Poll
Question:
Who's the best bad director?
Option 1: Ed Wood
votes: 3
Option 2: Uwe Boll
votes: 1
Option 3: Rick Sloane
votes: 2
Option 4: Roger Corman
votes: 10
Option 5: Charles Band
votes: 1
Option 6: Polonia Bros.
votes: 1
Option 7: Fred Olen Ray
votes: 0
Option 8: Claudio Fragrasso
votes: 0
Option 9: Joe D'Amato
votes: 1
Option 10: John De Bello
votes: 0
Option 11: Lucio Fulci
votes: 1
Option 12: Herschell Gordon Lewis
votes: 0
Option 13: David DeCoteau
votes: 0
Option 14: Ted Nicolaou
votes: 0
Option 15: Stuart Gordon
votes: 1
Option 16: Phil Tucker
votes: 0
Option 17: Fred F. Sears
votes: 0
Option 18: Harold P. Warren
votes: 0
Option 19: Nicholas Webster
votes: 0
Option 20: Irvin Yeaworth
votes: 0
Option 21: Jim Wynorski
votes: 1
Option 22: Larry Buchanan
votes: 1
It's time to pick the best of the worst. Who among these people best deserves the recognition as the best worst director? Which one is really the king of crap? You decide.
Giallo? :question:
I'm confused.
There, it's fixed.
Oh, thanks! :smile:
How is Michael Bay not on this list?
Quote from: BakuryuuTyranno on December 23, 2009, 03:12:15 PM
How is Michael Bay not on this list?
Michael Bay is not a b-movie or z-movie director. That's why.
Where's Herschell Gordon Lewis??
Quote from: retrorussell on December 23, 2009, 03:24:03 PM
Where's Herschell Gordon Lewis??
Sorry about that. He's on the list now.
It's kind of hard to vote on this, as it depends on what you mean by best. I assumed best in a legitimate directing ability sense. In that case, Roger Corman, who is a legitimately good director. For example, Masque of the Red Death, X, or Little Shop of Horrors. Stuart Gordon is also up there.
If it's favourite director, then it's Ed Wood. If it's best directing skills, Roger Corman, in my opinion.
Tough choice. I went with Charles Band. Though he's got a pretty spotty record, Full Moon in all its various incarnations has turned out quite a lot of schlock that I love. Jim Wynorski is another favorite, but I think Band has the quantity advantage.
Quote from: Jim H on December 23, 2009, 04:57:49 PM
It's kind of hard to vote on this, as it depends on what you mean by best. I assumed best in a legitimate directing ability sense. In that case, Roger Corman, who is a legitimately good director. For example, Masque of the Red Death, X, or Little Shop of Horrors. Stuart Gordon is also up there.
It's all about the directing/storytelling sense.
No Andy Milligan?! No Jerry Warren?!!
Anyways, Ed Wood's bad movies were always entertaining at least. But the man who I feel has the biggest link to the most massive number of true bad and B-movies, albeit many of them surprisingly watchable and entertaining, is none other than Roger Corman.
Uwe Boll on the list but no William Castle??? :wink:
I have to agree with JaseSF on this one, Corman has made some of my favorite genre pictures of all time, most of them with Vincent Price. Stuart Gordon is another one whose films I really enjoy.
how can you not love the cheeseyness of Roger Corman :buggedout:
Larry Buchanan's name should be included in this poll too.
I voted Corman. After all he is the "king of b's"
:buggedout: Stuart Gordon by a longshot!
Quote from: diamondwaspvenom on December 23, 2009, 03:21:56 PM
Quote from: BakuryuuTyranno on December 23, 2009, 03:12:15 PM
How is Michael Bay not on this list?
Michael Bay is not a b-movie or z-movie director. That's why.
so how does this explain Uwe Boll?
Quote from: Skull on December 30, 2009, 02:32:11 PM
Quote from: diamondwaspvenom on December 23, 2009, 03:21:56 PM
Quote from: BakuryuuTyranno on December 23, 2009, 03:12:15 PM
How is Michael Bay not on this list?
Michael Bay is not a b-movie or z-movie director. That's why.
so how does this explain Uwe Boll?
It's because Uwe Boll's films, although big budgeted, have that b-movie vibe to them whereas Bay's films are just mainstream trash.
Quote from: diamondwaspvenom on December 30, 2009, 04:46:05 PM
Quote from: Skull on December 30, 2009, 02:32:11 PM
Quote from: diamondwaspvenom on December 23, 2009, 03:21:56 PM
Quote from: BakuryuuTyranno on December 23, 2009, 03:12:15 PM
How is Michael Bay not on this list?
Michael Bay is not a b-movie or z-movie director. That's why.
so how does this explain Uwe Boll?
It's because Uwe Boll's films, although big budgeted, have that b-movie vibe to them whereas Bay's films are just mainstream trash.
Hmmmmmmmm... and I thought Uwe Boll cannot direct himself out of a paper bag... :)
Quote from: Skull on December 30, 2009, 05:27:38 PM
Quote from: diamondwaspvenom on December 30, 2009, 04:46:05 PM
Quote from: Skull on December 30, 2009, 02:32:11 PM
Quote from: diamondwaspvenom on December 23, 2009, 03:21:56 PM
Quote from: BakuryuuTyranno on December 23, 2009, 03:12:15 PM
How is Michael Bay not on this list?
Michael Bay is not a b-movie or z-movie director. That's why.
so how does this explain Uwe Boll?
It's because Uwe Boll's films, although big budgeted, have that b-movie vibe to them whereas Bay's films are just mainstream trash.
Hmmmmmmmm... and I thought Uwe Boll cannot direct himself out of a paper bag... :)
Well, technically he can't. But then again a lot of bad filmmakers are the same.
I had to say Joe D'Amato the mystical Italian, that no one is sure how much dreck he's ever worked on because no one's sure of all his pseudonyms. Some pseudonyms of his others used, and some were monikers for himself and another director or producer!
Where Roger Corman, who did the best with what he had (be it a sea monster which looked like Homer Simpson in a trash bag with ping-pong ball eyes) and had original ideas, D'Amato produced knock-off after knock-off; porn, and was guilty of releasing movies as squeals to larger budget movies that may have been relatively successful!
I feel really awful about saying all that.
Corman, for sure. His movies are cheap and cheesy, but they're entertaining, and pretty well made considering how little time and money goes into some of them. But then, Corman has always been about bang for the buck.