Guardian picks top 40 directors

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Using an obsure rating system too:
http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/page/0,11456,1082823,00.html

1. David Lynch
2. Martin Scorsese
3. Joel and Ethan Coen
4. Steven Soderbergh
5. Terrence Malick
6. Abbas Kiarostami
7. Errol Morris
8. Hayao Miyazaki
9. David Cronenberg
10. Terence Davies
11. Lukas Moodysson
12. Lynne Ramsay
13. Bela Tarr
14. Wong Kar-wai
15. Pedro Almodovar
16. Todd Haynes
17. Quentin Tarantino
18. Tsai Ming-Liang
19. Aki Kaurismaki
20. Michael Winterbottom
21. Paul Thomas Anderson
22. Michael Haneke
23. Walter Salles
24. Alexander Payne
25. Spike Jonze
26. Aleksandr Sokurov
27. Ang Lee
28. Michael Moore
29. Wes Anderson
30. Takeshi Kitano
31. Richard Linklater
32. Gaspar Noé
33. Pavel Pawlikowski
34. David O Russell
35. Larry and Andy Wachowski
36. Samira Makhmalbaf
37. Lars von Trier
38. Takashi Miike
39. David Fincher
40. Gus Van Sant

Who was left off? Who should have been left off? Where the FUCK is Spielberg?

Ok, i know list threads are kind of boring so please feel free to turn this into a "current state of cinema" discussion.

― ryan (ryan), Friday, 14 November 2003 20:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Doesn't only one of the Coens actually direct the films?

― chester (synkro), Friday, 14 November 2003 20:28 (twenty-two years ago)

On the credits oen is down as being producer, the other director, but they pretty much share duties, I think.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Friday, 14 November 2003 20:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Sheesh. Could David Lynch be any more overrated? And yeah, Spielberg was robbed. As were Paul Zemeckis, Amy Heckerling, Tim Burton, Sam Raimi, Peter Weir, Clint Eastwood, and a bunch of other people.

― o. nate (onate), Friday, 14 November 2003 20:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Surely "Michael Moore" is a typo-should be "Michael Mann", right? Right? !!!!????!!!!

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 14 November 2003 20:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Steven Soderbergh shouldn't be anywhere near a list like this.

Where are David Gordon Green, Julio Medem, and Curtis Hanson?

Where the FUCK is Spielberg?

Where he belongs! ;)

Interesting to see Walter Salles so high...

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 14 November 2003 20:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Errol Morris at #7? Is Fog of War even out yet? I haven't heard of any of his other films...

And where are s1utsky and Anhtony Miccio???

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 14 November 2003 20:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Right... those categories mean what, exactly? Could they not have given them proper scores, you know, like Long-Range Weaponry and Black Magic?

― William Bloody Swygart (mrswygart), Friday, 14 November 2003 20:57 (twenty-two years ago)

ha i will avoid turning this into a spielberg argument but still you have to admit he is conspicuous by his absense - and it seems that the list is very short on commercial/hollywood type directors.

Errol Morris did "Gates of Heaven" (doc about a pet cemetary) which is beautiful.

― ryan (ryan), Friday, 14 November 2003 20:59 (twenty-two years ago)

my spelling is for shit today

― ryan (ryan), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:00 (twenty-two years ago)

And...why all the love for Michael Winterbottom? He's not bad, but if you're going to have a "joker in the pack", I'd pick someone like Ben Hopkins to shake things up a little. Isn't that what these things are for?

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:01 (twenty-two years ago)

and it seems that the list is very short on commercial/hollywood type directors

Exactly. This list is very rockist.

― o. nate (onate), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:01 (twenty-two years ago)

ha i will avoid turning this into a spielberg argument but still you have to admit he is conspicuous by his absense - and it seems that the list is very short on commercial/hollywood type directors.

Yes he is, but his exclusion seems deliberate whereas leaving Michael Mann off (whatever his MANY faults) just seems like a glaring oversight...

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:03 (twenty-two years ago)

McG should be on there, too! Instead of Spike Jonze!

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:03 (twenty-two years ago)

Why is michael moore ahead of Wes Anderson?

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:07 (twenty-two years ago)

fassbinder!

― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:09 (twenty-two years ago)

Um, isn't he dead?

― o. nate (onate), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:10 (twenty-two years ago)

If Bill & Ted were here we could send them back in time to tell Tim Burton "Dude, I know it sounds like a good idea, but you totally shouldn't do Planet of the Apes, man.", and in that alternate reality he's in the Top 20 on this list.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:10 (twenty-two years ago)

i dont know, the fact that he actually has a sense of humor might hurt him with the crowd that made this list.

― ryan (ryan), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:14 (twenty-two years ago)

*cough cough*coen brothers*cough cough*

I do see your point though.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:21 (twenty-two years ago)

no ridley scott? or even oliver stone for that matter?

― Jack St E (Jack St E), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:22 (twenty-two years ago)

i think that many of these were chosen for political rather then aesthic reasons, as gaurdian would be wont to do. The joy that i have is the sheer no. of v. v. good documentary film makers.

― anthony easton (anthony), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:24 (twenty-two years ago)

christ that list is awful. the top 5 in particular is jaw-droppingly bad. putting michael moore on the list AT ALL = err?

― Justyn Dillingham (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:25 (twenty-two years ago)

i dont know, the fact that he actually has a sense of humor might hurt him with the crowd that made this list.

I don't know, isn't Mann one of the most humorless directors currently working?

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:36 (twenty-two years ago)

ridiculous!

― s1utsky (slutsky), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:57 (twenty-two years ago)

He's here! Everything's going to be alright!

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 14 November 2003 21:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh wait, were you referring to the list or my comment about Michael Mann? Do you think he actually has his fair share of "laffs"? Context! :)

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 14 November 2003 22:02 (twenty-two years ago)

christ almighty! no jean luc godard! /me faints.

also, if you have lynne ramsay, you have to have david gordon green on it too, by principle alone.

― todd swiss (eliti), Friday, 14 November 2003 22:09 (twenty-two years ago)

no, the whole thing is ridiculous, but I hate lists so perhaps I am not qualified to comment! what does it all mean etc.!

― s1utsky (slutsky), Friday, 14 November 2003 22:10 (twenty-two years ago)

Isn't that guy who made great horror films like Braindead some sort of big, awardwinning movie director now? You'd have thought that he might have been in here...

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 14 November 2003 22:16 (twenty-two years ago)

hmm...'substance' rating.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Friday, 14 November 2003 22:22 (twenty-two years ago)

hmm...'substance' rating.

Larry Clark would be #1 on that category alone! ;)

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 14 November 2003 22:24 (twenty-two years ago)

I wonder which substance they are referring to.

― o. nate (onate), Friday, 14 November 2003 22:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Brought to you by Pitchfork. No wait. I suppose Kaurismaki is their excuse for leaving out Jarmusch.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 14 November 2003 22:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Ketchup?

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Saturday, 15 November 2003 00:15 (twenty-two years ago)

No Spike Lee or Terry Gilliam? Surely they deserve spots over David Fincher and Richard Linklater. Also, Lynch over Scorcese makes no sense according to any criteria.

― kyle, Saturday, 15 November 2003 00:49 (twenty-two years ago)

It makes sense re: "credibility."

― Leee Majors (Leee), Saturday, 15 November 2003 00:52 (twenty-two years ago)

No Kurosawa? Ford?

― oops (Oops), Saturday, 15 November 2003 01:05 (twenty-two years ago)

I think they're dead, now.

― RJG (RJG), Saturday, 15 November 2003 01:09 (twenty-two years ago)

kinda raises a disturbing question thought if this list were for all-time, would any of these directors deserve to make it?

― ryan (ryan), Saturday, 15 November 2003 01:12 (twenty-two years ago)

Ah, nevermind. Your post kinda makes it seem like you just tried to off them, rjg.

― oops (Oops), Saturday, 15 November 2003 01:16 (twenty-two years ago)

should be higher:
Wong Kar-wai
Gaspar Noe
Sokurov
Paul Thomas Anderson
Michael Haneke

should be lower:
Coens
Miyazaki
Cronenburg
Lynn Ramsay

shouldnt bloody be on there:
Soderburgh
Pavel Pawlikowski
Linklater
Michael fuckin Moore

― jed (jed_e_3), Saturday, 15 November 2003 03:17 (twenty-two years ago)

Playing devil's advocate here... most of these directors have made at least one film that impressed me in some respect. And some of the stabs at multiculturalism (as bald-faced and easy as they were) with Kiarostami, Tsai and la femme Makhmalbaf were pretty gutsy, assuming most of the readers will be the types to argue over whether P.T. Anderson or David Fincher is the greatest director of all time. Still, I have to go with some of the rest of y'awl who protest the pass given to quite a few of the British directors (Winterbottom in particular).

(And, yes, Fog of War has shown. It was just here in Minneapolis. I had to miss it, though, in order to make time to see Peter Watkins' La Commune.)

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Saturday, 15 November 2003 03:23 (twenty-two years ago)

i agree eric - its mostly a good list, excepting the silly exclusion of david gordon green and probably some others i cant think of!

― jed (jed_e_3), Saturday, 15 November 2003 03:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Bit miffed there seems to be only one female in the list. No Jane Campion for starters.

― Trayce (trayce), Saturday, 15 November 2003 03:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Two women, though why one of them isn't Claire Denis or Catherine Breillat is anyone's guess (excluding those who hate either, obviously).

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Saturday, 15 November 2003 03:43 (twenty-two years ago)

oh yes! campion - she should definatley be on there. i mean her films of late have been below par but she is always interesting. i mean i'd rather watch a failure of hers like "holy smoke" than some steven soderbugh crap.

denis and breillat - yes also, im seeing now how crazy this list is!

― jed (jed_e_3), Saturday, 15 November 2003 03:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Hi, uh, Stanley Kubrick?

― rgeary (rgeary), Saturday, 15 November 2003 04:18 (twenty-two years ago)

I mean, I've enjoyed Todd Haynes' and Alexander Payne's films so far, but come on. Linklater? Gak.

― rgeary (rgeary), Saturday, 15 November 2003 04:18 (twenty-two years ago)

I also like how they hold Tarantino's slowness against him like it's some kind of fault. "Pump out the films already, buddy!" I enjoyed Jackie Brown enough that it doesn't really damage my opinion of him and haven't seen Kill Bill yet, but sheesh, the guy is literally aiming to complete 10 films or so and call it a career. I think he *gains* points for that!

― rgeary (rgeary), Saturday, 15 November 2003 04:20 (twenty-two years ago)

Haha and they rate Malick highly because he is so slow! Sorry, Badlands is one of the least interesting films I've ever seen. And anyone who includes as many unmotivated, random shots of animals as are in The Thin Red Line can't score an 18 for "look."

― rgeary (rgeary), Saturday, 15 November 2003 04:24 (twenty-two years ago)

If i made this list i would put Malick at 1 and Kar-Wai at 2, but that's just me.

Lynch seems to benefit an awful lot from the fact that no one really seems to hate him--he is as good a consensus point as any i guess, but to suggest there is a lot of "substance" or "intelligence" to his films is pretty absurd to my mind.

― ryan (ryan), Saturday, 15 November 2003 05:10 (twenty-two years ago)

rgeary --

Kubrick's not on the list because he's not currently working. This list (with the debatable exception of Terence Malick -- though he's contantly cooking something up) is composed of directors who are still capable of directing films. Being dead and all stands in the way of Kubrick fulfilling this requirement.

Wait... let me get this straight. You assumed this was a list of the greatest 40 directors flat-out full-stop period? And... Kubrick was the only notable omission that struck you from the entire history of cinema?! A list that includes David Fincher, P.T. Anderson, Spike Jonze, the Coens, and Alexander Payne but doesn't include, oh, Hitchcock, Hawks, Welles, Eisenstein, Antonioni, Fellini, Fassbinder, Ford, Ozu, and so on and so forth... and the only exclusion that sits wrong with you is Kubrick's?!

--------

All that said, the list's biggest mistake was excluding Brian De Palma.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Saturday, 15 November 2003 05:30 (twenty-two years ago)

ack! eric, you're totally right. for some reason i thought it was british and american, but it's not (duh) and it's currently working directors. double duh.

still, i wouldn't argue with a list that excluded eisenstein! strike is completely bloody deadly. i dare anyone to sit through it and not fall asleep.

― rgeary (rgeary), Saturday, 15 November 2003 06:52 (twenty-two years ago)

the lack of kurosawa should have been another obvious tip off as to the nature of the list

― rgeary (rgeary), Saturday, 15 November 2003 06:53 (twenty-two years ago)

i've sat through strike! without falling asleep. it's grebt, much more entertaining than potemkin.

why is scorsese in there but not coppola? the latter's still alive, and it's not like the former's done anything interesting in over a decade.

― Justyn Dillingham (Justyn Dillingham), Saturday, 15 November 2003 07:27 (twenty-two years ago)

I want to see Strike. Ivan the Terrible alone makes Eisenstein worth bedding.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Saturday, 15 November 2003 07:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Funny story: I went bowling tonight, and my friend Brian told me about this list. He said it was a weird list, and who did I think was #1. I said, is he American? Brian said yes. I went and got a beer and thought about it. I returned and said, "Altman." Brian said, "Not even on the list." I said, "Spielberg." Brian said, "Not even on the list." Eventually, he gave me enough clues that I was able to guess Lynch, and I'm okay with that, because I do adore Lynch. But what the fuck! No Spielberg OR Altman?

― jaymc (jaymc), Saturday, 15 November 2003 08:42 (twenty-two years ago)

also, if you have lynne ramsay, you have to have david gordon green on it too, by principle alone.

Haha, refer to my ILF thread: "TS: Lynne Ramsay vs. David Gordon Green"!

― jaymc (jaymc), Saturday, 15 November 2003 08:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Todd, we need to talk!!!

― jaymc (jaymc), Saturday, 15 November 2003 08:43 (twenty-two years ago)

jaymc! FAP!

hopefully.

― todd swiss (eliti), Saturday, 15 November 2003 19:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Brian DePalma. Brian DePalma. Brian DePalma.

(kee-rist Femme Fatale was his best film since Casualties Of War!)

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Saturday, 15 November 2003 19:40 (twenty-two years ago)

colin / jed - what do you think of denis, breillat, ramsay?

― athos magnani (Cozen), Saturday, 15 November 2003 19:57 (twenty-two years ago)

This is the first time I've said this on ilx to anyone, but:

Anthony Miccio, I kiss you!

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Saturday, 15 November 2003 20:47 (twenty-two years ago)

so do I

― s1utsky (slutsky), Saturday, 15 November 2003 21:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Lynne ramsay is an interesting figure (she was the year above me at school!) and ratcatcher is terrific, i don't know if it resonates so much outside of a scottish audiense though, and she gets excellent performances in both her films. I dont like Morvern Caller, i think, apart from the acting and some lovely camerawork its pretty much a disaster. It's goos she is on there - she just shouldnt be so high up. Breillat - i have only seem A ma souer which is good - interesting (again!) and vaguely repulsive, but from what i have heard of her other films she's covering subjects that seem unique to her and important at some level (this is mostly conjecture, ahem, can you tell?) Clare denis makes beautiful and intense films and should be on there based on the three films of hers i have seen - especially Beau Travail which is fascinating. And Jane campion is a MAJOR ommision.

what do you reckon athos?

― jed (jed_e_3), Saturday, 15 November 2003 21:56 (twenty-two years ago)

i LOVE ratcatcher colin. i've seen it more than any other film. you can obv. see the clinches (a word i'm using cs i'm drunk) from roeg (i.e. the editing which gives significance to ordinarily non-significant stupid inanimate objects cf. the rasp. ripple in ratcatcher's slashing scene w. any of the editing in roeg's 'don't look now' esp. the scene where the stupid mother falls over at the restaurant.) (other obvious pinch: the starting scene by the canal compared w. the starting scene in 'don't look now'. WTF?!) (i LOVE her and would LOVE to have a pint w. her!) (i don't like Morvern Callar at all tho i thk i'd have to see it again). breillat i'd like to deal w. when less drunk (= i don't have anything at all interesting to say?) jane fuckin campion wtf?!

― athos magnani (Cozen), Saturday, 15 November 2003 22:05 (twenty-two years ago)

the year above you at school!!! wow!

― athos magnani (Cozen), Saturday, 15 November 2003 22:08 (twenty-two years ago)

yes i was pals with her sister anne and she drew me at one point for her art higher ( i had my clothes on) and i met her recently at the cca - she pretended to remember me, which was nice of her. and yes jane campion - sweetie, a work of genius, not so dissimilar from a Lynne ramsay film - an angel at my table and the piana! yes!

Lynne Ramsay's short "the gasman" is just as good as the ratcatcher - amazing.

― jed (jed_e_3), Saturday, 15 November 2003 22:48 (twenty-two years ago)

the CCA is my local. I have never seen anyone famous in there except N., though.

― RJG (RJG), Saturday, 15 November 2003 22:54 (twenty-two years ago)

aye but jane campion? claire denis?! catherine breillat?!!! did you see the latest denis / breillat offerins?

― athos magnani (Cozen), Sunday, 16 November 2003 00:19 (twenty-two years ago)

... assuming you mean the Denis/Breillat thing disparagingly, have you seen the Coens', Winterbottom's, Payne's, Lee's, Moore's, Russell's, or the Wachowski's latest?

I don't think it was the Guardian's intention to judge/choose the directors they did based on the strength of their latest film.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Sunday, 16 November 2003 00:30 (twenty-two years ago)

i don't care about all those other directors eric. h.

― athos magnani (Cozen), Sunday, 16 November 2003 00:32 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah i loved "trouble every day" i didnt see "sex is comedy" though.

― jed (jed_e_3), Sunday, 16 November 2003 00:41 (twenty-two years ago)

No mention of R Kelly then.

― Lynskey (Lynskey), Sunday, 16 November 2003 02:32 (twenty-two years ago)

zero on the french new wave...not good. as mentioned above at least godard should have made it (err, for breathless alone if not for alphaville, weekend, contempt, et al). truffault too, maybe. i love wes anderson to death though so i am glad to see him up there. seconded on kurosawa even though i have only seen "rashomon" (sp?).

― marcg (marcg), Sunday, 16 November 2003 02:33 (twenty-two years ago)

godard is still alive!!!!!!!!!!

― RJG (RJG), Sunday, 16 November 2003 02:35 (twenty-two years ago)

technically speaking, yes

and kiyoshi kurosawa had nowt to do with rashomon, wtf

― Herbstmute (Wintermute), Sunday, 16 November 2003 02:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Alternate 40 - mostly foreign and indie as fuck - (in no particular order; only numbered so that I know I have 40):

1. Edward Yang
2. Zhang Ke Jia
3. Kwon-taek Im
4. Alejandro Gonzalez-Inarritu
5. Bahman Ghobadi
6. Jane Campion
7. Roy Andersson
8. Jean-Marie Straub and Daniele Huillet
9. John Sayles
10. Raoul Ruiz
11. Mike Leigh
12. Spike Lee
13. Jim Jarmusch
14. Jean-Pierre Jeunet
15. Peter Greenaway
16. Amos Gitai
17. Kaige Chen
18. Youssef Chahine
19. Leos Carax
20. Claude Chabrol
21. Robert Altman
22. Peter Weir
23. Shinya Tsukamoto
24. Paolo and Vittorio Taviani
25. Whit Stillman
26. Todd Solondz
27. Curtis Hanson
28. Souleymane Cisse
29. Mohsen Makhmalbaf
30. Ken Loach
31. Emir Kusturica
32. Atom Egoyan
33. Hsiao-hsien Hou
34. Terry Gilliam
35. Joao Botelho
36. Theo Angelopoulos
37. Yimou Zhang
38. Oliver Stone
39. Erik Skjoldbjaerg
40. Idrissa Ouedraogo

― Girolamo Savonarola, Sunday, 16 November 2003 03:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Still missing someone and I think you know who I'm talking about. (seriously though, great list.)

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Sunday, 16 November 2003 08:22 (twenty-two years ago)

number 37?

― athos magnani (Cozen), Sunday, 16 November 2003 11:07 (twenty-two years ago)

i think thats all just made up names.

― jed (jed_e_3), Sunday, 16 November 2003 13:09 (twenty-two years ago)

UGH. Well here's mine for what it's worth, in no order:

Atom Egoyan
Brian DePalma
Daniel Puffin
Todd Haynes
Werner Herzog
Rie Kalmykow
Lungfa Savarino
Krystof Kryszlowzki
Lilyan Brundritt
Margareta Pillinger
Helen Villmer
Thurman Mirtly
Hubert Castro
Brad Neconie
Ang Lee
Sofia Coppola
Esther Tilly
Tomas Davis
Royce Gracie
Takeshi Kitano
Paris Hilton
You Sucka

― Dancing Queen, Sunday, 16 November 2003 13:23 (twenty-two years ago)

girolamo - is edward yang the man behind yi-yi?

― athos magnani (Cozen), Sunday, 16 November 2003 14:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Still missing someone and I think you know who I'm talking about. (seriously though, great list.)

Thanks. Umm...uh...Barney?

UGH. Well here's mine for what it's worth, in no order:

Kieslowski is dead.

girolamo - is edward yang the man behind yi-yi?

Yes. And a great many other excellent films!

― Girolamo Savonarola, Sunday, 16 November 2003 16:07 (twenty-two years ago)

my friend says (i'm sure i've said this before) yi-yi is #2 all-time but that his other films are 'alright' but nowhere near as good no.

― athos magnani (Cozen), Sunday, 16 November 2003 16:17 (twenty-two years ago)

What about A Brighter Summer Day? Or Taipei Story and In Our Time, for that matter?

― Girolamo Savonarola, Sunday, 16 November 2003 16:19 (twenty-two years ago)

i'll ask him.

― athos magnani (Cozen), Sunday, 16 November 2003 16:37 (twenty-two years ago)

thats a fine group of directors girolamo but i would hope an "alternate" list would solve at least one of the problems of the first one!

― ryan (ryan), Sunday, 16 November 2003 16:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Roy Andersson!

Taviani Brothers!

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Sunday, 16 November 2003 18:00 (twenty-two years ago)

David Lynch, Har Har Har!!

― Pete S, Sunday, 16 November 2003 18:05 (twenty-two years ago)

If Gaspar Noe is on there then where's Wes Craven? OK he only did three good ones, but as they were 'Last House on the Left', 'Hills Have Eyes' and 'Nightmare 1', that's good enough

― dave q, Sunday, 16 November 2003 18:34 (twenty-two years ago)

My list:

1. S1utsky
2. Aki Kaurismaki
3. McG
4. Anthony Miccio
5. Steve Martin in "Bowfinger"

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Sunday, 16 November 2003 18:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Where the hell's Mel Gibson?

― Pete S, Sunday, 16 November 2003 18:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Bob Clark? Rafael Zelinski?

― dave q, Sunday, 16 November 2003 18:48 (twenty-two years ago)

kevin costner?

― jed (jed_e_3), Sunday, 16 November 2003 18:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Sorry, Giarlomo. I sort of assume that everyone knows me as the resident De Palma freak wherever I am.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Sunday, 16 November 2003 19:39 (twenty-two years ago)

As everyone knows me as the resident Oliver Stone freak I am. But this is my list, biatch!

― Girolamo Savonarola, Sunday, 16 November 2003 19:41 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't really consider myself a DePalma freak (I'm not a fan of Mission To Mars, Raising Cain, Bonfire Of The Vanities or even much of Scarface). I'm just someone who realizes he's the best American director of the last quarter century.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 16 November 2003 19:48 (twenty-two years ago)

wht films did he do? heat?

― athos magnani (Cozen), Sunday, 16 November 2003 19:52 (twenty-two years ago)

imdb.com

i meant, wht films did he do tht mean he's the best American director of the last century?

― athos magnani (Cozen), Sunday, 16 November 2003 19:53 (twenty-two years ago)

But Anthony, that's just because you're a Paulette.

― jaymc (jaymc), Sunday, 16 November 2003 20:12 (twenty-two years ago)

It's not JUST because I'm a Paulette.

I said last QUARTER century. I don't want him to have to compete with John Huston (hee hee PAULINE IS IN MY BRAIIIIIN!)

the best answer would probably be Dressed To Kill, followed by Casualties Of War, The Fury, Carrie, Blow Out, Femme Fatale and a few others. Other directors have had good track records to but I think directorially Brian DePalma has achieved some unparalleled effects. I'm astounded by his work on multiple levels.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 16 November 2003 20:20 (twenty-two years ago)

I can't think of anyone else who not only has mastered the filmic language but expands upon it (with a hell of a lot of humor too).

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 16 November 2003 20:23 (twenty-two years ago)

Damn I'm pissed off at myself because I recently saw a movie that I thought was slightly DePalmian (rather than merely Hitchockian) and I can't remember what it was.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 16 November 2003 20:26 (twenty-two years ago)

OH! Now I remember. Final Destination.

And here's where you all dismiss my opinions forever.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 16 November 2003 20:27 (twenty-two years ago)

that's interesting, but what is the difference between De Palmian and Hitchcockian?

― ryan (ryan), Sunday, 16 November 2003 20:30 (twenty-two years ago)

that's difficult because Hitchcock's career is rich enough that you could probably find at least one example of Hitchcock doing something that DePalma did 80 times, which would make it hard to say it's truly DePalmian. I'd say it's a little more nakedly macabre and sensual. Also more self-aware and comical. Pop trash. American. Though the anthromorphizing of inaminate objects in Final Destination leans a little more towards early Speilberg when I think about it.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 16 November 2003 20:36 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd probably be quicker to call something like Talented Mr. Ripley or Shallow Grave Hitchcockian.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 16 November 2003 20:38 (twenty-two years ago)

The simple answer:

Hitchcock : Classic genre :: DePalma : Pomo formalism

Of course, putting it simply is tres limiting.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Monday, 17 November 2003 02:30 (twenty-two years ago)

I mean... I've seen / been involved in more debates centering around De Palma vs. Argento than De Palma vs. Hitchcock. I've always sort of thought that Argento is, in many ways, closer to Hitchcock. De Palma's a bit more like Godard. (Alright, I admit that Armond White had to tip me off on that one.)

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Monday, 17 November 2003 02:32 (twenty-two years ago)

UGH. Well here's mine for what it's worth, in no order:
Kieslowski is dead.

-- Girolamo Savonarola (gsa...), November 16th, 2003.

Heh Giro I'm not actually into films at all anymore so I'm not surprised I didn't know that. But anyways, if you look closely at my list, half the names are taken from the "joy of stupid spam names" thread, and one of them is Paris Hilton.

One of the cruellest things I've been doing lately is reading one of those really snooty or exotic spam names in the morning and later asking people if they are "familiar with his work" and give them quiet, judging looks no matter what the response.

― Dancing Queen, Monday, 17 November 2003 02:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Haha, that's awesome!

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 17 November 2003 02:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Anthony, btw, I didn't mean to be snide. I just know, from various things you've posted, that you like Kael, so I thought I'd make a little dig.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 17 November 2003 02:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Hold up. Spammers are using Kieslowski's name to schill they shit now?!

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Monday, 17 November 2003 02:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Where the FUCK is Francis Ford Coppola?! God DAMN it.

― Andrew (enneff), Monday, 17 November 2003 03:13 (twenty-two years ago)

Everyone thought of Jack and cried.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 November 2003 03:15 (twenty-two years ago)

and then they thought of his bit of "new york stories" and cried more.

― jed (jed_e_3), Monday, 17 November 2003 03:46 (twenty-two years ago)

don't forget Dracula!

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Monday, 17 November 2003 03:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, I think that while you can bring people's older work into consideration, they have to have at least done some decent stuff within the past ten years. Otherwise why not cite Bergman and Antonioni - after all, they are still alive.

― Girolamo Savonarola, Monday, 17 November 2003 07:09 (twenty-two years ago)

indeed -- why put malick on when he's done 1 film in 25 years? which wasn't even all that great. if he's being judged on past form, why not godard, bertolucci, etc. why samira not mohsen? where's hou? yang?

― enrique (Enrique), Monday, 17 November 2003 09:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Gaspar Noé is the only French director on the list? Come on, the guy the guy has made two feature-length films, neither of which are that good. I don't think you should put directors with less than three films on such lists. Also, Takashi Miike and Takeshi Kitano may be cult favourites, but there are certainly artistically better directors in Japan (Shinji Aoyama, Kiyoshi Kurosawa, Masato Harada for example).

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 17 November 2003 11:29 (twenty-two years ago)

how can moodysson be justified if there's no bergman? it's k-absurd -- either make a list of grebt directors NOW ACTIVELY GOOD or don't. scorsese is only there because of past work, ditto malick. but anyway, these lists are always a bit silly. it what sense is alex payne 'one better' than spike jonze? and does auteurism always need justification? (ie the coens are great writers; soderbergh knows who to call; jonze needs kaufman).

― enrique (Enrique), Monday, 17 November 2003 11:33 (twenty-two years ago)

I think Bergman is rather on the dead side too, but the point is fair - if it's on career work for living directors, Coppola should be high up in there, if it's on recent form, Scorsese shouldn't.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Monday, 17 November 2003 18:18 (twenty-two years ago)

I would like to see a list like this for screenwriters.

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Monday, 17 November 2003 18:20 (twenty-two years ago)

good working directors that were not included off the top of my head

manoel de oliveira
edward yang
hou hsiao-hsien
johnnie to
hong sang-soo
michael mann
hal hartley
theo angelopoulos (is he still "working" i dunno)
im kwon-taek

― amateurist, Monday, 17 November 2003 18:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Angelopoulos is definitely still working.

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Monday, 17 November 2003 18:34 (twenty-two years ago)

Martin, Bergman isn't dead.

― Andrew L (Andrew L), Monday, 17 November 2003 20:10 (twenty-two years ago)

"It's only a movie, Ingrid"

― Andrew L (Andrew L), Monday, 17 November 2003 20:28 (twenty-two years ago)

I would like to see a list like this for screenwriters.

Many of the directors listed are screenwriters.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Monday, 17 November 2003 21:40 (twenty-two years ago)

Ooh, I thought he'd died some years ago! Sorry! He has just retired then, which admittedly hardly makes me right, but he's still not a current director.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Monday, 17 November 2003 21:41 (twenty-two years ago)

au contraire, he's just coming back. he wrote 'faithless' which i think ullman directed a couple years ago. i think it's tough putting sophomore directors like lynn ramsay/spike jonze next to veterans. there are plenty of great films made by people who never really worked again at the same level -- carax is one of these, i'd argue, who's at least as good as tarantion but hasn't quite lit any fires since.

― enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 18 November 2003 09:33 (twenty-two years ago)

He's never been inactive as a person - but he's finished with film as a director. He occasionally kicks around scripts, which usually get passed along to Ullman, but he still does plenty of stuff for TV.

― Girolamo Savonarola, Tuesday, 18 November 2003 13:10 (twenty-two years ago)

no, i think he has just directed again. S&S did a set report. i'm pretty sure. ditto antonioni, allegedly.

― enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 18 November 2003 13:12 (twenty-two years ago)

Saraband is a TV movie.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000005/

― Girolamo Savonarola, Tuesday, 18 November 2003 13:26 (twenty-two years ago)

fair dos.

― enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 18 November 2003 13:33 (twenty-two years ago)

two years pass...

revive... the Bos Phoenix's Gerald Peary named his 7 greatest living NARRATIVE filmmakers as Bergman, Antonioni, Godard, Altman, Herzog, Polanski, Chabrol.

He polled his readers and among 60 discrete suggestions, got "not a single vote for Steven Spielberg, Spike Lee, or Ang Lee. Nada for Pedro Almodóvar or any Spanish-language filmmaker. Or any African, Italian, or Russian one. Jane Campion was the only woman filmmaker to get more than one vote. The other female directors who made ballots: Chantal Akerman, Elaine May, Claire Denis."

http://thephoenix.com/article_ektid10519.aspx

Mine: Bergman, Godard, Ousmane Sembene, Altman, Eric Rohmer, Scorsese, Shohei Imamura.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 2 May 2006 18:49 (nineteen years ago)

I was just wondering about Imamura yesterday - mainly wondering if he had another film in him and hoping so. Imamura of the last decade is so good.

Mine: Sembene, Kiarostami, de Oliviera, Godard, Imamura, Hou Hsiao Hsien, Sokurov.

― TRG (TRG), Tuesday, 2 May 2006 19:54 (nineteen years ago)

Chris Marker
Brian De Palma
Agnes Varda
Abbas Kiarostami
Robert Altman
Larry Cohen
Steven Spielberg (boring, cliched caveat: only the stuff from the last five years, et al)

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 05:29 (nineteen years ago)

godard, resnais, kiarostami, altman, lynch, zhang-ke, and cronenberg (because he is fun)

i dont include the likes of bergman and antonioni because neither has made anything worth while since the 60's basically

― t0dd swiss (immobilisme), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 06:35 (nineteen years ago)

ten narrative film makers b/w 1910 and 1990:

DW Griffith
Max Olphus
Douglas Sirk
Leni Refiensthal
Akira Kurwasawa
Liliana Cavani
Ranier Fassbinder
Fellini
Wong Kar-wai
Errol Morris

another ten
victor fleming,
alfred hitchcock,
jean luc godard,
quentin tarintino,
william castle,
sergi eisenstein,
robert altman,
nicholas ray,
ernst lubitsch
werner herzog

and a last ten
george cukor,
robert bresson,
william wyler,
brian de palma,
tarkosvsky,
otto preimger,
john waters,
kieslowski,
kenneth anger,
bob fosse,
,

its utterly shameful how little women are on that list, and it tends towards domestic melodrama, i know

― anthony easton (anthony), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 07:08 (nineteen years ago)

you actually enjoy griffith and riefenstahl?

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 09:45 (nineteen years ago)

My favourite directors working today:

Pedro Almodovar (probably the most consistently good director of the last 20 years)
Jim Jarmusch
Jean-Pierre Jeunet
Hiroyuki Tanaka aka Sabu
Hayao Miyazaki
Peter Jackson (has never made a bad film)
Ang Lee
Terry Gilliam

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 10:22 (nineteen years ago)

Peter Jackson (has never made a bad film)

lolololol

but he's not as bad as almodovar.

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 10:24 (nineteen years ago)

Enrique very OTM. also: Miyazake UGH. all in all a truly awful list.

― jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 10:33 (nineteen years ago)

Well okay, Bad Taste was kinda meh, but even The Frighteners had some great bits in it ("My body is a roadmap of pain!"). And King Kong was fun and sad.

What's wrong with Almodovar?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 10:43 (nineteen years ago)

i don't know where to start, really.

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 10:45 (nineteen years ago)

early almodovar = horribly camp and yet still manages to be utterly boring. late almodovar = less camp because he's "matured" but still dull as fuck.

― jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 10:48 (nineteen years ago)

I've never heard anyone call Almodovar dull or boring! Most of his films are fast-paced melodramas, I guess you can criticize them for being over-the-top, but "dull" isn't a word I'd use.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 10:58 (nineteen years ago)

they're only "not dull" if you find '70s sexual politics the last word in cinematic thrillage.

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:00 (nineteen years ago)

Huh? How many Almodovar films deal with sexual politics? I think they're rather apolitical, i.e. queer people are just any other characters to him, not plot points.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:02 (nineteen years ago)

"just as any other"

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:02 (nineteen years ago)

Huh? How many Almodovar films deal with sexual politics? I think they're rather apolitical, i.e. queer people are just any other characters to him, not plot points.

-- Tuomas (lixnix...), May 3rd, 2006.

yeah cos in spain that's an apolitical stance.

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:03 (nineteen years ago)

Good grief! No Jean-Pierre Melville on any of these lists?

― Jay Vee's Return (Manon_69), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:08 (nineteen years ago)

"over the top melodrama" is pretty much the definition of dull for me. having said that, though, i can appreciate someone like John Waters because he's pretty good at what he does.

― jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:11 (nineteen years ago)

So maybe his sexual politics are still valid rather than stuck in 70's... Anyway, I can't really see your point, since I think Almodovar pretty much exemplifies a queer stance of today rather than any seventies notion towards sexuality. Would you care to elaborate on the subject?

(xx-post)

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:14 (nineteen years ago)

no, it's too boring.

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:20 (nineteen years ago)

You know, man, it'd be easier to cow people into submission with your rep if you had, like, a different rep.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:24 (nineteen years ago)

yeah cos in spain that's an apolitical stance.

eh?

― Andrew (enneff), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:24 (nineteen years ago)

andrew 1: i'm not trying to cow anyone
andrew 2: ie, tuomas is being disingenuous

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:30 (nineteen years ago)

Okay, maybe apolitical was a wrong word, what I meant is that his films aren't trying to make any sort of "gays are human beings too" statement, many of his characters just happen to be queer in one sense or another, but that's not the point of the films. So yeah, portraying queer characters without making a statement of their queerness is political, but I still find your comment about 70's sexual politics mystifying.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:36 (nineteen years ago)

andrew 2: ie, tuomas is being disingenuous

He's not the one claiming that Almoldovar is self-evidently a rubbish director.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 11:56 (nineteen years ago)

well, no, i'm the one doing that.

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 12:04 (nineteen years ago)

Make with your list, Enrique.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 12:17 (nineteen years ago)

I'm surprised the first mention of both Marker and Varda came only after my post (not sure how I forgot them on my list either, although neither are exactly narrative anymore). Varda is as good as she's ever been, and I secretly hold out hope that Marker has one more masterpiece (his short film about Tarkovsky was brilliant).

― TRG (TRG), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 12:40 (nineteen years ago)

I would put Varda first among living women (with Campion and Elaine May next), but mostly on the strength of just Cleo and Vagabond, as I'm not sure how I can resolve her nonfic work with the 'narrative' criterion.

you actually enjoy griffith and riefenstahl?

They're both essential film grammarians (and Godard has made about 3 'enjoyable' films in his career).

Second living seven: Kiarostami, Spielberg, Leigh, M Makhmalbaf, Cronenberg, Coppola, and either Polanski, Hou, Woody, Tsai or Lumet.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 12:59 (nineteen years ago)

They're both essential film grammarians

k, but who's putting actual grammarians in their list of favourite writers?

(and Godard has made about 3 'enjoyable' films in his career).

pshaw!

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 13:09 (nineteen years ago)

enrique's arbitrary 7 (so many films i like are one-offs, or two-offs or whatever):

actually naw, i'm not doing it, there's hardly any directors where i've seen everything they've done, or when they have, they haven't made very many films at all! so, y'know, 'michel gondry', 'cept that one of his two films released to date was a bit rubbish. 'alain resnais' but i've not seen 'muriel'. 'antonioni' based on too many vcr viewings.

i think linklater is the only director on my list where i've seen all of their films (except 'bad news bears').

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Wednesday, 3 May 2006 13:15 (nineteen years ago)

Great Filmmakers are about where Great Novelists are, ie 96-98% dead.

I was trying to think if I left out any Outside the Usual Paradigm directors whose new work I invariably run to see, and there's one: George Kuchar (Mike K would likely be in the top 25 too).

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 4 May 2006 14:12 (nineteen years ago)

Great Filmmakers are about where Great Novelists are, ie 96-98% dead.

lols. novels have been around c. 300 years, films... 110 years. so active filmmakers from 1/3 - 1/2 of cinema history are still going.

― the Enrique who acts like some kind of good taste gestapo (Enrique), Thursday, 4 May 2006 14:15 (nineteen years ago)

I'd also put Bela Tarr near the top.

― TRG (TRG), Thursday, 4 May 2006 15:21 (nineteen years ago)

Best seven living and still at or right around at their peak: Dardennes bros, Wong Kar Wai, Von Triers, Morris, Leigh, Akin, Twyker.

Best living seven (even though all but one are well past their peak): Allen, Herzog, Scorsese, Fukasaki, Wong Kar Wai, Polanski, Malick.

Best ever alive or dead:
Lang, Kubrick, Kurosawa, Melville, Hitchcock, Leone, Polanski.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 4 May 2006 15:56 (nineteen years ago)

Too be honest I am thinking that Leigh might maybe belong in the second category now.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 4 May 2006 15:57 (nineteen years ago)

What other directors from the first 1/3 of cinema history are still going outside of Manoel de Oliveira?

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:50 (nineteen years ago)

DW Griffith's corpse still directs apparently.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:58 (nineteen years ago)

? I didn't see him on anyone's Living list; has AT&T done an Intolerance ad?

Don't know of any '30s directors besides de Oliveira; with Robert Wise dead, I can't even think of one right now who stretches back to the '40s other than Bergman.

so active filmmakers from 1/3 - 1/2 of cinema history are still going.

Yeah, and in the last 25 years most seem as bereft of ideas as post-1970 fiction writers.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:18 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, I can't think of any from the '40s either, but then you get to the '50s and it's a different story altogether.

― TRG (TRG), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:45 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.