argentos unrealised potential
 

i just finished watching the card player and thought it was a great show but, it got me thinking that if argento had've had more budget and a big studio behind him he would be a legend. his movies have great stories, relevant violence and big endings. why does he still have dubbed italians in english movies? why bring along actors like max von sydow and liam cunningham and put them alongside random dubbed ities. surely his talent would've benifited from big money techniques and actors, then maybe he wouldn't just be a cult director. in short, why is ronaldinho playing for accrington stanley f.c.?

That could be true. I would just hope that a bigger budget wouldn't go to his head and make him cocky. I happen to like his stuff. Top me it's very raw and shows his passion for making movies because he'll make them no matter what.

Dario Argento is a legend!I thought everyone knew that?;)

yeah, we know he's a legend, but i'm saying he could've been a kubrick, carpenter or scott to the rest of the world. in short, his movies are made cheaply and we love them but if they had've been big budget they could've maintained integrity and been great. why couldn't peter neal have been played by eg. james caan? or jessica harper by jane fonda?

Deep Red,Tenebre,The Bird with the Crystal Plumage,Phenomena,Opera and Sleepless are near PERFECT!I wouldn't change a thing!:)

Argento is an established legend. It doesnt take $$ to make one, or George Lucas would be ranked higher than Akira Kurosawa.

Argento's movies do have the punch when it comes to casting an impression on the viewer, and any Argento movie, regardless of its budget, is a treat to watch.

People flame some of his movies such as the Church and Phenomena but I have enjoyed each and every one from the Argento stable.

The man's a genius, and he can make a good enough movie with even $1, come his day.

i agree with everything you've said. his movies are great but, the italian actors speaking english then being voiced over does detract from the movie. maybe his movies would be better subtitled. i know money doesn't make movies but it couldn't hurt. just to make them more polished. i suppose hollywood might mess them up the way they have with j horror remakes, but if he'd had twice the budget...

I don't think Argento's problem is his budget. It's usually the scripting. His imagery is gorgeous, his actors are good, but Argento is a very nonverbal guy. Lynch uses it to his advantage with creepy nonspeech, but Argento tries for realistic dialogue in spite of the fact that he doesn't have an ear for it. The only Argento dialogue that's exceptional is all the metacinema in Opera.

I don't think "Dario Argento" needs to commercialise any of his films.All of his films are very well made......even without big studios,big producers and well-known actors.

I think Dario Argento stands unmatched. He has his own style of filmmaking and he utilises the resources given to him to the maximum. He's really good at getting the best out of everybody involved in him, and has made some top-notch quality horror films.
Hand him a big budget and he might go downhill, like Ang Lee or John Woo once they went to Hollywood. I would want him to stay in Italy, and keep making films the way he sees it fit, rather than latching onto some big Hollywood studio like 20th Century Fox, who call the shots and leave directors hanging on like a lame puppet in their hands.

Someone said Argento's weakness is his scripting, and ear for dialogue, which I agree with - style and gore-wise he is usually very interesting.

I'm not sure if working with 'better' or English-speaking actors more often would improve some of his films.

the expectations for a gigantic budget argento would be such that it would never live up to them. i just want more quality english speaking actors and less corn syrup. i love his work, i just think there are obvious easily amended flaws.

He did write Once Upon a Time in the West but that was under the guidance of Bernardo Bertoluci. His writing and the way he directs his actors drives me nutz.

It's almost as if he asks his actors to only play the surface-level, to hide any and all emotion other than fear or desire.

I agree. I like his films greatly, but they have their flaws. Most often in the writing. The concepts are good, the endings are great, but there's always something missing... That being said, I am a fan...

Imagine if Suspiria had a bit better dialogue and character development to help it through the middle.

I have kind of always accepted the bad acting as a part of the 60s/70s giallo style. To me, it's just as much a part of Argento's edge as his red-orange blood and his radical (preferably Goblin) music. I just kind of accept it and, in a way, take comfort in the horrible dialogue these macabre time pieces contain.

But yeah, I agree; I think, visually, Argento is one of the most unique and creative filmmakers to come out of Italian cinema, and I happen to love most everything he's done. In fact, Profondo Rosso (Deep Red) is one of my favorite movies of all time. It just bleeds (sometimes quite literally) with creepy style and genuine fright, and has a little mix of classic detective noir.