So someone at pinoydvd forum asked: what is it, primarily, that you judge a director by?
- Ability to tell a story?
- Bringing out the best in actors?
- Way with the camera?
- Originality of vision or technique?
I realize it's normally "all of the above." But, if you don't mind, which aspect of directorial work do you prioritize?
That's hard to say, really. Kael called it a "film sense" which is really a made-up term she uses that she has to qualify so much it's pretty much useless. I think sticking to one virtue or another and holding it high above all else limits one's way of thinking to the point that one's preferences are influenced, which is what I don't want to happen.
I just like their films; that comes first; then I have to explain why. Their films have to interest me, for one reason or another; I guess that's the ultimate criteria to me: the ability to arouse and sustain interest. Which, again, has to be qualified so much that as a criteria it's also pretty much useless. Better to read my thoughts on a filmmaker than have me check off his qualities on a list.