1. this is mostly a wimp

sure he's a hack, but still much better that michael bay or roland emmerich or jan de bont

red dragon is a good movie, so is the first rush hour, but I think that with the golden compass studios now know better than to put untested hacks in charge of big budget films

Posted at 6:19PM on Feb 5th 2008 by mike green

2. screw that! harry knowles is a big, fat baby. i like brett ratner and his films. is he orson welles? hell no. but, is he uwe boll? hell no! harry knowles has a personal vendetta against the man, and i for one think it's disgusting. the mans films make money. and, they're fun. i wanna punch harry knowles in his fat face and watch the blubber explode. i think it's ridiculous that a studio would pay any attention to this red haired dooshbag. i am sick of listening to harry knowles bash this man, when harry knowles has gushed all over such garbage as fantastic four 2. if anyone should be in internet jail, it should be this bulbous enfant terrible known as headgeek. will any website grow a pair and tell this dbag to shut his mouth?

Posted at 6:24PM on Feb 5th 2008 by RustyStardust

3. You know what? The same people who yap about how much Ratner sucks were the same asses who loved X-Men 3, which was an abomination of a movie.

Knowles IS a pompous douchenozzle and his website still looks like it was made by nine-year-olds, but he's absolutely right. Ratner's a hack, and all of his movies suck. Period. End of story.

Posted at 6:32PM on Feb 5th 2008 by Sam

4. I don't personally hate the man but I always thought his movies made money because of the people in them NOT because he directed. I don't think his name alone sells anything.

Posted at 7:39PM on Feb 5th 2008 by Marina

5. The guy's name does bring up a lot of hatred from fanboys.

That hatred notwithstanding, he'll get more big budget jobs. I don't recall seeing actors complain about him, and his movies always rake in the dough for the studios.

We might not like him, but he'll keep on making 'em.

Posted at 7:57PM on Feb 5th 2008 by Noisecon

6. The thing is that lately he got associated to project, this and the Escape from New York remake, that a) have a pretty strong fanbase, b) are totally wrong for him.
I mean, really, if you have a film that it's supposed to be a dark and visionary retelling of the werewolf man myth set in Victorian England, Brett Ratner is not the first name it comes to your mind when you think about a director for it. Then again, Joe Johnston isn't either, so what do I know...

Posted at 8:39PM on Feb 5th 2008 by Colorado

7. sam, you obviously have no idea what yer talking about. ratner is not a hack. you want a hack- try adam shankman or joe roth or uwe boll or tim story or many other directors far worse than brett ratner. as for his movies making money for the names involved- do yer homework. jackie chan's movies in the states haven't made major money outside of rush hour. and, X3 made more money than any of the other X-Men. and, 'red dragon' has a higher imdb rating than 'hannibal' (and, made more money). he's unfairly persecuted and it's sick. and, he does make money on his name. he's known all over LA radio as 'super director brett ratner'. the man's movies have made 2 billion dollars worldwide (on 8 films). that's an average of 250 million per film. obviously, some people like his films. i wish all you hypocritical, so called geeks would chill out and focus on filmmakers who really deserve hatred. i think it's more jealousy than anything. it's sick...

Posted at 12:23AM on Feb 6th 2008 by RustyStardust

8. I can't believe people are defending this guy. X-Men 3 is complete garbage. The Rush Hour movies are dumb comedy that any chimp with a budget could direct. Of all the reasons his movies make money, him directing isn't one of them. Nobody said "gee I dunno about that new Rush Hour, but since he's the director, I think I'll check it out. Nobody who doesn't follow movie news online has any idea who he is. He might not be the absolute worst director, but he has no business directing things that have any kind of legacy attached to them.

Posted at 2:00AM on Feb 6th 2008 by Scott K

9. Ratner will get more work - GUARANTEED. Hollywood is business. And business is ALWAYS first and foremost a numbers game. Good boxoffice = more opportunities to direct. He's through the gates as they say.

I agree with many that his directing talents need some considerable honing but his films have their redeemable qualities. And the man has a lot of personality and friends. In business where who you know directly relates to what you get, that has a lot of value.

The better question to ask is when his BIG summer blockbusters stop making booku bucks how much slack will the industry give him in another chance to direct another BIG blockbuster. I'm afraid to say not much because his success is more based on money making than talent IMO. Although I do think he definitely has talent to some degree (apparent from both Rush Hour 1 & 2). Maybe it has less to do with his talent and more to do with his versatility and his ability to understand where his strengths (& more importantly his weaknesses) are.

In terms of the "2nd chance" for Ratner at some point it becomes a judgement for the "suites" of do we go with an established talent like Ratner (even with a box office blunder) or just give some promising up-and-comer a shot to make us some big bucks this summer movie season.

Something interesting to think about too is back in the day directors had decades to hone their talents on directing films before they became John Ford, Billy Wilder, etc. Not everyone's a genius right out of the box. Should we be SO hard on the guy. The best way to express your thoughts on the guys films after all is just not to watch them!

Posted at 3:46AM on Feb 6th 2008 by DJHajie

10. I cant see what the problem is with X3.. i thought it was great entertainment.. the bit with xavier getting killed was brilliant, Red dragon is also a very watchable movie, i personally think he directs good movies, they're not show stoppers but they certainly put my ass on a cinema seat.

Idiots with a vendetta against him boggle me when there are so many out there that shouldn't be directing adverts let alone fecking movies

Posted at 8:52AM on Feb 6th 2008 by bongo123

11. Man, that one guy exploded into a pro-ratner rage. Weird.


He's right there with Paul WS Anderson for obnoxiousness. Really, he's not Uwe Boll, as mentioned. He at least has some eye. The problem is that his scripts are awful, his directing is bland but serviceable, yet he thinks he and his movies are awesome. It's really how the movies carry themselves that cause the problems.

You can easily put the analogy to two girls. You have one girl that thinks she's the hottest girl alive, but she's just a little above average. She'll be mocked constantly behind her back. Idiots, though, will be cutting each other's throats to be with her because they'll think that, if she thinks she's that hot, other people must, and being with her will make them seem cooler.
You can have another girl that looks the same but is self-conscious and keeps a low profile. She'll be the one that intelligent people are dying to be with. Sure, she looks the same, but her personality makes her seem much better looking.

So it goes with Ratner. He's mostly shoddy. His movies are mostly shoddy. I can't recall enjoying even a piece of one of them (go to hell Chris Tucker), but since he thinks he's awesome, and his movies think they're awesome, idiots buy into it. They follow the hype.

Personally I get turned off by it. He's done nothing to deserve the high profile he gets. His angles are dull, he doesn't capture action all that interestingly, he has annoying actors, predictable plots, and some of the worst one-liners this side of Commando.

So yes. If you love his movies I will think less of your intelligence. If you enjoy them I won't, we all have guilty pleasures, but if you consider them anything more I'll just assume you're some kind of simpleton looking for acceptance and easily swayed by people that think they're awesome.

Posted at 10:10AM on Feb 6th 2008 by MosquitoControl

12. Wait a minute. The People rose up and took down Ratner (at least a little bit), so couldn't we do the same thing with McG?
C'mon, who's with me!!

Posted at 11:49AM on Feb 6th 2008 by kevjohn

13. Ratner is definitely better than people like Michael Bay. Whereas I only like one Bay flick, The Rock, I like a few of Ratner's, like Red Dragon, X-Men: The Last Stand, and the first Rush Hour. Except for Red Dragon, none of his movies are anything but fluff, and mostly bland fluff.

Dude should stop.

Posted at 2:23PM on Feb 6th 2008 by AJ Wiley

14. Ratner is a very decent director. Much better than most. Harry Knowles is just biased and a bit of an idiot.

Posted at 3:47PM on Feb 16th 2008 by Proman