1. Spielberg
2. Peter Jackson
3. Tim Burton
4. Clint Eastwood
5. David Cronenberg

Sofia Coppola
David Lynch
Stanley Kubrick
Paul Thomas Anderson
Quentin Tarantino

Top Five:
1. Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction)
2. Wes Anderson (Bottle Rocket)
3. Stanley Kubrick (Clockwork Orange)
4. Alfred Hitchcock (Man Who Knew Too Much [1954])
5. Orson Welles (Citizen Kane)

Runners Up:
Ridley Scott
Steven Spielberg
Martin Scorsese
Mel Brooks
Many more...

quote:

hark, the ImmovableMotorist
Slacker First Class
Posted 20 December 2007 11:58 AM Hide Post
Top Five:
1. Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction)
2. Wes Anderson (Bottle Rocket)
3. Stanley Kubrick (Clockwork Orange)
4. Alfred Hitchcock (Man Who Knew Too Much [1954])
5. Orson Welles (Citizen Kane)

Runners Up:
Ridley Scott
Steven Spielberg
Martin Scorsese
Mel Brooks
Many more...

What's interesting about this post is your reference to "one" movie for each director you chose. Personally I find it difficult to base a favorite director on the strength of one movie, sort of a, one time lucky fortune type of deal. The issue I have is when it comes to a single movie (unless one movie is used as an example), it is difficult to separate out a good director from luck, the movie itself having inherent qualities that any director may have been able to have created a great movie, or whether or not it was the script, actors, the cinematographer, or any number of things that made the movie, not the director.

1. Martin Scorsese
2. Steven Spielberg
3. Stanley Kubrick
4. Akira Kurosawa
5. David Lean

I'm just going to throw out a few contemporary names that I think have been overlooked thus far and to whom I might depart the auteur label: Michael Haneke, the Dardenne brothers, Satoshi Kon, Ki-duk Kim, Chan Wook Park, Gus van Sant, Brad Bird, Alfonso Cuaron, Paul Greengrass, Guillermo Del Toro, Jafar Panahi.

Then there's the few whose exclusion has been simply unforgivable: Woo, Bresson, Roeg, Buñuel, Herzog, Kazan, Leone, Carpenter, Truffaut, Melville, Tati, Errol Morris. Maybe even Sam Raimi.

And although he's a writer, he's such a visionary and his work is so unmistakable, I'd still include Charlie Kaufman as an auteur.

As for Spielberg, his visual genius is all too often undermined by his pat sentimentality. A.I., Minority Report, and War of the Worlds were all still great until the denouements. I love Jaws, Close Encounters, and Raiders of the Lost Ark as much as the next guy, but I can't help but think of Spielberg as of much more than a middlebrow panderer nowadays (although his Catch Me If You Can, however overlong it was, caught me offguard in its quality).

quote:

unKeMPt
Enthusiast
Posted 23 December 2007 04:35 PM Hide Post
I'm just going to throw out a few contemporary names that I think have been overlooked thus far and to whom I might depart the auteur label: Michael Haneke, the Dardenne brothers, Satoshi Kon, Ki-duk Kim, Chan Wook Park, Gus van Sant, Brad Bird, Alfonso Cuaron, Paul Greengrass, Guillermo Del Toro, Jafar Panahi.

Then there's the few whose exclusion has been simply unforgivable: Woo, Bresson, Roeg, Buñuel, Herzog, Kazan, Leone, Carpenter, Truffaut, Melville, Tati, Errol Morris. Maybe even Sam Raimi.

And although he's a writer, he's such a visionary and his work is so unmistakable, I'd still include Charlie Kaufman as an auteur.

As for Spielberg, his visual genius is all too often undermined by his pat sentimentality. A.I., Minority Report, and War of the Worlds were all still great until the denouements. I love Jaws, Close Encounters, and Raiders of the Lost Ark as much as the next guy, but I can't help but think of Spielberg as of much more than a middlebrow panderer nowadays (although his Catch Me If You Can, however overlong it was, caught me offguard in its quality).

The absence of some of these obscure director's names on this thread and their unforgivable omission is a relative judgment because unless one is steeped in all movies, world-wide, favorite director in some cases can be only be as real as one's having even experienced the films of such obscure directors. What may be unforgivable to you is the lack of the appreciation and effort or perhaps even the availability of the industry to have not distributed, marketed, made available such films to those who might have been able to place their names on this thread.

quote:

Posted by Unkempt
Then there's the few whose exclusion has been simply unforgivable: Woo, Bresson, Roeg, Buñuel, Herzog,

quote:

Posted by me!
Another selection of Directors I adore:

Robert Bresson: He had a remarkable sense of tension and release, and I love the fact that he rarely used the same actor twice, mostly working with non-actors, thus allowing the viewer to believe more whole-heartedly in the characterization.

Billy Wilder: For the ability to make slapstick work in films like Kiss me, Stupid, and then turn around and get serious with Double Indemnity and the Apartment.

Terence Malick: His films are not static postcards as so many often critique. Badlands is dynamic as hell and the Thin Red Line takes a single man and makes a universe.

Peter Weir: Because he is yet to make a truly terrible film, and his storytelling instinct is up there w/ Spielberg.

Werner Herzog: If for nothing else, the majesty of Aguirre. But watch a lot of his films, and he always begins at the crisis point, as so few filmmakers do. (for that, also look to Cronenberg)

There ya go son. Somebody out here in fave director thread is singing from the same hymn book!

I also love, love, love Nicolas Roeg.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kulturtrager,

I'll regret doing this, but I'm bored at work - so what the hell...

1. David Lynch
2. S. Kubrick
3. F.F. Coppola
4. Woody Allen
5. M. Scorsese
6. P.T. Anderson
Runners Up:
Wes Anderson (needs more releases)
Darren Aronofsky (ditto)
Sophia Coppola (see a pattern?)
David Fincher
Ridley Scott


I'll be kicking myself in the ass any second now for forgetting someone.

quote:

mymindsblank
Know-It-All
Posted 25 January 2008 12:49 PM Hide Post
I'll regret doing this, but I'm bored at work - so what the hell...

1. David Lynch
2. S. Kubrick
3. F.F. Coppola
4. Woody Allen
5. M. Scorsese
6. P.T. Anderson
Runners Up:
Wes Anderson (needs more releases)
Darren Aronofsky (ditto)
Sophia Coppola (see a pattern?)
David Fincher
Ridley Scott

This list is good.

in no particular order

The Coen Brothers for everything before intolerable Cruelty and Lady Killers (haven't seen old country yet)

Terry Gilliam for Brazil, The Fisher King 12 Monkeys

Brad Bird The Iron giant is a masterpiece in animated story telling, he greatest trick is perhaps not fluffing things up or dumbing the stories down.

Chanwook Park the vengeance Trilogy but mainly Old Boy one of the most visual riveting pieces of film in recent years.

Takashi Miike Ichi the Killer, Audition, Imprint, The Happiness of the Katakuris ( a musical with Zombies...) and one of the Asian three extremes shorts (had no blood but still managed to one of the most disturbing of the shorts) there is a reason why Eli Roth featured him in Hostel.

-------------------

honorable mentions

David Cronenberg (for making horror films with smarts)
David Lynch (Lost highway, Blue velvet)
Darren Aronofsky (Pi, Requiem for a dream)
Christopher Nolan (Following Batman begins, the mind f**k that is Memento)

some directors that havnt been talked about on this post:

Wong kar Wai
Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne
Hou Hsiao-hsien
Apichatpong Weerasethakul
Lars von Trier
Terrance Malick

quote:

rgautam Upwardly Mobile Participant
Posted 15 February 2008 07:42 AM

some directors that havnt been talked about on this post:

Wong kar Wai
Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne
Hou Hsiao-hsien
Apichatpong Weerasethakul
Lars von Trier
Terrance Malick

From a mainstream movie poster. Who???? I looked up the directors you listed.

Wong kar Wai - The only Wai movie I've seen is 2046. As I recall, I didn't like it very much.

Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne - I'm assuming you mean Jean-Pierre Dardenne. Haven't heard or seen anything directed by him.

Hsiao-hsien Hou - Same as above.

Apichatpong Weerasethakul - Same as above.

Lars von Trier - I saw his production DOGVILLE. The movie is among my top favorite movies. However, since I evaluate directors on the basis of a number of movies, I can't really comment on Lars as a director yet.

Terrance Malick - Surprisingly, I've heard of Terrance, but I'm also surprised by how little he has accomplished. I saw THE THIN RED LINE. I found it a solid if not fantastic movie. I would tend towards JARHEAD and BLACK HAWK DOWN.

I find the Dardenne Brothers massively overrated, but at least, I've seen four of their films and keep watching what they put out because they try to do something different.

You've seen one von Trier film? That's fine. It's not really very difficult to watch these directors' films at all. You just rent them. As far as von Trier, goes, I've seen six of his, not counting The Five Obstructions which he was the mastermind of.

Terrence Malick is my fave on that list. True, he has only made four features, but I watched them all in the theatre.

quote:

From a mainstream movie poster. Who???? I looked up the directors you listed.

i just wanted to throw some new names out there.
imho these directors are taking cinema into a new direction. they owe a lot to the old schoolers everyones been talking about.

i read your earlier posts where u had trouble narrowing down the directors...i m not even gonna attempt that process. listed above are the ones i m enjoying the most these days.

wong kar wai has the most impressive catalog and is consistently outdoing himself. i d recommend starting off with 'chungking express' and 'days of being wild'. 2046 is kind of the ending to a trilogy that starts with 'days' into 'in the mood for love'. some ppl i ve talked to said 2046 works better if u had seen 'in the mood for love'. so u might wanna try it but i think its his most complex and most accomplished film.

dardenne brothers are making 'real' movies in a sense that their movies look like documentaries with no music or a helping hand to evoke emotions. its just recorded action from the actors and its emotionally devastating to watch some of their films. i d start of with 'the promise' and 'rosseta'. their 2 recent films are my favs 'the son' and 'the child'

i dont wanna write papers on these guys but i ll say this much for malick he makes a movie every 10 yrs but its some of the most breathtaking audio-visuals. black hawk down was a good film but i think 'thin red line' is a more complex film where explanations are only hinted at and there is an eerie undercurrent throughout the film eluding to our relationship with nature.

i d also include tsai ming liang, tarkovsky, almodovar and lynch to the directors i m enjoying right now.

and i have to mention your list real quick: could u explain y u pickd ridley scott and peter weir over the likes of fellini, kurosawa, welles and bergman?

thanx for mentoning david lean....brilliant.

blockbuster has most of these movies, weerasethakul is the newest and the youngest of the directors and i couldnt find him anywhere...so amazon.

quote:

rgautam Upwardly Mobile Participant
Posted 16 February 2008 03:12 PM

quote:
From a mainstream movie poster. Who???? I looked up the directors you listed.

i just wanted to throw some new names out there.
imho these directors are taking cinema into a new direction. they owe a lot to the old schoolers everyones been talking about.

wong kar wai has the most impressive catalog and is consistently outdoing himself. i d recommend starting off with 'chungking express' and 'days of being wild'. 2046 is kind of the ending to a trilogy that starts with 'days' into 'in the mood for love'. some ppl i ve talked to said 2046 works better if u had seen 'in the mood for love'. so u might wanna try it but i think its his most complex and most accomplished film.

i dont wanna write papers on these guys but i ll say this much for malick he makes a movie every 10 yrs but its some of the most breathtaking audio-visuals. black hawk down was a good film but i think 'thin red line' is a more complex film where explanations are only hinted at and there is an eerie undercurrent throughout the film eluding to our relationship with nature.

and i have to mention your list real quick: could u explain y u pickd ridley scott and peter weir over the likes of fellini, kurosawa, welles and bergman?

thanx for mentoning david lean....brilliant.

Some of the best responses I've encountered. The 2046 is better seen the context of other previous movies is a decent point. I'll have to think about that one in terms of if I ever have time or inclination to try it.

Your comment on BLACK HAWK DOWN I will grant you is probably right one target. I experienced BLACK HAWK DOWN as a go along experience that didn't really go deeply into the character or thoughts, emotions...it really was just a rescue movie done very well. THIN RED LINE was more of a character movie, less action, more drama. I really didn't take the time to judge these two military movie on the same basis. When I watched BLACK HAWK DOWN I was more into the experience, less thinking...so it really was a movie that met my interest that day. It's possible I was tired when I went to see THIN RED LINE and didn't want to think much. I can't remember.

As for fellini, kurosawa, welles, and bergman...I'm more of a contemporary film buff and these classic directors you mentioned are likely too sophisticated for my tastes...they have too much going on. Ridley for ALIEN and Peter Weir for PICNIC AT HANGING ROCK were both straight forward without a lot of density, thickness. ALIEN was just plain real. PICNIC AT HANGING ROCK was just plain period (as in time era), hit right on - no more, no less. It remains my number one movie of all time so I can't easily dismiss Peter Weir.

another name i ll throw out there which i have nt seen is Michaelangelo Antonioni. i have only seen 4 of his films and i think he is up there with the other oldschoolers like bergman and fellini.

l'avventura, la notte, l'eclisse are movies where he perfected his language of cinema and contemporary directors owe a lot to him for how he films people in contemporary city landscapes.
Then in color there was 'blowup' - brilliant film about the medium of film and recording action, combined with the swinging 60's culture in London somehow producing a very mysterious film.

Blowup is certainly his best. Zabriskie Point borders on embarrassing, but at least, The Passenger has a superb ending.

Ingmar Bergman is my favorite director of all time, but of those directors still making films today, I'd say my favorites are David Lynch, Claire Denis, Michael Haneke, Lars Von Trier, Olivier Assayas, David Cronenberg, Terrence Malick, and Lynne Ramsey (though she hasn't really done much in the past 5 years or so).

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Platypus Quest,

quote:

Ingmar Bergman is my favorite director of all time, but of those directors still making films today, I'd say my favorites are David Lynch, Claire Denis, Michael Haneke, Lars Von Trier, Olivier Assayas, David Cronenberg, Terrence Malick, and Lynne Ramsey (though she hasn't really done much in the past 5 years or so).

totally forgot about assayas...he is brilliant.
just saw haneke's 'cache' and i must say it was an involving and challenging experience, def gonna check his back catalog.