I don't get it honestly.
I don't hate his movies but I don't get the masturbatory levels of fandom. Like Vertigo is an interesting mystery but hardly mindblowing.
I don't understand how people can look at any of his films and consider them the best ever made. He's a very tight director and pretty good but not really the best.
>>63537431
read Hitchcock by Truffaut you filthy philistine.
>>63537431
you dont get it opee
people like nolan would be more suitable for ya, not for everyone i think
>>63537535
If I have to read a book in order to be initiated into a secret fanclub, then that's on his movies, not me.
>>63537566
Vertigo is literally the Gone Girl of its age. I don't think either of those are too far off from Nolan's work.
>>63537606
>complaining about reading something in order to appreciate what an artist, widely regarded to be the greatest, is doing
>because you're too stupid to figure it out on your own
yikes. maybe adulthood ain't your thing after all. stick to vidya.
>>63537651
I don't hate his movies and what his movies are doing is pretty simple.
They're thrillers, they have twists, they're a ride. It's not that shocking or difficult and yeah, they're fun but I don't get why people literally think he's the greatest of all time. I see him in the same way I see fincher or ridley scott. A decent commercial director that is most concerned with making an entertaining film, which is fine but not the best ever.
>>63537431
He knew how to shoot, he even pioneered techniques, and he did tension very well. Narratively, all his movies were pleb garbage, which made them popular.
It's like if Kubrick never aspired to do more than Transformers film.
>>63537566
Nolan is literally the Hitchcock of our time.
>>63537431
He's considered the best on the sight and sound poll because he's the middle ground between art and commerce so he appeals to everyone and his movies aren't average. They're probably the best in their genre but yeah, that's the reason he's liked so much.
I agree though. He isn't the best director, just the least exclusionary best choice.
>>63537934
Fincher is hitchcock, nolan is kinda like a kubrick that doesn't actually give a shit about the movie he is making
>Nolan
>Fincher
>Scott
Spielberg seems like a better 'modern' comparison to me. Impeccably crafted mass-market popcorn movies. Both were great at impeccably-crafted set-pieces, and both used big-name actors but didn't seem to demand much acting from them.
>>63538124
I honestly think fincher is better than Hitchcock.
I don't understand what there is to get? Either his movies resonate with you or they don't. You can't invalidate personal taste.
>>63538277
Nah, Spielberg is the modern Ford. He has too much range to be Hitchcock. Hitchcock basically only worked in the thriller genre.
>>63538335
Hitchcock's films aren't those types of movies. I'm certain that people like his movies not because they relate to characters but because they like seeing plots that work like clockwork (even if elements are a bit contrived)
Anyone who compares him to Nolan might as well be screaming they're a pleb.
