Example collocations logo

Directors in sentence

1215 examples of Directors in a sentence

I find it cute, cute how so many fledgling directors make movies where they combine other people's creative ideas in order to make their own one-joke premise of a movie.
If all that these directors want is a foot inside Hollywood's door then they're doing the right thing and they should keep it up because combining plot outlines is how Hollywood makes films.
Usually, I think people are too hard on directors and actors.
You are not directors, you are ILLITERATE!!!
There are some extremely talented black directors Spike Lee,Carl Franklin,Billy Dukes,Denzel and a host of others who bring well deserved credit to the film industry .
The music background i must say did not fit AT ALLLLL with the story and it's amazing how you can find these directors who have absolutely no lives in creating a well and balanced film.
Here it is not one, not two but all SIX-love stories, an ensemble cast of top stars of bollywood, plus all stories in the genre of your favorite top directors Johar, Bhansali, Chopra et al.
My opinion, by the way, is not just some knee-jerk reaction--I have seen most of Fellini's films and have also seen many films by the world's most famous directors.
With this in mind, I feel that the most overrated and annoying directors can be both Godard and Fellini.
So, since only a small clique actually watches their films and they are already predisposed to seeing the directors as geniuses, it's not surprising that their films are so often praised--it's like a cult!
The storytelling is sloppy and the directors' intent on "humanizing" a group of people who they regard as "overlooked" and "invisible" comes across as unconsciously and irritatingly condescending.
The problem here here lies in the perspective of the directors instead of the truck drivers.
The directors bring their own naive assumptions about truckers forward and then simply edit the film to confirm those assumptions.
Overall, the story lacks any tension, the film is entirely too long (should have been a 15 min sketch), the big question of "So what" is never answered, and the entire film is one piece of see-through propaganda that does nothing to further "enlighten" (as the directors claim) the outside world about big riggers.
Shudder to think about the thought process and voyeurism that went on in the directors mind.
It seems all the good directors are falling prey to the Box Office mania..that the Mumbai Media Morons have created.
It has been said several times, how little imagination horror directors have today, remaking remakes of foreign sequels, but setting the film in a cabin in the woods just doesn't seem to be an "hommage" to anything, it seems to be, simply, a ripoff.
I really want to know what the point is....what was the directors' vision.....why no development of the dead lover?
My opinion of the series as a whole was not swayed, but I did gain respect for Spielberg knowing that he started out like most low tier directors.
The criticisms of the film included very articulate and constructive ones from the lay public as well as an actor and a woman who teaches M.A. film directors.
Well this happens about 25 times in this movie(clearly the directors' favorite scare tactic).
The few night shots that did make it in to the movie look like they were stolen from the Blair Witch Project or random shots from the directors backyard.
Really is too bad when directors make these sorts of mistakes when they then go to all the effort to get other things right.
This is a typical example of technically highly skilled directors of video clips/commercials trying to do their first full feature length movie.
I can't understand how Ettore Scola,one of the greater directors of Italian cinema, made a film like this, so stupid and ridiculous!
To be honest, this film is another in a series of huge disappointments...most of these so-called "masters of horror" films are only horrifying in terms of their sub-par effects and laughable story lines...aside from Ron Perlman, everyone else in this film cannot act to save their life...the gunshots sounded like someone was playing Bop-it under the boom mike or something, and looked completely unrealistic...overall, this film is about as scary as Home Alone...the only good masters are Cigarette Burns, Jennifer, and maybe Pelts...I don't know how these directors can sleep at night knowing that they have ruined the very genre that some of them used to actually understand...
Phil Silvers as Sergeant Bilko was a funny man, no doubt due to the skilled writers and directors and all the other talented team working characters in the series who contributed perfectly to one of the funniest and dateless situation comedies America has ever produced.
it's too incoherent, too flashy and way too boring, it's a who gives a crap kinda story, and i really think that big time directors need to make movies based on their own or a writer's own imagination not something based on some ignorant snobby brat's life.
The problem with reviewing this film is that, a.) it's a sequel to a brilliant movie, which always makes watching it objectively difficult, and b.) it's directed by John Frankenhimer, one of the best American directors ever, so I wanted to like it.
William Friendkin was the perfect person to direct a film about drug traffic in decaying new York city, because of his documentary-like approach to the action and story, Frankenhimer on the other hand is one of the most stylish directors ever, i.e. "The Manchurian Candidate" and "Seconds", and with his "French Connection 2" it feels like someone trying to be gritty and not having the true understanding to pull it off.
BackNext