3.5K Messages
•
85.6K Points
PS. Ultra-violent Bloody Directors
What is on the list page. https://www.imdb.com/list/ls026381332/
“Who is the worst (I.E. goriest) of these modern masters of film (without speciallizing in the horror genre)? It is too easy in horror film to go for the gore and ultra-violence. I mean they could have made a few horror films, but they were manly known for films of an another genre and still piled on the violence and gore. “
What is not on the list page is that I had originally thought of this as a showdown between Peckinpah and Tarantino. But I decided to leave it open for you and others to suggest other directors that might fit the bill as long as they don’t specialize solely in horror.
I thinking of adding these guys but haven’t made up my mind on it.
- John Carpenter
- Mel Gibson
- Roland Emmerich ( “The Patriot” has a lot of blood flowing.)
- Sergio Leone (not much blood but a lot of violence).
- Sam Raimi ( too many horror films in his resume).
- Martin Scorsese but I still love his films when he is not violent.
- Ridley Scott
- Steven Spielberg - sorry, but the blood flowing in “Ready Player One”, “ Saving Private Ryan”, and “Schindler’s List” earned him concideration for this list.
- George Miller - the Mad Max films and “The Witches Of Eastwick”
“Who is the worst (I.E. goriest) of these modern masters of film (without speciallizing in the horror genre)? It is too easy in horror film to go for the gore and ultra-violence. I mean they could have made a few horror films, but they were manly known for films of an another genre and still piled on the violence and gore. “
What is not on the list page is that I had originally thought of this as a showdown between Peckinpah and Tarantino. But I decided to leave it open for you and others to suggest other directors that might fit the bill as long as they don’t specialize solely in horror.
I thinking of adding these guys but haven’t made up my mind on it.
- John Carpenter
- Mel Gibson
- Roland Emmerich ( “The Patriot” has a lot of blood flowing.)
- Sergio Leone (not much blood but a lot of violence).
- Sam Raimi ( too many horror films in his resume).
- Martin Scorsese but I still love his films when he is not violent.
- Ridley Scott
- Steven Spielberg - sorry, but the blood flowing in “Ready Player One”, “ Saving Private Ryan”, and “Schindler’s List” earned him concideration for this list.
- George Miller - the Mad Max films and “The Witches Of Eastwick”
ElMaruecan82
5.2K Messages
•
138.3K Points
7 years ago
In fact, we also have to define ultra-violence, is it a matter of quantity of hemoglobin or is it something about the way violence is portrayed. Should it be disturbing or not?
FYC: Abel Ferrara, definitely.
4
albstein
1K Messages
•
47K Points
7 years ago
Lars von Trier
John Woo
Paul Verhoeven
Brian de Palma
Nicolas Winding Refn
Gaspar Noé
1
seventhar7
795 Messages
•
29.7K Points
7 years ago
Then between Tarantino and Scorsese, I would choose Tarantino.
I mean, Scorsese also has a certain amount of violence and bloody dose but not at the bloodthirsty level as Tarantino.
Inglourious Basterds
Django Unchained
The Hateful Eight
Pulp Fiction
Kill Bill
Reservoir Dogs
All of them had this bloodthirsty level... this is he style.
If you a good bloodthirsty scene you will definitely appreciate Tarantino movies.
But yeah, Scorsese and his certain amount of violence it's very good. The style of violence of the both is a little different, for me:
Scorsese is more a type of physical violence.
Tarantino is more a type of violent scenes with a bloody dose.
By the way, great idea.
3
MykolaYeriomin
Champion
•
4K Messages
•
244.1K Points
7 years ago
Takashi Miike
Eli Roth
David Cronenberg
Abel Ferrara
By the way, current description makes me think a lot whether you're suggesting that some directors just have a lot of violence in their movies with neutral connotation, or condemning them for using violence, which most of these people do with rather precise artistic points.
0
0