Current Events > Is james cameron the most bankable director in hollywood?

(+) Yeah! (+)

yeah i mean where the most people would see his films just cause he was directing it....

Nolan fosho at this point.

lilORANG posted...

Nolan fosho at this point.

what was nolan's last movie? Don't remember. Don't really like his movies

Not the most, but Michael Bay is one of them

GranTurismo posted...

what was nolan's last movie? Don't remember. Don't really like his movies

Oppenheimer. Which would have been a bomb under any other director. 3+ hour historical biopic. Yuck.

Cohen Brothers, just because of their long string of high quality movies over the years.

They may not make those multi-billion dollar earning films, but they've had a bunch of huge cultural hits on generally smaller budgets and few big losers.

cameron and nolan probably.

Torgo posted...

Cohen Brothers, just because of their long string of high quality movies over the years.

They may not make those multi-billion dollar earning films, but they've had a bunch of huge cultural hits on generally smaller budgets and few big losers.

yeah i liked one of their movies. Fargo , it was really kinda violent. The rest are meh haven't seen many though

Ricemills posted...

Not the most, but Michael Bay is one of them

is it bay? his most recent movies have not done so well

Tarantino right? His movie releases since Inglourious Basterds have felt like cultural events

Putting Nolan's name on a film will add more to the box office than Cameron's.

It's Christopher Nolan more than anyone else. He has a 3 hour talky biopic closing in on a billion dollars right now.

Quentin Tarantino and James Cameron would be the only major contenders. No one else comes close. Even Steven Spielberg no longer drives people to the threater.

Coen Brothers? Nope. They never have actually. Film geeks love them, but only a small handful of their movies made decent money. They peaked in that stretch of No Country for Old Men, Burn After Reading, and True Grit.

Maybe Scorcese? Since 2000 he has several movies make a few hundred million worldwide based on his name (oh, and Leo). We will see how the 3.5 hour Killers of the Flower Moon does and if he can still drive people to the theater.

ai123 posted...

Putting Nolan's name on a film will add more to the box office than Cameron's.

i don't really like nolan's movies. What are his major hits? the bale batman movies? i didn't really like those. The ones with kilmer and keaton were better

Nolan easily. People love his style of filmmaking.

GranTurismo posted...

yeah i liked one of their movies. Fargo , it was really kinda violent. The rest are meh haven't seen many though

"The rest are meh" tells me everything I need to know about your opinion on them rofl

And the answer is yes. Nolan is ok, Oppenheimer wouldn't have been nearly as successful without Barbie, and nothing Nolan has made will compare to Cameron's back to back to back to back behemoths

GranTurismo posted...

i don't really like nolan's movies. What are his major hits? the bale batman movies? i didn't really like those. The ones with kilmer and keaton were better

Other than the Batman movies, Inception, Interstellar, Dunkirk and Oppenheimer all made a ton of money. Even Tenet made a lot considering it was September of 2020. None of these are franchise flicks yet they perform like them based on his name. Whether you like him or not, he is objectively the most bankable director today.

bsp77 posted...

Other than the Batman movies, Inception, Interstellar, Dunkirk and Oppenheimer all made a ton of money. Even Tenet made a lot considering it was September of 2020. None of these are franchise flicks yet they perform like them based on his name. Whether you like him or not, he is objectively the most bankable director today.

Other than Cameron.

GranTurismo posted...

i don't really like nolan's movies. What are his major hits? the bale batman movies? i didn't really like those. The ones with kilmer and keaton were better

Inception, Interstellar, Dunkirk.

The Prestige isn't one of his 'big' films, but it is a fantastic movie.

Point is that Nolan can make box office out of most drama genres (sci fi, psychological thriller, war film, neo noir, superhero, biopic). Cameron does 'blockbusters'.

ai123 posted...

Inception, Interstellar, Dunkirk.

The Prestige isn't one of his 'big' films, but it is a fantastic movie.

Point is that Nolan can make box office out of most drama genres (sci fi, psychological thriller, war film, neo noir, superhero, biopic). Cameron does 'blockbusters'.

The only one of those that wasn't a blockbuster was Oppenheimer which is only so successful because of Barbie.

RuneterranSnap posted...

The only one of those that wasn't a blockbuster was Oppenheimer which is only so successful because of Barbie.

why is oppenheimer much more successful cause barbie came out? have heard others say this

RuneterranSnap posted...

Other than Cameron.

I am actually thinking about it. Hard to know for sure since he has only done Avatar in the 2000s. And it is absolutely astounding how fantastic the legs on Way of Water were. But it is a sample size of 2 (post Titanic) vs a sample size of 5 (post Dark Knight). Hollywood has been so different since the late 2000s that looking earlier wouldn't work anymore anyway.

So I am not saying you are wrong, I am saying I don't have the data to tell. I could call it a statistical tie.

GranTurismo posted...

why is oppenheimer much more successful cause barbie came out? have heard others say this

Barbenheimer. Barbie was a smash success and since Oppenheimer was connected with it in the public consciousness it got pulled up.

Don't get me wrong it would've done ok on its own, just nowhere near its current success.

bsp77 posted...

I am actually thinking about it. Hard to know for sure since he has only done Avatar in the 2000s. And it is absolutely astounding how fantastic the legs on Way of Water were. But it is a sample size of 2 (post Titanic) vs a sample size of 5 (post Dark Knight). Hollywood has been so different since the late 2000s that looking earlier wouldn't work anymore anyway.

So I am not saying you are wrong, I am saying I don't have the data to tell. I could call it a statistical tie.

you liked way of water? I didn't . And what do you mean exactly that hollywood is so different from the 2000s,in what way?

RuneterranSnap posted...

The only one of those that wasn't a blockbuster was Oppenheimer which is only so successful because of Barbie.

This makes you sound like you don't know what you are talking about though. Yes, both movies benefited from the cultural phenomenon, but that doesn't explan the grosses continuing for so long.

RuneterranSnap posted...

Barbenheimer. Barbie was a smash success and since Oppenheimer was connected with it in the public consciousness it got pulled up.

Don't get me wrong it would've done ok on its own, just nowhere near its current success.

how was it connected so closely with barbie? They didn't have a marketing thing together, weren't made by the same studio? Just have not heard much about this

bsp77 posted...

I am actually thinking about it. Hard to know for sure since he has only done Avatar in the 2000s. And it is absolutely astounding how fantastic the legs on Way of Water were. But it is a sample size of 2 (post Titanic) vs a sample size of 5 (post Dark Knight). Hollywood has been so different since the late 2000s that looking earlier wouldn't work anymore anyway.

So I am not saying you are wrong, I am saying I don't have the data to tell. I could call it a statistical tie.

You might be right that he wouldn't have the same success, but the question is who is bankable, and the reality is no director is more bankable than the director who, after making two of the biggest film franchises in history already, made a movie that held the highest grossing mark for over a decade until the director came back with a tech everyone thought was a joke, used it right for once, and created a new highest grossing picture.

you guys like the avatar movies? cameron has done better

GranTurismo posted...

you guys like the avatar movies? cameron has done better

They were both significant achievements no other movie matched regarding the use of 3d and are objectively major earners

their stories were terrible though.

GranTurismo posted...

their stories were terrible though.

That's your opinion and also irrelevant to the discussion

GranTurismo posted...

you liked way of water? I didn't . And what do you mean exactly that hollywood is so different from the 2000s,in what way?

I did like it, but I didn't say that anyway. I only said it had great legs.

Hollywood started focusing on blockbusters in the 1980s because of successes like Jaws and Star Wars, but most blockbusters failed to turn into long term franchises because the sequels sucked and had diminishing returns (Star Wars was an exception). Ultimately, the 80s mostly sucked for films in general after the awesome 70s. Not saying I didn't like any movies in the 80s, as there are tons I do, but the overall trends sucked.

The 90s then had an influx of great independent films that slowly took over the mainstream and this trend continued through the mid 2000s (although the indies were now studio flicks). At the same time in the 2000s, successful franchises began to start up which did not have shitty sequels and diminishing returns. Think Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, X Men, Spider-Man, Pirates of the Caribbean.

Then 2008 happened. Iron Man came out and started the MCU, and The Dark Knight came out, and proved that superhero movies could be proper films with prestigious filmmakers. Also, both happened to be superhero flicks.

Since then, franchises (especially superhero movies) have taken over more and more. This is coupled with more streaming, better home TVs and audio, and higher theater prices. So many people only go to movies for events now.

RuneterranSnap posted...

They were both significant achievements no other movie matched regarding the use of 3d and are objectively major earners

I agree. I just can't make a definitive statement on 2 movies from the same franchise.

And let me be clear, I am somewhat of a Cameron fanboy when looking back at everything he did.

But my favorite directors still working today would be Tarantino, Scorcese, Nolan, Villenueve, and Spielberg. I also have some strong feelings for Bong Joon-Ho, Yorgos Lanthimos, PTA, and Alexander Payne, but they just don't feel as "big" to me, so maybe I am being biased. I want to love Guillermo del Toro more, but he is so uneven.

Edit: and the Coen Brothers! Damn, forgot them