MovieChat Forums > Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) Discussion > Did George P. Cosmatos genuinely have an...

Did George P. Cosmatos genuinely have any "talent" as a filmmaker?

posted 3 years ago by TMC-4 (20281)
1 reply | jump to latest

Or was he merely a yes man on Sylvester Stallone's payroll? Stallone allegedly recommended Cosmatos to Kurt Russell for Tombstone when the initial director was fired. Russell couldn't officially direct the film himself because of DGA rules (after Clint Eastwood took over directing duties himself on The Outlaw Josey Wales), so George P. Cosmatos came in "direct" for him.

http://www.agcwebpages.com/BLINDITEMS/2022/JANUARY.html

64. ENTERTAINMENT LAWYER 01/06 **14**

https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2022/01/todays-blind-items-director.html

The Director: This foreign born director (George P. Cosmatos) was probably A- list if you look at his credits. Then, when you look a little deeper into it, you think to yourself, this director directed some really big budget box office hits, how come he has less than a dozen credits to his name (Filmography)? When you direct at least three movies that were at the top of the box office, you should have more credits. The crazy thing is, he directed his first two movies, and that is about it. For much of his career, he was a guy who lived off friendships and those friends saw that he was paid well for "directing" movies, but he was just a guy who was told what shots he was supposed to set up each day and how. He also got the credit for directing the movies, but had nothing to do with it except going where others had told him to go the night before. One of his biggest admirers is this permanent A list action actor (Sylvester Stallone) who made sure his friend always had a job to earn some money and also got a kick out of the fact that he felt like he was pulling the wool over everyone's eyes in Hollywood. George P. Cosmatos/Sylvester Stallone

[–] Starman (412) 3 years ago

In my eyes he's definitely one of the greatest filmmakers that ever lived, just a different type than most, his recognizable trademark shots, his sensibility for visual punching power and editing style found in all his films is remarkable to this day. It's easy to tell you're watching one of his films just from a first few minutes in the film, You can tell he had a lot of command on the sets, especially the technical side. He was very much an auteur in many ways, as he had very clear ideas and visions about how to make the films be and look the way they do. I think his son certainly inherited some of that same attitude, very much an auteur himself too. I think George just worked within the corrupt system that didn't want to deal with fickle filmmakers like him, he's been just one example of many many out there. He wanted to make his own type of films in it, especially his Tarzan film, but the system wanted to keep him for one purpose only,, hence why so few films from him after Rambo 2. In order to see who he really was as an artist, I believe all it takes is to look at his ambitions before he moved to the States, and then Canada.