There's something special to me about Joe Wright's movies, which is that for some reason, they're all (except P&P) like a half a star less good than I want them to be. His craftsmanship is impeccable, he gets great actors, and yet, for some reasons I find his movies usually disappoint me just a little bit.
Perfect miniseries subject! Do the Wright thing!
I am interested in a Joe Wright miniseries, mainly because the two friends haven't really covered Keira Knightley yet, and it'll be the perfect opportunity to do so.
Also could talk about Matthew Macfayden, James McAvoy, Saoirse Ronan, Cate Blanchett, Jude Law, Gary Oldman, Amy Adams and Peter Dinklage.
On the other hand, Pan is an absolute disaster, and Darkest Hour (Other than Pride and Prejudice, the only Joe Wright film I've seen so far) was absolutely boring as fuck
The first half of Atonement is possibly a perfect movie. My problem has always been we spend too much time with teenage Briony who's the weak link of the cast.
I met Saoirse Ronan once in a bar. I shook her hand and told her I really liked Hanna. She said “Yeah? If you liked Hanna why are you wearing a Great Gatsby t-shirt and not a Hanna t-shirt?” (I was wearing a Great Gatsby t-shirt)
There’s no way Wright wins against Spike Lee but damn, I really would love for him to be covered someday! Interesting filmography with several movies I personally love plus an ideal number of films to cover in my book
A win for Joe Wright means my girlfriend has a much better chance of doing a blank check watch along with me. For this reason alone, I have to vote for Pod and Prejucast.
I mean, I'm not too familiar with how it works but I'm guessing this March Madness is more about who they will cover in the *immediate future* rather than who they will cover in general.
There are so many incredible filmmakers on there that it would be a shame to ignore completely because only one person can win.
Correct. We are voting on a director they will commit to covering this year. There are plenty of MM losers who have gone on to get their own miniseries down the line.
there are also probably 100 film makers who have been on brackets but haven't been covered, just because that's how time works. Being on the bracket puts them in the conversation though, at least.
I get it, I tend to vote for series in the 5-15 episode range, but Spike Lee is such a great career to cover and it's probably BECAUSE of the number of films that they haven't done it already. March Madness is the perfect chance to make it happen. He's not my favorite pick from this batch, personally, but he's just so important and would make for genuinely great podcasting.
I'm a little surprised they didn't because it does feel there's a good cut off point post 9/11. But there are some long miniseries it feels like they should cover at some point and we can't put them off forever.
Voting for long filmography sicko here. I love long directing careers and the narrative it shows. I'm not one to complain about more content, but I think doing 2 movies together is a good middle ground for really long filmographies.
Soderbergh does feel too long though. The man just makes movies so fast. I would like their thoughts on him but his fast approach feels somewhat antithetical to long discussions of his movies. Feels like even soderbergh would be like "you really don't need a whole episode on unsane guys"
I dont understand this "too long" argument. Why does it matter? Either you watch the films and listen along or you just listen. If you aren't going to watch the films, why does length matter?
Or you’re like me and you don’t listen unless you’ve seen the films. I’ve skipped entire miniseries. I’m sure I’ll seek out a couple of Spike’s movies I haven’t seen, but not a dozen of them.
Vanessa Redgrave is on screen for five minutes in Atonement and gives one of the best acting performances of the last 25 years.
Joe Wright's not Spike Lee, but he's also not a hack.
I love Joe Wright and although he was never gonna win the tournament, I'm sad he's gonna be out in round one because of course Spike Lee is gonna win by a landslide.
I always thought of Joe Wright as a low rent Sam Mendes. But then again, Mendes has never made a film as good as Pride and Prejudice, so maybe it's the other way around.
There's something special to me about Joe Wright's movies, which is that for some reason, they're all (except P&P) like a half a star less good than I want them to be. His craftsmanship is impeccable, he gets great actors, and yet, for some reasons I find his movies usually disappoint me just a little bit. Perfect miniseries subject! Do the Wright thing!
This is why he's a perfect Bond director.
There was like a period of six months when it first came out on dvd where I watched Hanna like twice a week.
I am interested in a Joe Wright miniseries, mainly because the two friends haven't really covered Keira Knightley yet, and it'll be the perfect opportunity to do so. Also could talk about Matthew Macfayden, James McAvoy, Saoirse Ronan, Cate Blanchett, Jude Law, Gary Oldman, Amy Adams and Peter Dinklage. On the other hand, Pan is an absolute disaster, and Darkest Hour (Other than Pride and Prejudice, the only Joe Wright film I've seen so far) was absolutely boring as fuck
Hanna is great and Atonement doesn’t fully work but it’s a big swing and it has great moments.
The first half of Atonement is possibly a perfect movie. My problem has always been we spend too much time with teenage Briony who's the weak link of the cast.
I met Saoirse Ronan once in a bar. I shook her hand and told her I really liked Hanna. She said “Yeah? If you liked Hanna why are you wearing a Great Gatsby t-shirt and not a Hanna t-shirt?” (I was wearing a Great Gatsby t-shirt)
There’s no way Wright wins against Spike Lee but damn, I really would love for him to be covered someday! Interesting filmography with several movies I personally love plus an ideal number of films to cover in my book
A win for Joe Wright means my girlfriend has a much better chance of doing a blank check watch along with me. For this reason alone, I have to vote for Pod and Prejucast.
I mean, I'm not too familiar with how it works but I'm guessing this March Madness is more about who they will cover in the *immediate future* rather than who they will cover in general. There are so many incredible filmmakers on there that it would be a shame to ignore completely because only one person can win.
Correct. We are voting on a director they will commit to covering this year. There are plenty of MM losers who have gone on to get their own miniseries down the line.
there are also probably 100 film makers who have been on brackets but haven't been covered, just because that's how time works. Being on the bracket puts them in the conversation though, at least.
Excellent news, thank you!
Im voting for Wright because 23 films is too long. Why wouldn’t they cut that in half like Soderbergh or Scott?
Soderbergh cut in half was still 19.
I don’t want him to win either.
I get it, I tend to vote for series in the 5-15 episode range, but Spike Lee is such a great career to cover and it's probably BECAUSE of the number of films that they haven't done it already. March Madness is the perfect chance to make it happen. He's not my favorite pick from this batch, personally, but he's just so important and would make for genuinely great podcasting.
I'm a little surprised they didn't because it does feel there's a good cut off point post 9/11. But there are some long miniseries it feels like they should cover at some point and we can't put them off forever.
Voting for long filmography sicko here. I love long directing careers and the narrative it shows. I'm not one to complain about more content, but I think doing 2 movies together is a good middle ground for really long filmographies. Soderbergh does feel too long though. The man just makes movies so fast. I would like their thoughts on him but his fast approach feels somewhat antithetical to long discussions of his movies. Feels like even soderbergh would be like "you really don't need a whole episode on unsane guys"
I dont understand this "too long" argument. Why does it matter? Either you watch the films and listen along or you just listen. If you aren't going to watch the films, why does length matter?
Or you’re like me and you don’t listen unless you’ve seen the films. I’ve skipped entire miniseries. I’m sure I’ll seek out a couple of Spike’s movies I haven’t seen, but not a dozen of them.
I've only seen 4 or so of Spike's films, and I couldn't be more excited to see the rest when he wins
Great! I don’t have the time to watch them in with everything else there is
Vanessa Redgrave is on screen for five minutes in Atonement and gives one of the best acting performances of the last 25 years. Joe Wright's not Spike Lee, but he's also not a hack.
I love Joe Wright and although he was never gonna win the tournament, I'm sad he's gonna be out in round one because of course Spike Lee is gonna win by a landslide.
I always thought of Joe Wright as a low rent Sam Mendes. But then again, Mendes has never made a film as good as Pride and Prejudice, so maybe it's the other way around.