The way he views a script
Coincidentally, I view a script the way he does it (other directors might do the same thing, I don't know cause everyone has a different way of viewing it). As he reads it, it plays it in his mind as if the film was actually playing in front of him. Sure, many would find this to be a mistake. But, I don't think it is as long as you keep focus and you have a vision. Then, it all works well and you get the results you want for the most part. It's worked for him so far.
Good Sense of story telling
Okay so, 2 out of his three films are adaptations. But, you can't say that they were bad films (Eclipse is actually the best of the series). Hard Candy is the driving force of this part of the article. As far as I know (I'm 17 so, I still have a lot to learn and see) this was a pretty original film and it got lots of good reviews. It's a pretty intense and creepy movie. This isn't something kids should be seeing (I for one have never been good at watching movies my parents approve of) but, it's a good story and it's got fairly strong performances from Ellen Page and Patrick Wilson. It's got a pretty low budget. But, the story is very good. He knows how to keep the story going without making it less interesting of a film. He has a good sense of story telling which partly for me also includes the pacing of the film.
Variety
He's done 3 completely different genres. One for each film. Hard Candy was more of thriller, 30 Days of Night is horror and Eclipse is action-romance. While they're all each pretty dark films. Each has a specific genre and he can do them with no problem. Watching Hard Candy with the help of the script of course, he is able to make the movie give you a major sense of the creeps. 30 Days of Night (for me) made vampires scary. I wasn't hiding my face scared but, I wasn't exactly going in any dark rooms or outside that night after watching it. It was also very suspensful which makes it work that much more. Eclipse was action-romance (the romance in those movies suck) but, he proved he can make good action (30 Days of Night also proved this). The kind that's very clear and you can see what's going on and it doesn't give you a headache.
Strong Performances
This guy, very under rated actor. Anyways, in all three of David Slade's movies. He has been able to bring out strong performances from his actors. Ellen Page, Patrick Wilson and Josh Hartnett are the three people that come to mind the most. If you don't believe me, go back and rewatch these movies. He knows what he wants from an actor and he makes sure that they do their best work (Hard Candy is my favorite Patrick Wilson movie) and it really does show. You don't really see a lot of "strong" performances from actors in movies anymore. The kind that give the films an emotional weight of some sort. Also, did I forget to mention Ben Foster? Yea, he was amazing in 30 Days of Night.
No uninteresting projects
Now, this part of the editorial is more less of what has made him so great so far. Twilight, okay ignore that one (although, Eclipse does have a interesting story). Hard Candy, 30 Days of Night and the upcoming tv series, Hannibal (which he is directing the pilot episode). These each have something about them that makes them completely interesting. Hard Candy and 30 Days of Night have the same appeal. They both have VERY interesting stories. While, the upcoming tv series, Hannibal (last I knew is a prequel to the movies (except Hannibal Rising, I could be wrong)) has the "prequel" factor to it that attracts viewers. Not to mention the fact that it's Hannibal Lector (c'mon, who doesn't love Hannibal Lector?). So, I think that this man has made good project choices so far and I think he is destined for a great future as a film director.
Agree? Disagree? What are your thoughts on David Slade? Comment below with your thoughts and I ask for respect amongst yourselves as well as myself and the editorial.
Fun Fact: David Slade is my choice director for a Mortal Kombat film.