Why David Twohy?

I'd be curious to hear what's so incompetent about his directing. In my eyes, he's a director who's made a lot out of a little. With smaller budgets than most, he managed to churn out some very impressive sci-fi fare. In Pitch Black's case, it's a credit to his direction and ingenuity to make the film look a lot more expensive than it is.

You need to give sepcifics. Is it the way Below was put together, is it that you don't like the echtocrome film stock in Pitch Black, what? Though I'm not crazy about the Twohy, I think he's competent, but gets into thrid act problems.

I agree that THE ARRIVAL is fun cheese and nothing more but I really loved PITCH BLACK and, albeit to a lesser degree, BELOW. I don't quite understand why you consider them shoddily directed. PITCH BLACK especially had some great shots and use of color. The film brought a level of grittines with it that had been missing for way too long from science-fiction filmmaking. The only thing that I could think of to say against PITCH BLACK and Twohy is that he felt it was necessary to rewrite the original script ...

Bateman, these are all boring generalizations. Hurry up and make an interesting point.

I like how this is said and agree with it:

I think Twohy has a lot of talent and I'm excited to see what he can deliver with Pitch Black sequels/prequels -whatever they are. The guys got a great visual sense and is a good writer. I think he's had a pretty interesting career so far.

While I don't think he's a bad director, I don't see anything significant about him.

He needs more cowbell.

Ha ha ha.

Anyway, he sucks.

That's funny, because I feel the same way about Robert Rodriguez...

Well, Twohy isn't as flashy as say, Michael Bay, but he's a good, hard-working director. And the way things are these days, with what sort of money the studios are willing to give or not give to make films, a guy like him who can be efficient and produce good work without breaking the bank, give a return on investment, he's gonna get a lot of work. And he's doing this in the genre we all love. We should be grateful for Twohy.

Pitch Black is just a mess. It's a great idea, great characters, great monsters, and it just ends up all screwed up. I think alot of what Bateman says is true about the action--hard to get a sense of where things are going how things relate. And then the character motivations don't make much sense, either. It could really be put together alot better.

I love the scene in The Arrival when Sheen slides to the edge of the big dish and it comes up so suddenly. You bring up an interesting point 'dre about his third acts, they are a bit untidy. Still, I think he has a cinematic eye that's above that of plenty of more mainstream directors. Like say, Rattner.

The intensity of the first 10 minutes or so of Pitch Black, and the alien encounters makes me look forward to the sequels a lot. I liked Below quite a bit also.

The Arrival was a supreme slice of Sheen goodness. I have no qualms with the man, he does what he does well. He just needs to get a bit more ambitious, wich these Riddick films should be.

I find it hard to fault much of anything in either Pitch Black or Below (I haven't seen the Arrival). They are both atmospheric genre pieces that feel like good short stories. I think he's got a nice visual style, and he resists the temptation to dumb things down - most of the time. I never experienced any of the pacing/dialogue problems or awkward spatial problems with the action that you seem to have had either. Not sure what that says about either of us, just an observation.

Compare his work with Paul Anderson's on stuff like Soldier and Event Horizon - both of which are way, way dumbed down and way, way more incoherent than anything Twohy has done. I still find stuff to like in both of those films on a cheese level, but they're nowhere near as complete as Twohy's films. I agree, we're lucky to have a guy who makes these modern pulp tales work so well with so little.

I consider Pitch Black one of the most overrated movies of all time. This movie looks cheap, cheaply executed and I'm really not interested in seing the Riddick Chronicles (and no, I don't have anything against Vin Diesel).

I don't see where your coming from Bateman. but I do agree that David is not greatness, but he has managed to turn out some good movies.

Pitch Black - The first time I saw this I thought is was a decent flick and Vin pulled in a nice performance as did the others. But after repeat viewings I hold this film as one of my all time favorites. It had atomosphere, it had a great cast. The dialogue was great. And David really let Vin shine. This is probably the one film that made Vin into a star. You just see the charisma ooze of the guy and I think that was through Davids help.

The Arrival - I liked but I think it faltered at the end. Sheen pulls in a great perfomance in this one. Not a movie that I want to watch again, but overall a decent work.

Below - IMHO was a great film, great cast, great atmosphere. But I'm not one for Ghost movies so I didn't really think much of this film.

So in summary I think David is a great in setting up atmosphere and tension in his film. He lets his main actors really shine. And has done some really good work despite working under a tight budget. But, I think David fails in his endings. And I think that all of his movies could have been greater if they had somewhat of a better and more coherent ending. The exception being Pitch Black.

While I haven't seen a Twohy film in a long while, I have to somewhat agree with some of the complaints about pacing. Pacing scenes and moving the plot and whatnot, while a very difficult thing to get perfect, is not as hard as it looks. Given, I've always found I can do pacing real well naturally, but I do think he has trouble doing it in many spots. There is a certain sloppiness to Twohy's films in terms of pacing, I do agree, and I wonder if that's the reason I've only seen Pitch Black, Below, and The Arrival only twice each.

I think he has some great visual ideas for certain things (Below had a great sense of claustrophobia at times, at least in a theater - and the tracking shots in it in moments were cool). And also, as Kirby put it very well, he makes a lot out of so little. He takes these moderate-budget type of films and gives them a certain flair, edge, feel, mood, and style to them that many many many other directors wouldn't be able to. There's decisions he's made that I look at and say, "Yeah, I would've done the same."

The comment also how it's like he makes movies that feel like good short stories is another good point, and perhaps the reason why the third acts of his films can feel rushed and a bit hurried (Below's felt REALLY fast on the second time around and Pitch Black's feels like it's not even there) is just that. Short stories at times can get very quick towards the end. Abrupt, sudden, the pace changing quickly and roughly and jarringly.

But, I dunno. I like good short stories. And I have an affection for Twohy's films. I guess because to me, he directs the kinds of movies you don't typically see, and while his execution isn't particularly "spectacular" (there's no real shot in any of the three of his I've seen that I can't point to and say - "THAT is a fucking shot"), I'm a sucker for atmosphere and impressive tracking shots so he's got my money.

I'm just confused as to why you have so much hate towards the man. Is his execution that horribly atrocious to you, Bateman?

After seeing Pitch Black for the first time, I walked out of the theater angry. Not because I didn't like what I had just seen, in fact, I loved it. I thought something was missing at first, I thought it suffered in a similar fashion as From Dusk 'Til Dawn - where a completely new element is introduced in the middle and it wrecks what the film had already established. In FDTD, I was completely engrossed in the crime story and then BAM! Vampires. Same with Pitch Black - excellent human drama, and then BAM! Aliens.

So I saw it again, and instead of thinking about how I wanted the film to work, I just took it on it's own terms and let Twohy tell the story he wanted to tell. Accepting it like that made it a completely different movie for me, and I still consider it one of the best character-driven sci-fi movies I've seen.

It's good to have 'im back (He's Back!)

Read that first post...

Got really annoyed...

Prepared to post my thoughts...

Read Kirby's...

Realized that I no longer needed to post.

Welcome back, Master Drummond. My life becomes easier thanks to you.

Twohy is a screenwriter who parlayed his success with that into a directing career. As such, a case can be made that he is learning the craft along the way. Self-taught. Self-made.

Pitch Black was well done on no cake. Below, even moreso. Extensively moreso. Twohy takes a place I'd be terrified to be...

(think about the fact that LAMPS made in the forties had CORDS wrapped with STRING - and you realize that the technology available in the day made giant submersible warships about the most UNSAFE THING EVER MADE!)

...and adds to the claustrophobia...the darkness...the dread...suddenly naval combat is the least of the worries. It's The Haunting meets The Thing with the beautiful old-fashioned notion that what you can't see is more important than what is shown to you.

Perhaps Twohy's not a visual filmmaker (though considering his use of color and the complex chiaroscuro compositions he's concocted in two of his features thus far, that may be off-the-mark) - perhaps his forte' is directing actors - as every turn in Below is rock-solid-

AND he dragged a decent (though minamalist - and of course - bolstered by really good dialogue some guy wrote) performance out of Mark Vincent - the first one I've seen since his breakdancing video.

Also - Disaster in Time is cool, too. Twohy's a good one, and hopefully someday he'll be great.

Had no idea he directed "Disaster in Time". That's a fun little flick. And let's not forget that he penned Warlock.

Bateman, I'm just curious as to why you've chosen to gun for David Twohy, seemingly out of nowhere. I mean, your criticisms seem valid...I disagree with them, but I digress. The last thing I expected to see today was a post lambasting David "Fucking" Twohy. Did he repossess your house yesterday or something? Just seems kind of left field to me.

Not sure about Bateman's reasons (and I don't pretend to speak for him), but I find it interesting to talk/read/write/post/whatever about directors who seem to have "Internet cred", see where it goes. It's not exactly controversial to post a "PWS Anderson is the worst director ever"-thread (by the way, he's not).

On the subject: didn't like Pitch Black when I first saw it, but having read so much about it online I want to revisit it. Bought Below on DVD, and where a bit underwhelmed. Felt it never really payed off.

Personally, I'd level most of Bateman's criticisms at the feet of a lot of writer/directors (not least the Wachowski Brothers) before I'd level them at a reliable low-budget workman like Twohy. But let's see what he can do with a big budget on Riddick. That will be his true test.

See I saw Pitch Black & then a few weeks later viewed Mission to Mars. MtM had everything that should have worked... a top named director, financing, & a great cast but sitting through that flick was worse then chewing glass. Along comes a small budged ensemble sci/fi film that I feel blew the big boys out of the skies. Why?? Twohy...that's why. We will long be discussing the pros & cons of Pitch Black while Mission to Mars sinks into oblivion.

Some great points and I like this thread. Kudos to you Bateman. I think Twohy is talented. I was impressed by The Arrival but as many have said already its replay value and ending are poor. Below well I wasn't really that impressed with. The ending wasn't very good in my opinion but up to the middle of the film I was riveted throughout. Solid but a miss in my view. That brings me to Pitch Black. When I first saw it I enjoyed it for what it was and thought " What If? " about a bigger budget sequel. After a few repeat viewings its a bonafide sci-fi classic in my opinion. I eagerly await the further adventures of Riddick. So summing up Twohy is a very talented director and I am looking forward to seeing what he does with his next couple of films. Which is something I can't say about McG, Michael Bay and Brett Ratner.

Now I had a bit of trouble watching the theatrical cut, but LOVE the director's cut of the movie.

I haven't seen The Arrival, but am curious if that too has the silhouette shots, blue tones, eyeball close-up and a nod to claustrophobics everywhere.

Mission to Mars was directed by Brian De Palma. Don't know why you want to bring up this in a David Twohy discussion?

Yes, I knew who directed Mission to Mars when I made my statement. The topic being discussed is if Twohy is a good director or not. I used a comparison tactic that is traditional in debates & discussions...two films of the same (or similar) genre released within weeks of each other...one being Twohy's (Pitch Black) and the other a well known director with financing & a name recognition cast to back him (Mission to Mars). As I see it Twohy's work is far superior with what little he had to work with. That makes him a damn good director as far as I'm concerned. But if he's one of the great filmakers only time will tell. Not many have been successful at sequels...even the best of them.