Tim Burton - I cant be the only that hates him

JCos

I cant think of one Tim Burton film that I liked. He's like an actor that is typecast. His films are all the same. Bleak, dark, gothic imagery and characters. He Ruined Charlie and The Chocolate Factory and Planet of the Apes.

There has to be someone out there that agrees with me?

mike65

If you weren't charmed and moved by Edward Scissorhands you have to be cad.

Larianne

You mean to tell me you didn't like Edward Scissorhands, Beetlejuice or Batman? :eek:

Ah yeah, his later films are all crap but not those!

Lirange

Nightmare Before Christmas is class.

Robbo

You could task him with remaking Mariah Carey's Glitter and he'd still rope in Danny Elfman to soundtrack it and slap the old corpse paint on Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter.

Lirange

JCos wrote: »

I He Ruined Charlie and The Chocolate Factory

Burton didn't ruin Charlie and the Chocolate Factory so much as Depp. As great as he was in Edward Scissorhands he was out of place as Wonka. He was not a patch on Gene Wilder but that's really the only major fault I had with the re-make.

JCos

Who cast Depp in the role and asked him to potray Willy Wonka as he did? Same old ****e from Tim Burton.

Beetlejuice was alright.

Batman and Batman Returns were awful and have been highlighted as such given how good Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are.

Sweeney Todd is the only film I have ever wallked out of a cinema on.

JCos

Robbo wrote: »

You could task him with remaking Mariah Carey's Glitter and he'd still rope in Danny Elfman to soundtrack it and slap the old corpse paint on Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter.

heh. Exactly.

MagicMarker

Sleepy Hollow anyone?

ChumpStain

I don't hate him but an intense dislike is probably a good description of my feelings towards him. Loved Beetlejuice, Edward Scissorhands and Big Fish. Ed Wood was alright but the rest I'm not mad about.

It probably doesn't help that he's a god to goth and emo kids that probably wet themselves when they saw 'A Nightmare Before Christmas' for the first time and than say he's their favourite director(despite not directing that fecking film).

Fanny Cradock

He is very hit and miss.

Karl Hungus

He's a director who's very hit and miss, and definitely seems to re-tread familiar territory far too often. But one film of his I've felt was very overlooked was Ed Wood. If you've not seen it, take a look, and then make your judgements about the guy.

The Recliner

JCos wrote: »

Batman and Batman Returns were awful and have been highlighted as such given how good Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are.

I would disagree with this, Batman and Batman Returns were of their time and were big box office money, this is not a basis to judge them on but were it not for these movies which created the Batman Franchise we might not have had the current incarnations at all

Karl Hungus wrote: »

He's a director who's very hit and miss, and definitely seems to re-tread familiar territory far too often. But one film of his I've felt was very overlooked was Ed Wood. If you've not seen it, take a look, and then make your judgements about the guy.

Absolutely love Ed Wood, it is a great movie and Depp is perfect in the part
It also helps having seen and having affection for Wood's films

gogglebok

Lirange wrote: »

Nightmare Before Christmas is class.

Burton didn't direct that, though.

Karl Hungus

gogglebok wrote: »

Burton didn't direct that, though.

No, but he did write and produce it, so if we're talking about Burton's career in general, and not just as a director then it's fair game.

Mr.Lizard

I think all of his films are mediocre except for the animated pair of Nightmare Before Xmas and Corpse Bride (the former he granted didn't direct but was heavily invovled in) which I love.

He really is a visual director. The presence of actors in his movies just get in the way. You can take stills from any of his movies and they look amazing. It's just a pity the films themselves aren't any good.

gogglebok

Karl Hungus wrote: »

He's a director who's very hit and miss, and definitely seems to re-tread familiar territory far too often. But one film of his I've felt was very overlooked was Ed Wood. If you've not seen it, take a look, and then make your judgements about the guy.

I'd second that, and add some enthusiastic hat-throwing for a good unflashy performance by Johnny Depp.

I take your point about Burton's involvement in Nightmare Before Christmas. Burton didn't actually write the screenplay, but it was based on his characters and story, and he did put his name in the title.

I'll be interested to Coraline, Henry Selick's latest. It looks more like Nightmare, and a lot less like the insipid James and the Giant Peach, which he also directed.

JCos

The strawt that broke the Camel's back for me was Big Fish. It's an awful, awful film.

I've not seen Ed Wood and to be honest I'm never likely to due to my hatred of much of his other work.

JC 2K3

I never understood the hype about Nightmare Before Christmas.

Shacklebolt

I feel hes a classic example of style over substance. All his films seem hollow and impossible to become engaged in, despite all the effort that goes into the visuals.

On the subject of Batman, Burton acknowledges that Nolans films are a much better approach than his own.

Dexterm99

Karl Hungus wrote: »

No, but he did write and produce it, so if we're talking about Burton's career in general, and not just as a director then it's fair game.

If that's the case then, here are my favourite moments from Tim Burton's career:

TRON (1982) (animator) (uncredited)
The Fox and the Hound (1981) (animator) (uncredited)
The Muppet Movie (1979) (voice) (uncredited) (unconfirmed)

Galvasean

Beetlejuice, Edward Scissorshands and Nightmare Before Christmas (I'll let him have this one) were all very good in my book.
Although some of his more recent stuff (Planet of the Apes, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) has been quite poor while Sweeney Todd and Corpse Bride were a bit too 'beaten-trail'.

However I havent seen Ed Wood. I really must.

edit: About his Batman films I taught the first was good, up until

the Batplane

, although not a patch on the Nolan films. I really don't get Batman Returns' iconic status though. I taught it was over-stylistic and campy.

BlitzKrieg

Larianne wrote: »

You mean to tell me you didn't like Edward Scissorhands, Beetlejuice or Batman? :eek:

Ah yeah, his later films are all crap but not those!

Interesting little factoid (+theory) about Burton's Director Career in that quote.

Burton before Batman Returns used different editors for each of his films

Batman Returns and after:

he worked with this man:

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0495605/

Every Burton directed feature. Including animation. They have all been edited by Chris Lebenzon.

Now personal theory and opinion:

Up until Batman Returns Tim Burton, young, brilliant, dynamic a bit strange his films can be at best described as difficult to sell. Studios dont like films that are difficult to sell, they want films that might look unusual or weird but the story and the adventure goes down smooth and easy.

Enter Chris, he's put with Burton for Batman Begins, he has a history of high octane action films. He takes Burtons quirkyness and chops it up and puts it in a form thats easy for the massess to consume.

It continues, Burton is happy, the studio are happy, the films look unique but under that paintjob they are processed entertainment fluff. Burton has become a glorified action movie director.

Now its come to a point that his films are predictable. Not because they are all *gothy and dark* but because they are all edited and paced the same. The extended title sequence, set piece the 20 minute expose, another set piece etc etc etc.

The editing is predictable and blatantly processed.

Watch Charlie and Chocolate Factory and Sweeney Todd back to back, they are almost identical in how they are edited.

And its a process that has grown over the years and is now sadly like being slapped by a wet fish.

Burton needs to bring in fresh blood, new editor being the foremost (more so yes then the overuse of Johnny Depp)


There is potential for diversity if you compare his earlier films, with the exception of Danny Elfman they consisted of different crews and each one does indeed feel quite different to the other. Most obviously in the editing aspect.

So to recap Tim boot Chris, then Danny, then Johnny and yer Wife, new crew for a new you!

Tusky

I really like a lot of his films but his constant casting of Johnny Depp (who I also like) has gotten really really stale. Cast someone else!

mike65

BlitzKrieg, take a bow! The editor is the unsung hero (or villain) of cinema, thier skills shape a movie more than any other individual. They can take raw footage and create marvels or the mediocre. Most directors tend to stick with one they like though so we'll have to presume Burton is happy with the "shape" Lebenzon brings to his work, Clearly Tony Scott is happy as well.

BlitzKrieg

Most directors tend to stick with one they like though so we'll have to presume Burton is happy with the "shape" Lebenzon brings to his work, Clearly Tony Scott is happy as well.

Audience dont seem to be though seeing as the reception to Burtons films has been declining steadily since his introduction.

Though Big Fish seems to have dropped from the minds of everyone as it was a bit of an oddity among all his other films. I remember quite enjoying it myself.

Aidric

I liked Big Fish.

Larianne

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Interesting little factoid (+theory) about Burton's Director Career in that quote.

Burton before Batman Returns used different editors for each of his films

Batman Returns and after:

he worked with this man:

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0495605/

Every Burton directed feature. Including animation. They have all been edited by Chris Lebenzon.

Now personal theory and opinion:

Up until Batman Returns Tim Burton, young, brilliant, dynamic a bit strange his films can be at best described as difficult to sell. Studios dont like films that are difficult to sell, they want films that might look unusual or weird but the story and the adventure goes down smooth and easy.

Enter Chris, he's put with Burton for Batman Begins, he has a history of high octane action films. He takes Burtons quirkyness and chops it up and puts it in a form thats easy for the massess to consume.

It continues, Burton is happy, the studio are happy, the films look unique but under that paintjob they are processed entertainment fluff. Burton has become a glorified action movie director.

Now its come to a point that his films are predictable. Not because they are all *gothy and dark* but because they are all edited and paced the same. The extended title sequence, set piece the 20 minute expose, another set piece etc etc etc.

The editing is predictable and blatantly processed.

Watch Charlie and Chocolate Factory and Sweeney Todd back to back, they are almost identical in how they are edited.

And its a process that has grown over the years and is now sadly like being slapped by a wet fish.

Burton needs to bring in fresh blood, new editor being the foremost (more so yes then the overuse of Johnny Depp)


There is potential for diversity if you compare his earlier films, with the exception of Danny Elfman they consisted of different crews and each one does indeed feel quite different to the other. Most obviously in the editing aspect.

So to recap Tim boot Chris, then Danny, then Johnny and yer Wife, new crew for a new you!

Ha, interesting! But no no to booting out Danny Elfman, leave him alone! I say bring back Michael Keaton in some mad film!

BopNiblets

I liked his first two Batmans, Big Fish and Sleepy Hollow (but probably only because it had Ray "Darth Maul" Park in it. )
Not really into his more gothy stuff.

lukin

I agree with the thread starter, I absolutely HATE Tim Burton. He's made the same film over and over throughout his career.

corbo87

I have to say i adore evry single movie that Sirr Tim Burton made. I am very big fan of his movies, Batman, The nighmare before Christmas, Sweeny Todd, there is not one of his movies i did not enjoy and the fact that there so dark is what attracts me to them. I am not gothic one bit but i love his themes. Cant wait for alice in wounderland!!! wahoo!

Brimmy

Burton really is horribly overrated and just terrible all around.

I didn't really like Beetlejuice but it was commendable for what it was. Never liked the Batman films as he tried blending serious dark tones with campyness (The f*cking Penguin!).

Although that being said I do remember my young self loving Pee-wee's Big Adventure and Mars Attacks when it came out although I haven't seen it since and can't remember anything from it beyond Jack Nicholson, a trailer park and what the aliens looked like so that might not be a good thing..

JCos wrote: »

I've not seen Ed Wood and to be honest I'm never likely to due to my hatred of much of his other work.

You shouldn't tar this with the same brush. It's nothing like his other films and is actually brilliant. Especially if you have an interest in B-movies.

Mr. Frost

MagicMarker wrote: »

Sleepy Hollow anyone?

Great movie!

Karl Hungus

lukin wrote: »

He's made the same film over and over throughout his career.

That's absolute rubbish. You can't say that Ed Wood was anything like Mars Attacks, or that Batman was anything like Big Fish, or that Edward Scissorhands was like Planet of the Apes. He's made some absolute stinkers alright, and I absolutely hated his Wonka remake with a passion, but there seems some very undeserved bashing going on here.

tony1kenobi

Karl Hungus wrote: »

No, but he did write and produce it, so if we're talking about Burton's career in general, and not just as a director then it's fair game.

In that case he was awfully good in Singles.

Mr.Lizard

tony1kenobi wrote: »

In that case he was awfully good in Singles.

He was also dead good in Hoffa.

Ann22

I liked 'Beetlejuice', 'The Corpse Bride' and 'Sweeney Todd'. (I think Michael Keaton was the best Batman... I really like him as an actor, 'Multiplicity' was hilarious:D.)

Birdie086

Larianne wrote: »

You mean to tell me you didn't like Edward Scissorhands, Beetlejuice or Batman? :eek:

Ah yeah, his later films are all crap but not those!

+1

Beetlejuice class especially

JasonBourne 2.0

Have to agree with the op. Burton must be the most over rated director of all time. Batman is so boring compared to Nolan's interpretation imo and i can never understand how people buy into the nightmare before christmas, rubbish film . No originality from him at all. Just the Same dark, Gothic style overlapping on all his so called "masterpieces" although i must admit Edward Scissorhands was decent, most likely because Depp was the leading man.

eagle eye

Tim Burton directed Beetlejuice, Batman, Edward Scissorhands, Batman Returns and Ed Wood.

These are five excellent films.

I rest my case.

I also like Planet of the Apes

Christopher Nolan is one of the most gifted directors ever, to compare a really good directors movies to his is just unfair.

Brimmy

eagle eye wrote: »

Tim Burton directed Beetlejuice, Batman, Edward Scissorhands, Batman Returns and Ed Wood.

These are five excellent films.

I rest my case.

I also like Planet of the Apes

Christopher Nolan is one of the most gifted directors ever, to compare a really good directors movies to his is just unfair.

You just stripped yourself of the right to an opinion

Nah seriously though you say they're five excellent films and then only say he is a really good director? If he has made five excellent films surely you must think he's an excellent director himself?

Personally I'd only rank Edward Scissorhands and Ed Wood as excellent. Bettlejuice as good and the two Batmans as average.

I personally don't like Burton but I think it's a matter of acquired taste. Some do and some don't. Those that tend to do usually tend to be young adolescents with a taste for the (light) gothic as a sweeping stereotype :pac:

Although the other week at UCD Alan Rickman said he'd do absolutely anything that Burton asked him to do for as long as he lived so he must be doing something right for the actors.

BlitzKrieg

but I think it's a matter of acquired taste. Some do and some don't.

I find that interesting because you will find alot of people who will praise his earlier work but would easily criticize his current output.


This thread alone has people naming off beatlejuice and Edward Scissorhands as favourites while cursing Sweeney Todd and Planet of the Apes in the same sentance.

That doesnt sound like someone that people have a taste for, it sounds more like someone who has developed bad habits or lost that extra spice that makes them outstanding. Personnally I stand by my theory that he is slipped into some comfortable role and crew and is slowly churning out factory products. he needs a good shake up.

*Simone*

Comparing Burton's Batmans to Nolans' just doesnt make sense - they're not meant to be any way alike; Nolan went for a complete reinvention of the character, but IMO both takes are excellent in their own right.

Burton is certainly an aquired taste. His love affair with Depp is a little unnerving, but I'll let him have it because the pair of them work very well together.

Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, Beetlejuice, and Batman Returns are all classics, but I think he got it very, very wrong with Sweeney Todd & Charlie and the Choc. Factory. Infact, Sweeney Todd was embarrassing IMO!

I find it rather amusing that his films at face value look child-friendly to unsuspecting viewers, but infact they'd scare the sh*te out of any kid! Especially this new one Coraline looks rather twisted, but if the trailer & poster are anything to go by it looks marketed for kids

JasonBourne 2.0

Comparing Burton's Batmans to Nolans' just doesnt make sense - they're not meant to be any way alike; Nolan went for a complete reinvention of the character, but IMO both takes are excellent in their own right.

Would have to disagree, the films are based on that of the comic book character. Both directors had the chance to make a great interpretation however Nolan's version outdone Burton's by miles. How does making a comparison based on the previous evidence not make sense?

Galvasean

*Simone* wrote: »

I find it rather amusing that his films at face value look child-friendly to unsuspecting viewers, but infact they'd scare the sh*te out of any kid! Especially this new one Coraline looks rather twisted, but if the trailer & poster are anything to go by it looks marketed for kids

Woah hang on there. Coraline was written and directed by Henry Selick. As far as I'm aware Burton has nothing to do with it.

The Recliner

JasonBourne 2.0 wrote: »

Would have to disagree, the films are based on that of the comic book character. Both directors had the chance to make a great interpretation however Nolan's version outdone Burton's by miles. How does making a comparison based on the previous evidence not make sense?

I don't think you can compare the two

Nolan's Batman is based on Miller's Batman Year one, that came out in 1988 when Burton was already making his version of Batman so you aren't comparing like with like

If anything you could say that Burton showed more imagination as Nolan was working from pre-existing material

For what it is worth I like both versions, they each have their own take on things. The impact of Burton's version at the time it was released was huge and I think it is always easier to follow something and do a remake than blaze the trail. Saying that Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are excellent

JasonBourne 2.0

I don't think you can compare the two

Nolan's Batman is based on Miller's Batman Year one, that came out in 1988 when Burton was already making his version of Batman so you aren't comparing like with like

If anything you could say that Burton showed more imagination as Nolan was working from pre-existing material

For what it is worth I like both versions, they each have their own take on things. The impact of Burton's version at the time it was released was huge and I think it is always easier to follow something and do a remake than blaze the trail. Saying that Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are excellent

Yes i understand what you are saying in that Nolan had later material that Burton didnt to work from. however in essence the same characters are used in both the directors interpretations (e.g. Nolan's "Joker" vs Burton's and likewise harvey dent) with Nolan's touch being far superior in relation to the characters and the cultural context. The reviews speak for themselves really.

Rotten tomatoes: Batman(69%)- Burton
Batman begins(84%)- Nolan
Dark Knight(90%)- Nolan

BlitzKrieg

cultural context?

Burton is certainly an aquired taste. His love affair with Depp is a little unnerving, but I'll let him have it because the pair of them work very well together.

Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, Beetlejuice, and Batman Returns are all classics, but I think he got it very, very wrong with Sweeney Todd & Charlie and the Choc. Factory. Infact, Sweeney Todd was embarrassing IMO!

Again with the acquired tastes comments? In your own post you name Burtons earlier work as good and his later work as bad. That does not describe a director who only appeals to those of a certain taste it describes a director who has lost his way.

If you had named films throughout his career that are not to your liking then yes he is an acquired taste but you named all but rwo of his early feature directed films (you left out Batman and pee wee's big adventure) as classics and then slammed the last two films he made.

JasonBourne 2.0

Cultural context = the world in which the characters live (e.g. Gotham city)

Nolan portrayed a much better cultural context in his interpretation than Burton imo

*Simone*

Ok first, Tim Burton did have something to do with the film Coraline - he designed the characters and the sets (apparently) :P

2nd, I'd agree that you're not comparing like with like when trying to compare Burton's Batman to Nolans. Nolan took it in a completely new direction, playing down the whole comic/stylised aspect to the characters. Im not in ANY WAY dissing Nolan's latest installments - they are both truly excellent. I just don't think you can compare them to Burtons.

Also, even though his recent stuff is a bit hit 'n miss, I would still call him an acquired taste as his style doesn't really change. Just because he's made a few stinkers doesnt mean you either love him or hate him, imo. Everyone makes mistakes!

JasonBourne 2.0

I just don't think you can compare them to Burtons.

Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree:rolleyes: