Is Ron Howard considered a good director? (1 Viewer)

[Carlo_M]

I've often wondered that (the original thread question) myself. And I agree with what was said above: he is a good, although not great, director.

I've liked enough of his movies (Cocoon, Willow, Apollo 13), and he generally doesn't make stinkers, so I'll put him in the good category.

 

[LarryDavenport]

Let's not forget Grand Theft Auto, Gung Ho, Night Shift or my personal favorite Cotton Candy.

 

[Steve_Ch]

The very BEST from The Happy Days cast .

 

[MickeS]

Ha, it looks like we all pretty much agree: Howard is a competent, if boring, director. I haven't seen any really BAD film from him, but nothing really GOOD either. Like someone pointed out, the only thing that makes his work stand out from any "no-name" Hollywood director is that Clint Howard is in all his movies.
/Mike

 

[Tim Campbell]

I dont know about Great, but there really is not a movie made by him that I hate. I can't think of another director I can say that about

 

[Jin E]

I dont know about Great, but there really is not a movie made by him that I hate. I can't think of another director I can say that about

How does that saying go? If you've never made a mistake, you aren't taking chances. Someting like that. I still enjoy his work though.

 

[Seth Paxton]

The restraint shown in not imposing heavy stylistic fingerprints on everything he touches.

In other words, Tim Burton.
yes, I like Burton's films, but he clearly makes ANY subject look and feel like his style almost to a fault.

 

[Luis Cruz]

Well, I don't know about everyone else, but I think Ron Howard is a great director...he simply makes well made movies. I mean, he's no Speilberg or Scott, but he definately holds his own. Movies such as Apollo 13, Ransom, Willow, Splash, and my personal favorite of his The Paper. All are well told and well directed. I am looking forward to seeing A Beautiful Mind, but it will have to wait till I see Lord of the Rings...

 

[Terrell]

Yes, he is a very good director. Well, in my humble opinion.

 

[Jacob_St]

After finding out he converted Russell Crowes character In A Beautiful Mind from a homosexual to a heterosexual I don't have much respect for him. If it's based on a true story you shouldn't try to sugar coat a film to get the biggest gross possible. I guess that's what this man is all about. I put him in the average directors list.

 

[Terrell]

Wait a minute. Wasn't John Nash married, or am I mistaken on that?

 

[CharlesD]

I wouldn't say Ron Howard is a "great" director, he is a good "nuts and bolts" director, he's technicaly very good, and given his background, has a good understanding of acting.

Other than that, though, I'd rather watch a well-made documentary about the Apollo 13 flight than Howard's often silly movie.

Jack,
I'm curious to know why you found Apollo 13 to be "silly". Personally I liked it very much, and thought it was very well done. There certainly were a few technical inaccuracies (esp. during the launch sequences) but overall I thought it was quite accurate.
I share your enthusiasm for the space program and appreciate your insightful comments about science fiction (and just to be clear, obviously this movie is not sci-fi but seems to appeal to sci-fi fans) so I love to hear you elaborate on that comment.

 

[Rich Malloy]

Ron Howard is a terrible director. Technical competence means squat if there's no artistic integrity, and Howard has none.

Dumb, whitewashed, sentimentalized, dishonest, faux-inspirational - but technically competent - crap. There's more truth and true emotion in any early episode of The Andy Griffith Show than in all of Opie's movies put together.

Will I go see "A Beautiful Mind"? Fuck no! I've been fooled before by this charleton, and won't be fooled again. If he's turned a new leaf, good for him. But I don't believe it for a second, and I refuse to enable this contemptible hack with my box office dollar.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Ah come on Al, tell us how your really feel about Ron Howard as a director!
Crawdaddy

 

[MickeS]

Jacob_St wrote:

After finding out he converted Russell Crowes character In A Beautiful Mind from a homosexual to a heterosexual I don't have much respect for him. If it's based on a true story you shouldn't try to sugar coat a film to get the biggest gross possible. I guess that's what this man is all about. I put him in the average directors list.

This is written by Nash himself at the Nobel Prize website (http://www.nobel.se/economics/laurea...h-autobio.html). It seems unlikely he's homosexual:
Now I must arrive at the time of my change from scientific rationality of thinking into the delusional thinking characteristic of persons who are psychiatrically diagnosed as "schizophrenic" or "paranoid schizophrenic". But I will not really attempt to describe this long period of time but rather avoid embarrassment by simply omitting to give the details of truly personal type.
While I was on the academic sabbatical of 1956 - 1957 I also entered into marriage. Alicia had graduated as a physics major from M.I.T. where we had met and she had a job in the New York City area in 1956 - 1957. She had been born in El Salvador but came at an early age to the U.S. and she and her parents had long been U.S. citizens, her father being an M. D. and ultimately employed at a hospital operated by the federal government in Maryland.
The mental disturbances originated in the early months of 1959 at a time when Alicia happened to be pregnant. And as a consequence I resigned my position as a faculty member at M.I.T. and, ultimately, after spending 50 days under "observation" at the McLean Hospital, travelled to Europe and attempted to gain status there as a refugee.
I later spent times of the order of five to eight months in hospitals in New Jersey, always on an involuntary basis and always attempting a legal argument for release.

/Mike

 

[Terrell]

God Al. You find nothing redeeming about Ron Howard? I though Apollo 13 was a great movie and Willow was a tremendously fun and well made movie as well. Now A Beautiful Mind is getting Oscar buzz. He's not that bad.

 

[Rich Malloy]

Uhh... are you kidding me? What other elements of Nash's life has Howard white-washed away?

Please, people, I beg you to stay away from this movie and read Sylvia Nasar's book instead. I had no idea that Howard could be such a liar as to expunge Nash's homosexuality ("bisexuality" if you prefer),and I wonder if his racist rants and cruel treatment of family and colleagues remain in this apparently white-washed portrait?

This is a fascinating man - and one deserving of our sympathy and understanding, as well as our awe at his intellectual prowess - but the real portrait is far more interesting than what I'm learning about the movie in this thread.

Ok, I didn't believe it possible, but my dislike of Ron Howard the director has actually fallen a few more notches.

 

[Terrell]

Did you read the post above you? Nowhere does he mention sexuality and he was married for 9 years. Besides, even if he was homosexual, do we have to have that in the movie for it to be good. You're taking this too seriously. This is not a documentary Al. This is a drama inspired by events in John Hash's life. Quite frankly, I don't care to see them explore his homosexuality, because the movie specifically deals with a part of his life, not his entire life. But again, he was married for 9 years. How is that homosexual?

You're taking this movie too personal Al. It's not a biography.

 

[MickeS]

Well, if he is bisexual and that was a part of his life during the period that the movie describes, then they should have had it in there. But it doesn't seem to have been, at least it doesn't seem like it wa very important compared to the other things that happened to him. And does the movie say that he's NOT bi/homo? I mean, he WAS married.

/Mike

 

[Rich Malloy]

You're taking this movie too personal Al. It's not a biography.

Oh really? Not a biography? So then it wasn't based on Sylvia Nasar's biography of John Nash entitled "A Beautiful Mind"?

Well, I'll be damned. I hadn't realized this was a fictional character. I stand corrected.

In my defense, the John Nash I was referring to is the mathematician whose PhD thesis was awarded a Nobel in 1994 or 95 (or thereabouts), after which he became quite the pop-culture celebrity. I remember reading articles from the high-falutin' journals all the way down to PEOPLE magazine and the Sunday supplements. The dude was, briefly, famous. Famous, that is, for a mathematician. In fact, he's the only mathematician I can claim to know anything about, and this has more to do with his bizarre life and mental illness than his mathematical insight. And, in particular, his famously complicated relationships with men and women are hardly unknown - indeed, they were highlighted above most everything else (save the racist rants and space alien talk) in that rash of articles and stories that flooded the popular market and which served to illuminate his bizarre former marriage and the goodness of his long-suffering ex-wife who continued to support him in many, many ways long after they were divorced and after his many betrayals of her. It was part of what made him such a fascinating man and her such a fascinating woman.

But I guess that's a different fella, eh guys?