This isn't always the case, but sometimes, when a writer/director gets too big, they can basically make whatever they want.  And in this case, scripts that would have never gotten a second read (or even a full read, for that matter) make it to production.

What are some examples of films you think would have never been made had the writer/director been a nobody?

I put my vote in for "Southland Tales".   There's no way anyone would have waded through that massive, convoluted script and pushed it to production had Kelly not just come off of "Darko".

To me, The Strangers was a really bad script. Okay film, but the script was horrible. IMO.

Quoted from Grandma Bear To me, The Strangers was a really bad script. Okay film, but the script was horrible. IMO.

Yeah, but wasn't that by a first-timer?

Maybe you missed this...

http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-screenwrite/m-1232430481/s-all/

Quoted from Grandma Bear Maybe you missed this... http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-screenwrite/m-1232430481/s-all/

According to this, it made it through the Nicholls competition and that was the reason it went on to be made.

I'm talking about scripts that are only made because a writer/director is popular and has sway.  Unless I'm missing something here.

It was in the top 300 (I think). The writer was allowed to direct it because he had some "in" as a cinematographer.

Read it and I think you'll agree.  

Cliffhanger - Sylvester Stallone

I liked cliffhanger...

This is going to be another see-saw thread!  One person's junk is another person's treasure!  

Off the top of my head...

- Death Proof
- No Country For Old Men
- Terminator Salvation

and, of course

- The Happening

Quoted from sniper No Country For Old Men

What have I started?

I hated No Country for Old Men.  I thought it was a worthless movie.  I'll second that.

Quoted from steven8 I hated No Country for Old Men.  I thought it was a worthless movie.  I'll second that.

I'll have to politely disagree.

Also, the films I'm thinking of don't necessarily have to be seen in a negative light either. I'm sure there are tons of really good films that just never would have seen the light of day unless a popular filmmaker was attached.  One of my favorite films, "The Fountain", probably never would have been made had Aronofsky not been coming off of "Requiem".

Quoted from dresseme I'll have to politely disagree. Also, the films I'm thinking of don't necessarily have to be seen in a negative light either. I'm sure there are tons of really good films that just never would have seen the light of day unless a popular filmmaker was attached.  One of my favorite films, "The Fountain", probably never would have been made had Aronofsky not been coming off of "Requiem".

Respectfully disagree on that one as well, I'd have to add The Fountain on this list, as I felt it shouldn't have been made either.

Quoted from steven8 Respectfully disagree on that one as well, I'd have to add The Fountain on this list, as I felt it shouldn't have been made either.

I don't know if this should necessarily be an argument of what shouldn't have been made, more of a discussion on what wouldn't have been made.

EDIT:  For example, you argue that "The Fountain" wouldn't have been made because it's a bad film.  I argue it wouldn't have been made because it's a very complicated film that doesn't really appeal to a lot of people that I could see a lot of execs easily dismissing.  On this, both of us are arguing why it wouldn't have been made.  Arguing why it shouldn't have been made is a different thing altogether.