directors Who is the best director of all time?

I know, it's a ridiculous question, everyone already knows Michael Bay is the greatest director of all time. He practically invented the idea of constantly recycling banal tropes. An influential genius who showed the world that budget can entirely replace creativity!
 
Best Director wins:

(2) Lewis Milestone 1928 and 1930
(2) Frank Borzag 1928 and 1932
(2) Frank Lloyd 1929 and 1933
(2) Leo McCarey 1937 and 1944
(2) Billy Wilder 1945 and 1960
(2) Elia Kazan 1947 and 1954
(2) Joseph L. Mankiewicz 1949 and 1950
(2) George Stevens 1951 and 1956
(2) Fred Zinnemann 1953 and 1966
(2) David Lean 1957 and 1962
(2) Robert Wise 1961 and 1965
(2) Milos Forman 1975 and 1984
(2) Oliver Stone 1986 and 1989
(2) Clint Eastwood 1992 and 2004
(2) Steven Spielberg 1993 and 1998
(2) Ang Lee 2005 and 2012
(2) Alejandro González Iñárritu 2014 and 2015
(3) Frank Capra 1934, 1936 and 1938
(3) William Wyler 1942, 1946 and 1959
(4) John Ford 1935, 1940, 1941 and 1952

winning emperors new groove GIF
:lol:
 
Actually, I have to agree with John Ford. That guy knew how to be incredible and invisible at the same time. He was so great in that he never got in the way of his own film. Contrast that with Zach Snyder, and maybe my meaning will be more clear.
 
King Vidor, because he's always been my idol. Movies like The Champ, Stella Dallas, and The Fountainhead are, IMHO, among the greatest movies of all time. And Henry Hathaway, because he was my neighbor and (to a young kid) somewhat of a hero. Prince Valiant may have been less than memorable, but he made up for it with Lives of a Bengal Lancer, Shepherd Of The Hills, and True Grit.

I still have nightmares of being chased by Robert Wagner and that Dutch-bob haircut.
 
I know he's not listed but I'd like to toss Sam Peckinpah into the mix. Not the greatest of all time but certainly one of the most copied directors. My father went to school with him and they remained friends until he died so on the rare occasion, I got to see him work and even though you could smell the alcohol on him a mile away? He was one of the most diligent directors I have ever seen and I've seen my share up close and personal.
 
(3) Frank Capra 1934, 1936 and 1938

One of my favorite directors. "It Happened One Night" (1934) set the basic format for Rom-Coms that is still followed to this day.

For the time (30s/40s) he was somewhat controversial. The studio thought "Mr. Deeds Goes To Town" was a terrible idea for a film; it won the Oscar in 1937. "Meet John Doe" (1941) had no 'good guys' at the start of the film. The US Congress actually tried to prevent the release of "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington" (1939). And, of course, I must acknowledge "It's A Wonderful Life," the quintessential Christmas film and a lovely slice of Americana; it wasn't a hit in 1946, but resurfaced with a vengeance in the 1980s.

Yes, I'm a fan of almost all of the directors on IndieTalks list, but am especially a fan of Eastwood and Spielberg in addition to Capra.


The best director is the one that makes a film that reaches YOU.
 
One of my favorite directors. "It Happened One Night" (1934) set the basic format for Rom-Coms that is still followed to this day.

For the time (30s/40s) he was somewhat controversial. The studio thought "Mr. Deeds Goes To Town" was a terrible idea for a film; it won the Oscar in 1937. "Meet John Doe" (1941) had no 'good guys' at the start of the film. The US Congress actually tried to prevent the release of "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington" (1939). And, of course, I must acknowledge "It's A Wonderful Life," the quintessential Christmas film and a lovely slice of Americana; it wasn't a hit in 1946, but resurfaced with a vengeance in the 1980s.

Yes, I'm a fan of almost all of the directors on IndieTalks list, but am especially a fan of Eastwood and Spielberg in addition to Capra.


The best director is the one that makes a film that reaches YOU.
Agreed on all points - and I'd add Preston Sturges.

I love Hitchcock movies, especially Vertigo, Rear Window, and North by Northwest.
 
I couldn't begin to pick a best of all time. But certainly, for me, a few in the top ten, responsible for things that were, and that will remain, artistic landmarks, are:

Yes, Frank Capra, a particularly American sensibility, little guy v big guy, that, sadly, seems dated, Capra's natural constituency caricatured, co-opted by . . . but I won't start. I love these movies.

Ingmar Bergman. I had a film class, some x years ago, on Bergman, and those handful of movies--Wild Strawberries, Persona, The Seventh Seal, Smiles of a Summer Night, The Silence--have stuck in my brain, kind of depressing, but with frames of film you could actually frame and hang on some gallery wall.

Kubrick.

Spielberg. To me, just raw pure talent.

And I have to throw in David Lynch--a lot of it, to me, kind of inaccessible, but so unlike anyone else. And when he gets you, he really gets you. I have, for example, watched these 17 minutes maybe 10 times. Who else could have made them?


(still buried on Netflix)

edit: and, speaking of loglines, the one above is pretty good :)
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
I think there is no best director, only possibly a pick of best directors for a given project. Give two directors the same or virtually the same project and you'll likely end up with two very different movies. Ex: The Cave vs. The Descent. For all of its technical achievements, the original Jurassic Park is kind of a turd. Steven Spielberg is too much of a "safe" director for this kind of material. Just about everything he's ever directed is family friendly. Which in and of itself is fine, except the material here features blood-thirsty dinosaurs. An upbeat score that doesn't fit the movie (rejected composer/score had a better idea), terrible pacing, and just about everyone survives including the kids because Hollywood $$ butts in seats. Too bad the movie didn't follow the book.
 
I think there is no best director, only possibly a pick of best directors for a given project. Give two directors the same or virtually the same project and you'll likely end up with two very different movies. Ex: The Cave vs. The Descent. For all of its technical achievements, the original Jurassic Park is kind of a turd. Steven Spielberg is too much of a "safe" director for this kind of material. Just about everything he's ever directed is family friendly. Which in and of itself is fine, except the material here features blood-thirsty dinosaurs. An upbeat score that doesn't fit the movie (rejected composer/score had a better idea), terrible pacing, and just about everyone survives including the kids because Hollywood $$ butts in seats. Too bad the movie didn't follow the book.
In defense of Jurassic Park, I think this is a situation where the spectacle of the book couldn't be realized with the budget that an R rating was projected to return. Often PG movies return 4-5x the budget of their R rated counterparts, meaning that we might have been watching "Jason and the Argonauts" style dinosaurs if they had stuck to the novel more closely. It's not an optimal situation, but I think in a situation where compromise was inherent, we probably got as good of a movie as was possible, all things considered. I do feel like they could have pushed the envelope a bit more on that one, like they did with Raiders. That was a PG movie, but they kept burning people's faces off, which was a real stretch for PG at the time.

However, in a world with unlimited resources and no sacrifices required, I would have loved to have seen David Fincher's take on Jurassic Park.

In a semi unrelated complaint, I'm not 100% sure that Sam Neil was the best possible actor for the main role, or any main role.
 
Last edited:
Hahaha, yes. I can see in my mind the 'Spitter' venom burning Nedry's face off. I mean i'm not a gorehound, just that it would've seemed organic to the scene.
 
Back
Top