, for once. And this: "And, briefly, being “liberal” is no more a signifier of quality than being “conservative.” There are good liberal films and terrible conservative films, and vice versa" is glorious. It's too bad your colleagues who write for the site don't agree. For them, the only good films are ones that are attuned to the way they think. A shame, really.
Amen.
i haven't read all the comments on the two articles (something like 800+) so I don't know if anyone agrees woth me, but for my money Kubrick is as inconsistent as the rest and too self-indulgent. He has some good stuff, but overrated doesn't begin to describe him.
Hitchcock is not for everyone. I'm a fan but can't sit through all his stuff. However, I'd bet the average person could name more of his film titles than almose anyone else besides maybe Lucas and Spielberg
shapiro's choice of topic was too big for just one article. he should've spread that out over a course of a few days at least, to make room for his arguments, but i think he knew he was in for a beat down and opted for 1 day only. if nothing else he at least woke us up that afternoon.
Okay – sheesh, people…so we all hated Shapiro's list and a (large) number of us disagreed (violently) with him. But there's no need to go calling him names. He's written other articles that we've all praised him for. He stuck his leg out in traffic as far as directors go and he took some hits. Lets focus on why he's wrong, not why he has bad taste in film critique.
It's sad that it's the uniformed attack blog articles that get all the hits. It's really something Shapiro and Nolte should be deeply ashamed about, if not at least embarrassed.
To write such stupid fifth grader commentary about Alfred Hitchcock of all people, on a supposed Hollywood blog, is just ignorant, and childish to boot.
Well said. I couldn't believe that anyone would claim Hitchcock is overrated. That strikes me as someone who just doesn't know film.
The kid's article was unreadable once the reader saw that he didn't understand the appeal of Ridley Scott's Bladerunner. A 28 year old sci-fi movie that could be released today and do very well is a testament onto itself. That alone should put Ridley Scott on the 10 Best list. I have no idea what he said about the rest of the list. I couldn't go any further. It was like watching Olbermann. One just can't get past the initial stupidity.
I didn't know anyone still took the auteur theory seriously.
A quick point. Scorsese wasn't merely doing his job by making us feel dirty. He was a correction.
Up until his films the Godfather was the gold standard of gangster movies. Coppola's characters were idealized in a way that obscured their evil nature: controlling whores, dealing drugs, rape, extortion, murder.
Coppola was raised by a father who was a Hollywood composer. Scorsese grew up on the streets of New York and had to walk past the blood and bodies. He has no idealized illusions of gangsters.
yes that's what I said too.
I try not to get butthurt over other people's opinions.
How can Blade Runner and Alien be overrated? Sure, they are not the action movies one would expect, but they are the pinnacle of the sci fi genre (not counting 2001).
Hitchcock's movies have been damaged by time, not their quality, but the audience of today may not connect. Rear Window is up there with Blade Runner as my favorite movie of all time.
I think Shapiro is down to two options, either he needs to issue a retraction on the article, or explain a little bit more about his opinions. Why wasnt Bay on that list of directors? He's as overrated as you can get. Cameron is another one. Lets not forget our dear friend in Switzerland Roman Polanski. Not only are nearly all his movies garbage, he is a douche of a human being.
Agreed.
LOL! Can't we all re-make all the Hitchcock movies to suit the likes of the Ben Shapiros of the world……
Psycho: Marion Crane is actually a butt-kicking, tattooed, stronger-than-men-twice-her-size (now, THAT's a new concept!) bank robber who holes up in the Bates Motel which doubles as a brothel run by Madam/Mother Bates and her son Norman. Marion is in the shower with one of the "ladies" (in the obligatory lesbian scene), Norman/Mother murders them both. Marion's sister and boyfriend come looking for her. They check out the motel. They enlist a private investigator (played by the obligatory rap star).
In the end, boyfriend and sister attack the Bates motel with missile launchers, destroying Norman's/Mother's recently purchased spring collection in the process. Norman/Mother is laying on the ground and boyfriend/sister stand over him/her, mutter the snappy, profanity-laced one liner, before shooting him/her. They turn their backs and proceed to swap slobber after realizing that the carnage has brought out their lust, er, love for one another. Norman/Mother rises to kill them when their backs are turned. Boyfriend/sister shoot him/her again. They go back to their making out. Norman/Mother returns and they realize that Norman/Mother has become a zombie.
The sequel will have the boyfriend and sister married but in the process of a divorce. They will reconcile while fighting the zombie.
Good article, Mr. B! Gets us out of "I may not know Art, but I know what I like" territory.
I usually like Shapiro, but that article was a WTF moment for me. I'm not sure how anyone can call themselves a movie-lover and not like – shoot, merely appreciate – the directors he listed. If "Goodfellas" was the ONLY thing Scorsese ever made, I would consider him a great director (is Harper Lee not a great novelist for the one book she wrote?).
If Hitchcock is the "Stephen King of fimmakers" as Shapiro called him, I fail to see how that's a bad thing, even though I find the comparison superficial. To me, that rings of type of snobbery most of us as Big Hollywood deride.
Let's save the "overrated" moniker for the pretentious "artistes", like Terrence Malick and Jim Jarmusch, not the crack storytellers who have raised the medium, imo, well-above the pedantic, engaging our interest by actually making us want to know what happens next. That's what makes movie-going an elevating experience.
Not Trouble with Harry, Trouble with Tribbles!!!
Get your Hitchcock straight!
The avalanche of personal attacks on Mr. Shapiro suggests that his article contains more than a list of 'overrated' directors. Doesn't he insinuate that the 'system' that produces financing, awards and public homage is flawed?
"Hitch was a hit with audiences and critics…most influential film…most-copied filmmakers…most-referenced… impossible to understand…cinema without…Hitchcok…"
Sorry to pick out one sentence but it will illustrate what Ben is targeting: Hitchcock is a 'hit', the director has 'influence' and he is "most copied" and "most referenced".
Isn't Ben attacking the cult of "following" and "imitating"?
Isn't he almost attacking the entire move-making industry?
Haha, you'd think so from the comments.
Stanley.
Bladerunner is my favorite film of all time. The original version. Actually, the original Directors Cut, without the narration or added content. The most recent version of the Director's Cut, the Platinum Special Limited Edition Director's Cut with Extra Cheese, is just plain garbage. Ridley Scott is a brilliant director, but he is the worst editor in the history of filmmaking. He cuts scenes that shouldn't be cut and then pastes in crap that should remain on the cutting room floor. Watch Gladiator or Blackhawk Down about 5 times and you'll start to notice where Scott went in and chopped out large sections of the film without any regard to the overall plot or continuity. What happened to them? Well, they're over in the Deleted Scenes content on Disc Two of the Platinum Special Limited Edition Director's Cut Anniversary DVD.
The "genius" George Lucas needed to be on that list, too.
I'd watch this! Both of them. Where's the popcorn?
"by placing Alfred Hitchcock at the top of that list – a man who directed a half-dozen of the greatest films in the history of the American cinema, helped reinvent the language of cinema and is one of the most widely imitated directors in the history of filmmaking"
In defense of Mr. Shapiro, if you're going to compile an overrated list, this is the sort of winner you want. Can't be polarizing figures like Mr. Mullholland Dr., since even Me Too hipster artsy-fartsy critics admit he's "difficult". It's gotta be someone most everyone loves, given the nature of the list.
Can't wait for Ben's next bombshell? Forget Letterman. Big Hollywood Top Ten list is "Must See TV"
I've got an idea Shapiro. Top Ten religions.
"for my money Kubrick is as inconsistent as the rest and too self-indulgent"
Yes! But then again, unlike with Hitchcock, most people–including stuffy critics–admit it by now. I love The Shining, but not so much for the direction. Spartacus is good. Paths of Glory is okay (and overrated). Everything else is highly self-indulgent. Too much detail. 2001 has the worst ending of any "great" film outside of Apocalpse Now. The part with the monkeys is fun, though.
How can the director of Chinatown, Rosemary's Baby, and Macbeth be on that list? I admit that Polanski has not done anything special since then, but those three movies are masterpieces — Chinatown especially.
Some people think highly of Knife in the Water, too.
Could it be that Ben is stirrin the puddin by being absurd?
"Why wasnt Bay on that list of directors? He's as overrated as you can get."
What are you talking about? Pretty much everyone hates Michael Bay, besides ticket-buyers, who of course do not count to critics.
Right on Sonny. That was my problem with Shapiro's post, he decided that simply because he didn't like something it was overrated. His lazy takedowns of brilliant director's also betrayed his lack of real film knowledge. That's fine, you don't need to go to film school to tell if a film is bad. But if you are going to take on the Master of Suspense I would at least ask you to mount an attack that went beyond stupid, hackneyed quips.
Thanks for your pro Hitchcock remarks. I was baffled by Shapiro's 'Notorious' and 'Rebecca' opinion, too.
I love both movies and NEVER noticed the aledged 'similarities'. He CAN'T have watched either.
Good article Sonny. Thanks for your thoughts.
Unfortunately, for me, with his recent piece, Ben Shapiro has lost all credibility when the subject is film.
Personal taste is a different thing than the objective evaluation of quality. Some days I would prefer to watch Weekend at Bernie's, but there's no way I'd consider it "better" than, say, Schindler's List. I like Rocky more than I like the Godfather, but I think The Godfather is a better film. Personal taste is absolutely fine, but as I said before, it interferes with objectivity. People should learn to differentiate between the two.
Well said, sir.
Guess you think every John Wayne western is the same too; come to think of it…
"Pi is a jumble of nonsense that starts nowhere and goes nowhere."
Wow.
Harold Ramis was a solid-to-very-good comedy director, until Year One that is *sigh*…
maybe but if so, he somehow needed to write it in such a way that someone could see it as such.
Why is it that film reviewers/critics named Ben suck so bad?
If the criteria is one or two good / great films followed by a string of overrated crappy ones. (Which seems to be the Kid's main criterion) Then here is my overrated list:
10) Steven Spielberg
David Lynch
– An enormous collage of mediocrity ( Jurassic Park, Amistad, Catch me…), scattered with obvious genious, (Raiders, Schindler's List, Jaws), and littered with crap (1941, every other Indy film, AI, Hook, Always).
-There is some serious garbage here.
9)Brian De Palma
– For every Scarface there is a Bonfire of the Vanities. For every Carlito's way, a Casulties of War
– Dune. 'Nuff said
7) Peter Bogdanovich
– Last Picture Show- Awesome. Everything else is crap
6) Bret Ratner
-Did you see what he did to X3, and Red Dragon? Nobody destroys a franchise better. First Rush Hour – Funny. Everything else – Crap
5) Robert Rodriguez
-I hate saying it too. Love El Mariachi, Desperado, Sin City. Dude, stop with the Spy Kids, Sharkboy Lavagirl crap. You're killing me.
4)John Woo
-People shoot really cool in your movies is an accolade?
3) Spike Lee
– This guy sux. Liked 25th Hour though and the MJ commercials.
2) James Cameron
– Terminator – Feakin Awesome. The rest is crap
1) George Lucas
– Has he actually directed a good movie? Empires Strikes Back (by far the best Star Wars movie) wasn't even directed by him. And don't tell me THX 1138 or American Graffiti are good. It doesn't make you cool.
- People like Michael Bay don't make the list because no one ever said he was a great director.
Ben whoever is just some little weasel guy.
After my first shock (mostly over Lean and Hitch), I decdided it didnt matter what Ben thought about anything regarding film.
And if we don't care who he thinks is 'bad', why would we care who he thinks is 'good'?
Sure. Harold Ramis is good. Groundhog day is one of my favorite movies. I wouldn't put Ramis as Top 10 best directors, but his films are generally pleasant and I enjoy them. I tossed him into the list of pop movie directors like those of American Pie, Dude Where's my car, etc..
Kubrick was a magnificent director, but when you (unpleasantly) sit through several of his movies in a row, you might notice how often his skills were wasted by his bleak view of man. A little bit of humor can overcome it (or even better, a whole lot of humor, e.g. Dr. Strangelove).
I wouldn't consider Kubrick to be overrated, though, as I think his body of work seems to be acurrately evaluated by the critical community (i.e. technically excellent, but artistically inconsistent and often empty).
And speaking of Hitchcock – I have seen every American AH film (most more than once) and many of the British made films. My opinion in short – He hits his final peaks with North By Northwest and Psycho. NBNW is his last 'classic' film as Psycho is very different from his previous pictures. After Psycho – the point of diminishing returns sets in for the rest of his film career.
His earlier work – I think there are a few misfires like "Under Capricorn" and the one with Monty Clift as a priest up in Canada. Then to my tastes, some of the other films are too 'romantic' for me – Rebecca is a fine example. A good film that is not my cup of tea.
So there!
I have to disagree with your assessment of Alien. It is very slow during the first half, and to no real purpose. It seems little more than an excuse to me to say it's building tension, because I've seen other filmmakers do it without boring me to tears for an hour. To suggest he prefer Aliens vs. Predator is just ludicrous: Alien is not an action movie. It's a horror movie. And by horror movie standards, the first half is tedious and slow. The movie does a lot of things right, but it gets a lot of things wrong as well.
As for the short, throwaway criticism of Mann, I also have to disagree. I think "All style, no substance" says exactly what you suggest he say as a replacement. If Mann's style is substance, then his movies are still without substance.
But let's cut to the chase here: most of the filmmakers criticized in this list are talented in their own ways. But none of them (in my opinion) make well-rounded movies. These films are praised as masterpieces when more often, they're simply not. Blade Runner is a great movie in many ways, but it is a narrative mess. As I said, Alien is often slow and tedious rather than tense, and only really begins to shine in its later half. As he said, these are overrated filmmakers. Not horrible filmmakers, just overrated. And I think he's right about most of it.
As for the suggestion that Shapiro is elitist, this response is at least as elitist as the original post. We're talking about movies here. As for the comment about subjectivity vs. objectivity, I think Bunch is wrong. Even on the technical merits, these points are all debatable. This entire exchange isn't about anything measurable with a ruler. It's all subjective opinion. To suggest otherwise is nothing more than a rhetorical device.
The "elitist" comment I made was a quote from High Fidelity, when John Cusack, Jack Black, and the others are sitting around the record store talking about how pathetic the customers are for not liking this or thinking that is overrated.
Ben Shapiro's post reminded me of the scene, though it would have been more appropriate if his were a "top 5" list.
[...] of all, thanks to Andrew Breitbart and John Nolte for offering some virtual real estate to rebut Ben Shapiro’s awful list of overrated directors. Hopefully some of you Big Hollywood [...]
ROFLMAO! I'll give you that!
Liking a movie because of the director is a stupid concept. Either you like the storyline and the characters or you simply don't.
Sorry but most of the "Great" directors have produced some of the biggest snore fests in cinematic history, Scorsese being chief among them. If you make a move that takes 4 hours to watch and it only has an hour of story you fill it with tons of dialog or fluff to make it seem epic. Scorsese is the king of that as well as Tarentino, who have too much talking without substance behind it.
Nicely reasoned and written, Sonny, but I fear you're talking to a wall. As they say, in a movie I don't much care for myself, stupid is as stupid does.
I fail to see how that's a bad thing, too. Stephen King writes some very accomplished prose. I don't care for the genre, but that's a matter of my preference, not a commentary on King's writing. In fact, King's book "On Writing" is considered the "must have" for anyone who wants to be a professional (particularly a fiction) writer.
I understand what you write about "pretentious artistes", and in general, I agree. But I must say that Malick's "Days of Heaven" was one of the most beautiful looking films ever shot, though this was largely due to the late Nestor Almendros. Simple, slender plot and I'm sure people of a certain age would find it very slow, but it is something to look at.
I agree with your point about snobbery, too – talking to my kids about why there was so much carp-and-snark online, so few young people praising anything and panning almost everything and we all decided that when you criticize something, you have the feeling that it makes you sound superior and smart – that to criticize presumes some body of knowledge on the part of the critic, whereas praise is more likely to be regarded as personal taste.
"Pi is a jumble of nonsense that starts nowhere and goes nowhere."
It starts out with a guy who wants to beat the stock market with math and ends up giving himself a lobotomy. Far from Nowhere to Nowhere, that is a plot that could be the stuff of high tragedy.
I'll admit there is some "nonsense". Things were intentionally made confusing and, personally, I don't like fantasy sequences.
Gah. Guys like Shapiro make me embarrassed to be my age, a member of the ADD generation who doesn't have the patience for complex storylines or whose eyes glaze over if the movie isn't colorized. The kid has no credibility with me anymore.
My thought on reading Ben's post was that he was running the risk of being viewed as a twit, bent on agrandizing himself, rather than a considerate commentator….what was the motivation for the post??
"Has he actually directed a good movie? Empire Strikes Back (by far the best Star Wars movie) wasn't even directed by him."
Granting Empire is the best–though in my heart of hearts I don't believe it, as the original has a better ending (Empire, in fact, does not end. It's more like "See you next time!")–Star Wars was still good, no? Empire being better does not make Star Wars bad. So there you have it. Lucas directed Star Wars, and it is good.
Maybe he watched them both at the same time, to save time, and got a little confused.
"that doesn't negate that the final showdown with Roy is weak from a story standpoint"
How so? They have to confront eachother, right? And the robot's gonna be better, right? What could have been done differently? The setting? I thought it was the right place. Is it that you thought their showdown should have revealed some eternal truth about the difference between flesh and artifice, or something? because I think for an action movie, what they did was enough. i enjoy how Ford is suddenly the hunted one, running for dear life.
I haven’t seen Rebecca, but I appreciated Ben's comment for one reason. Did you notice how many of his Top 10 keep remaking the same movie? Lynch certainly does, in the sense that any scene from one of his movies could be dropped into another. Tarantino, Allen, and Scorcese each made one signature movie, then kept refining it. (In Woody Allen’s case, I’m ignoring his early comedic genius.) Even Mann falls into that category because his style is so distinctive, and he doesn’t wander much outside his comfort zone.
So, does that critique apply to Hitchcock as well? A little bit, yeah. Maybe that’s part of Ben's definition of being overrated, that you can fail to progress in style and still receive accolades.
If BH got the most knowledgable and informed film critic who had been studying and reviewing movies for 75 years and this expert listed his most overrated directors, there would be just as much a hue and outcry as Mr. Shapiro's list produced. We all have our own lists. Trouble is, we don't all have our own blogs or columns. Thanks goodness for Andrew Breitbart providing this forum for the critic in all of us to vent!
Shapiro stated Rebecca is the same film as Notorious because of the situation: the dangerous home, in Rebecca its Manderley, in Notorious the Sebastian manse. Also, the most sinister characters in each home are introduced in the same manner: in Rebecca its Mrs. Danvers and in Notorious the mother, i.e., a slow approach of the sinister character to the vulnerable character and then a tight ominous close-up. There you have it: As anyone can see, Rebecca and Notorious are the same film. Whatever.
Mr. Shapiro needs to learn the difference between opinion and talent. Personal taste is one thing, talent quite another. For example, I cannot stand the Beatles. I won't listen to them if I have any choice. However, as a musician I can undeniably see their influence and contributions to pop and rock music. You don't have to like something to understand it's merit, unless of course, you are Ben.
I didn't hate the list, but there were a couple of glaring examples (Spike Lee & Michael Moore being the prime examples). I think the Hitchcock thing depends on the concept of "overrated" as opposed to "bad." Since Hitchcock gets such an enormous amount of praise, it's easy to make the argument that if even a fraction of it is undeserved, he's vastly overrated. You can't overrate someone who doesn't get a lot of praise in the first place.
Let's all take a "rope" and hang Ben till "the birds' peck his face off and we can face his body "North by Northwest' so we can watch from afar. Then we will cut him down and bury him in the "family plot". In a "frenzy' we can cover his body with a "topaz" colored "torn curtain". We just have to be sure not to get "the wrong man" because we will already be "notorious" for what we do. Just keep looking out the "rear window" to make sure that "Marnie" doesn't "dial M for murder" on us and turn us in. Because if we get caught I must admit "I confess" with little or no questioning. So to keep this from happening, I'll take the "39 steps", jump into a "lifeboat" and "bon voyage" this "psycho" is gone.
Give me book any day of the week, plus reading the posts can be like watching a comedy. Better lines here than on tv…And so far it's free.
There seems to be a disconnect going on here. I think the Hitchcock thing depends on the concept of "overrated" as opposed to "bad." Since Hitchcock gets such an enormous amount of praise, it's easy to make the argument that if even a fraction of it is undeserved, he's vastly overrated. You can't overrate someone who doesn't get a lot of praise in the first place. In the case of Scorcese and Scott, I couldn't agree more. These guys get such a ridiculous amount of praise heaped on them for a few critically acclaimed movies, while they've made a bunch that couldn't possibly be crappier if that was their intended goal. So when they appear on every Best Director list despite a lifetime of crap work, that kind of makes the point that they are overrated.
I still hated Alien considering the incredible book it was based on. Not only was it far slower than the book (shredding the silly argument that Shapiro must be looking for AVP), the actors that were chosen (not to mention how they were directed) were monumentally weaker than their counterparts in the book. I've never to this day been more disappointed in a book adaptation.
What books is Alien based on?
There is a word for that.
"Trolling."
Sorry, I read the Alan Foster adaptation when I was a kid and thought it preceded the movie, but it was actually loosely based on the movie. My bad (although I still thought he captured the terror far better than Scott did). I read the book before the movie and was completely disappointed with the results.
You'll have to pardon my previous message (which was mistakenly written under my real name).
I was just curious… what book is Alien based on? I can't think of any interviews with Ridley Scott, Ron Shusett, Dan O'Bannon, et al where a source book is mentioned, other than Giger's published artwork.
Ah, I understand! I've never read the book myself but now I'm curious. To the best of my knowledge, it was an original Dan O'Bannon story and since he just passed away, I'm sure we would've heard something about "the book he based Alien on."
Thanks again for the clarification.
(I asked the question originally but mistakenly used my real name.)
You've obviously never met a Director, particularly those who have gone to film school and demand "A Film by Credit" on their first feature.
Ouch. American Graffiti was one the AFI Top 100 list, so it's not like it's an uncommon film.
I like several of your picks though. Your opinion on Cameron is like mine(though True Lies rocks).
Based on the photo of Ben Shapiro, it looks like he's barely out of college; a member of the short attention span generation. Anyone under 30 really can't begin to form a meaningful analysis of aspects of American culture, since they haven't lived long enough to experience much more than a few seasons of TV and a handful of movies.
I have to agree with one of the posts on Shapiro's blog; he must either be posting the list as a joke, and/or as a way to provoke readers.
In defense of Ben it should be pointed out that he still wets the bed – cinematically speaking.
Alfred Hitchcock had good looking birds er.. blondes in his movies that made me have vertigo and put me in a frenzy. I would be spellbound watching them.
Me and my friend Harry would checked the movie listings by dialing M.
I remember traveling to the theater with strangers on a train. The theater was north by northwest of me.
I had a suspicion I was going to have trouble with Harry. He was involved in a family plot. His friend Rebecca was suspected of being a saboteur, a secret agent. Her friend Mary was a lady was of easy virtue. She was notorious.
I was going to let them use just enough rope to hang em.
I planned to catch a thief on the way but I had the wrong man. It was about sabotage without a shadow of doubt. The man knew too much about blackmail of the farmers wife. It was all downhill from there.
I confess some think I am psycho for writing this….
Bon voyage
and literally, no doubt!
I skipped reading Ben Shapiro's article because I figured it would be like people are saying it is. Ugh.
Apparently Shapiro's little game is to get some attention for himself by slamming the career achievements of others whom he cannot hope to equal (ever).
I recall how BS played this little game with the name of John Updike, not many hours after Updike died.
BS only demonstrated his lack of class, judgment, maturity, authority, etc.
Whatever BS's agenda may be, so far what he has been accomplishing (as I see it anyway) is to present the identity of a smug, smirking little nobody, earning for himself the scorn (from others) which he aims at those who have earned his respect (whether or not he can see it and/or admit it).
'North By Northwest'- greatest film of all time…
Most imitated and never duplicated, although the Bond films come close. Watch it in it's glorious BluRay version and say to yourself:
'It was made in 1957'…
part 2 (I got a message that the total was "too long" for one post)
Whenever I see that BS has written another piece for Big Hollywood, I can't help thinking that BH is mistaken in keeping him as a contributor, because his writings help to give the BH site the taint of being a place where one of the biggest gratifications (of writers and readers) is to harp on anything considered to be bad
(even if millions of respectable people clearly value the thing in question).
This monotonous drone of negativity is tiresome and repellant.
If one of the readers here would care to recommend to me a website primarily where people exchange intelligent expressions of appreciation for great movie making, I would be interested to learn of such a website.
P.S. FYI, my criticism of BS here is an anomaly in my 'history' of posting comments on this website.
Usually my comments are expressions of enthusiatic appreciation for excellence in film.
"I confess some think I am psycho for writing this…."
Nah, you're probably just a little upset about the torn curtain.
Don't give up on BH because of BS latest boner. There are still excellent writers here and good discussion to boot.
As to your question…I enjoy:
Dennis Cozzalio's SLIFR:
http://sergioleoneifr.blogspot.com/
The Siren:
http://selfstyledsiren.blogspot.com/
Glenn Kenny's SCR:
http://somecamerunning.typepad.com/
Great rebuttal sir. I suppose Shapiro's views about film makers work I admire really rankled because what they created was a collection of very memorable moments. In Hitchcock's North BY Northwest, those scenes of Cary Grant running down that lonely road ,one is sure he is going to die.In Vertigo there is a feeling of being trapped inside a nightmare,those empty streets,Stewart's obsessive behavior. Images in Gladiator of Maximus striding across the arena ,the lone warrior or in American Gangster ,the scenes of misery and death brought on by drugs. When movie images become part of popular culture I would say that director is quite accomplished.
Ben Shapiro is the most OVERRATED sniveling, eliitist, contarian for its own sake, non-accomplished blogger of all time! Congrats go to him for beating our Harry Knowles and Perez Hilton…
It seems to me that Shapiro is just not a movie fan. Or a music fan, or an art fan. Every single one of his posts on BH has come down to "This sucks because blah blah blah" Maybe this cultural stuff just isn't for him.
Shapiro's a bottom b*tch just for not including Spike Lee!
If there weren't over-rated directors, what would bloggers have to blog about?
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I definitely have to say you missed the point of Sharpio's article. A piece of work should be looked at in context of its time (Why everyone likes Citizen Kane is because it "changed cinema", but I believe that truly great works can stand the testament of time, that is, exist outside when and where they were created and still communicate.
I think that Citizen Kane is great because it has a powerful story that is still relevant, but I cant stand Fellini because all of his work is pretentious and completely unrelated to me despite whatever importance Italian Neo-realism had. Sharpio is saying that movies, like all art, should be about what you enjoy, the experts be damned.
I've had this argument time and time again in film class and I definitely come from Sharpio's angle; though I disagree with him about Blade Runner. Talk about the merits of an individual film outside of what it did or who directed it. Was the Mid-poin Whammy really good? Did the end of the second act leave you as downtrodden as the lead character? Did the ending actually work? For example I love Blade runner because of the world, the style, the idea of the movie, but that doesn't negate that the final showdown with Roy is weak from a story standpoint. In the end the Tears in the Rain scene redeems the film but I am still intensely bored with the final showdown.
I just couldn't work that one in….. : )
You must be logged in to post a comment.