Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Who do you think is the most talented filmmaker of all time?

M. Night Sylmalan (sp?)

I second that. The Village is gonna be f#cken awesome.

Stanley Kubrick.

1. QT
2. Scorsese
3. M. Night
4. Kubrick

Steven Spielberg duh

No, he just knows how to capitalize in the box-office.

I think I'd go for Kubrick, though I don't like some stuff of his
I like Spielberg as well; doesn't matter if he's doing it for money... he's talented

Tim Burton, Sam Raimi, James Cameron, Steven Spielberg

Not neccessarily in that order

James Cameron (hell, I'm agreeing with Film Prophet...)
Alfred Hitchcock
Peter Jackson (Not just for LOTR either... Dead-Alive, anyone?)

Peter Jackson will also be doing King Kong soon

Spielberg
Burton
Cameron
Raimi
Kubrick
Peter Jackson
Luc Besson
M. Night Shyamalan
Ridley Scott

Not necessarily in that order, of course..but for the most part.

Peter Jackson
Spielburg(sp)

all the greats are greats and cannot be compared to each other. they even borrow off of each others style, this is how they become so damn good, there is a polanksi flick that is just as good as a scorsese film, there is a spielberg movie as great as a cameron or Kubrick, ounce you break through all the bullshit, you have a circle of directors that have just as much vision and talent as the other, but produces it in there own way. so i really dont think you can single out just one of the top dogs because there all great, but the ass-hole who made babies day out should defaintly be drug out into the street and wrapped in barbaed wire while someone takes a grinder to his skull

For me is a tie between Fritz Lang and Akira Kurosawa.

Quentin Tarantino!

Jackson, still and forever

Thankyou for making this thread less of a circle jerk shitfest. I despair of people who spew up the same old names with no indication of why they think so-and-so is worth our time.

People like Tarantino, Cameron and Rami are fine entertaining directors but saying they are the "best of all time" (a nonsensical claim in any case) is beyond ludicrous. Those of you who can't think beyond the latest hot-ticket mainstream "cool" list might bear it mind It's the equivalent of Saying Britnee Spears makes the worlds "best ever" music. It's a populist approach, and makes you look like sheep. Baaaahhhh!


Federico Felini
Carl Theodor Dreyer
Billy Wilder
Robert Bresson
Ingmar Bergman
James Whale
Roman Polanski


None of these are the "greatest", but compared to most of the people mentioned so far on this page they are geniuses. Film is an art - I love popular popcorn cinema, but don't go confusing your knowledge of mass audience pleasing fare with the true giant talents of the film medium.

I'm a huge fan of QT, but in no way I would put him on the top three. I'm glad you've mention Ingmar Bergman....I myself starting to discover his films.

Ed Wood

Its not even close. Kubrick has made a great films in many different genres like drama, horror, comedy etc.

Uwe Boll

I meant mine as my favorites. I wasn't really saying they are the best of all time. Its just my personal favs. M. Night wouldn't be a top of all time either since he is just now coming out with his 4th film.

Oh, what you are saying is that you ignored the actual topic of the thread and used it as an excuse to list your favorite directors, much in the way the pre-teens in the LOTR forum will leap at any excuse to type "ORLANDO!!!"

My mistake - I can only apologize for not working that out.

Burton, Kubrick, Coppola, Spielberg, etc

everyone forgot Hitchcock

Don't get smart ass with me. God forbit I post an opinion without being attacked.

Given the clientele of this board, myself included, perhaps we're not directly familiar with those directors? Frankly, it doesn't sound as if their "art" would be something I am interested in.

I watch movies to be entertained, and if I want to see art, I'll go to a gallery. Stupid pun, granted, but I doubt I am alone. In addition to that, how easily accessible are these director's works in the U.S. by way of rental? Virtually non-existant.

Besides, our taste in movies, eclectic or lying in film noir, foreign, etc, doesn't necessarily reflect our character. Live and let live. Set a good example for those who may want to explore the avenue of foreign film, instead of turning your nose up at them.

Everyone except primitive screwloose who listed him on the previous page.

For once we have something we can both agree on

Point well taken - you have no interest in great cinema as art - and if a film doesn't "entertain" then you don't want to know.

Personally i'm open to being moved, mystified, educated, bewildered, angered, excited, enraged... but thats just strange old me.

But that begs the question - Why would you list a bunch of mainstream directors (ok, Luc Besson is the exception) in a "most talented of all time" thread, unless like Myth you don't actually care about what topic a thread is addressing and just like to list your fave "entertaining" directors.

Yes, I know trying to talk about film in a serious manner at KMC is (given - as you say - the clientele) perhaps a waste of time, but dont expect me to quit any time soon: I have my reasons.

As to rental of any of my directors listed - try going a non multipex cinema once in a while, you may even find the popcorn tastes better: hell even blockbuster has a foreign film section. Tho Wilder, Polanski and Whale don't count as "foreign film" assuming you meant "not in english"?

Ummm...I find movies of the past much more entertaining and much more original. By todays standards movies are stuffed with CGI and recycle plotlines from previous films. Rarely we get to see a film that outstands the rest. Hardly anything interesting these days in filmaking. If it is about taste and not about quality I can understand.....but if it is about entertainment....well, to each his own.

I don't see the Coen brothers listed either. BLASPHEMY!

See now ... the Coens belong in this thread.

So what you are saying is mainstream directors are not talented?
James Cameron: Titanic
Steven Spielberg: Saving Private Ryan
Tim Burton: Edward Scissorhands

QUOTE MR ZERO
Personally i'm open to being moved, mystified, educated, bewildered, angered, excited, enraged... but thats just strange old me.

Are you also telling me that those films don't do these things?

Holy shit how could I forget

I'm not sure if this thread is the place to argue the point - but since it's your thread...? Bear in mind these are directors I admire.

James Camerons "The Love Boat" - I'm sorry i meant "Titanic" has a cliche driven plot that is laughably simple used to hang the big effects that Cameron was really interested in around. It's a snore.

Spielberg should have made one change to SP Ryan - he should have put "THE END" after the beach storming because the film gets worse and worse from that point till it dissolves in a wash of knee-jerk "kill the Nazi scum" nonsense. The end of the film (ryan as flashback/narrator) doesnt even make any sense. Most over-rated movie in a decade.

Burton. Burton makes fairy-tales and (to stretch a metaphor,) tho you can't say fairy-tales are great novels you could say a well crafted magical tale has a resonance and depth that most stories lack. I think Scisorhands is a flawless film and a true classic. I dont think burton has proved himself to be one of the "all time great" directors, but I never miss his movies on the big screen. Time will tell - he may have greatness in him.

Just because a talented filmmaker happens to be mainstream doesn't mean he is not worthy of being called one of the most talented filmmakers of all time. Anyway moving on I think one of the filmmakers we have forgotten to mention is Brian Depalma.

I wouldn't know what constitutes great cinema in your opinion, honestly. It's just a matter of not virtually being unable to latch onto anything outside of a video rental store, honestly. That said, I'm equally as open, given the outlet is there, and it's not, for me anyway.

As for my personal list of directors, it's an amalgam of whom I feel are the best "mainstream" directors of our time, given that's all I am familiar with, interlaced with what few Nat'l/other directors I know. Besson, really only having 3 recognizble movies (Nikita, Wasabi, and Leon) and Polanski (The Pianist), whom I forgot to include.

Arthouse cinema in North Carolina? When the state motto is "We Miss Dale Earnhardt!", you'd understand that film societies are about as important as education, here.

He's had about 6 movies worth mentioning in his 40 year career. Sadly, he'll be remembered moreso for the horribly overrated "Scarface", and less for "Carrie".

I rented "Casualties of War", however, and plan on taking that in tonight, or tomorrow.

I swear I'm not doing this just to go against C-Adiction but I think DePalma is one of the few western mainstream directors who's work is worth talking about in depth. A real stylist and almost impossible to categorize.

He is completely different from most directors out there

Not to be patronizing but if you get the chance, Subway and Big Blue (directors cut please). Joan of Arc (Messenger in the USA?) is flawed for sure but still a WOW of a movie. And since you like popcorn - who could fail to like The 5th Element? Besson gets around.

Except when he's trying to be Hitchcock, and even then he has his own slant.

Yanno he's considered something of an auteur in France. But then they think Jerry Lewis is funny - so what do they know.

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
He's had about 6 movies worth mentioning in his 40 year career. Sadly, he'll be remembered moreso for the horribly overrated "Scarface", and less for "Carrie".

Its true he will be remembered the most for Scarface but its because it was just that good. If any director could choose to be remembered the most for one particular film it would be a great film like this. The film so perfectly showed how those times really were. The best performance of Pacino's life was done in this film. Not overrated at all

"Joan of Arc" is readily available. I was going to rent "Amelie" as well, but rented "Dirty Pretty Things", and was kind of turned off by Audrey Tautou's performance, there.

"The Fifth Element" totally slipped my mind. Out of sight, out of mind, I sold my DVD copy a few weeks ago.

BTW, I don't mind the suggestions. I'd love to explore new avenues cinematically.



The movie, overall, is very overhyped. It's just like one long cuss word, with one long murder scene, and one long rail of coke getting sniffed. Just because it's a remake of a classic film noir, set in the drug war times of Miami doesn't make it an instant classic.

In addition, you shoud honestly rethink your position on Pacino's greatest role, unless you've never seen Serpico, Donnie Brasco, or this little movie called "The Godfather". "Scarface" has very little to offer in the way of emotional range, it's all tough guy acting.

COMPLETELY WRONG. You clearly don't appreciate this film at all because you don't know how it is to be in the position the character was in I won't tell you how but I knew a person in the same exact position just not on that level who came here to the US under the same circumstances who had to live a life just the same until his untimely demise. So I know first hand that Al Pacino played the character just how he would be in real life so to me its just not some cocaine sniffing gun shooting movie its more like a true story of the man I knew. Don't put down a film you know nothing about.

Steven Spielberg

Sam Raimi also

For originality, Quinten Tarantino

Spielberg has made some pretty cheesy movies, but the guy has undoubted talent. Mainstream and as big of blockbusters as he has made he still has real talent, though it is often squandered.

James Cameron though.....what really great movie has he ever made? I mean Terminator was cool and all, but that doesn't get him on my list of top 20 directors. Titanic was cheesy as all get up.

M Night is way overhyped. I mean "The Sixth Sense" was very good but "Signs" and "Unbreakable" were so-so. I wouldn't use one good movies (not one of the all-time greats) to put a guy in the class of elite directors.

I think you have all missed a few names though.

Orson Welles - way, way ahead of his time

Errol Morris - I know most people don't like documentaries much, but I love them, and this guy has made by far the best collection of films in recent history.

I'm "wrong" and don't appreciate a movie because I don't know someone who "lived like he did"?

Thank you for that totally irrrelevant, prejudice, and assinine assumption. You logic is seriously ****ed, and I smell bullshit.



You're joking, right?



Uhh..he only wrote AND directed "Aliens", "Terminator", "Terminator 2", and "The Abyss". For the handful of movies he's done, he's godly. Of course, no matter how much you may dislike "Titanic", that's his too.

Jesus F*cking Christ. You are a know it all little shit aren't you. I post my favorite directors and you attack me. So I clarify that they are my favs and not the greatest of all time and you attack me again for not doing 'exactly' as the topic says. I tell you to back off and you still attack me along with criticizing others.

Anyway, I also disagree with Scarface just being a "tough guy" act. It has possibly one of the greatest character developments in movie history (IMO, but don't attack me for it). I'd also like to add that Brian Depalma also did Carlito's Way which I don't think gets as much recognition as it deserves.

M.Night Shamalayn is my favorite director

btw all, favorite and most talented are different things

I said Spielberg because he is prolly the most successful so I was wrong too

Talent is a thing left to the seer so there will be no clear cut winner.

So now I reinsert my Film maker vote as Sam Raimi before Spiderman

What I'm sayng is that you don't know how those times really were its about coming to the US and having no choice but to either sell drugs or be homeless. Its not just sensless violence and drug use there is actual story behind it all if you ever took the time to read a history book. Prejudice?? You smell bullshit??

Well, since Tony Montana is a fictional character, I don't think the story of he, or any other Cuban immigrant cum drug lord will be chronicled in any history book.

And yes, I am well aware of the actual story behind the movie. It's the same of that in the 1932 "Scarface", the American dream, and one man's rise and subsequent fall, just like Al Capone. It was nothing new.

For you to flat out assume that I don't know what it's like having to sell something, or be homeless, like I said, is ludicrous. You don't know the first thing about me, so don't even start with me. That's the prejudice I am talking about. It isn't just applied to race, believe it or not.

Lastly, yes, I smell bullshit. Just because you claimed you lived next door Scarface doesn't help you relate to the theme of the movie. Unless you've lived it, I highly doubt you know the intricacies of a drug cartel.

I think you're just shooting your mouth off, frankly, given the cloak of anonymity you've been dawning since your arrival. Dodging questions about your age, your location, claiming to know about filmmaking. These aren't assumptions, just observations. Don't be so secretive, unless you have something to hide, kid.

I have to agree.

WRONG, WRONG AND WRONG. The story behind it is about what actually happended in the early 80's when Fidel Castro and Jimmi Carter nogotiated to send about 10,000 Cubans to the US in ships and among those was the character Scarface but in real life I knew one of those people very closely. When they got here they either worked for next to nothing in some dump or sold drugs I'm not saying its right but its what most of them chose to do at the time which ended in either death or prison. I don't have to tell you anything about myself and neither does anyone else here but I will tell you this I'm certainly not a Quote 'kid'. I am familiar the intricacies of a drug cartel but I didn't live it but like I said before I knew someone very close who did. The rest of the story yes was the rise and fall of a character but some of the story around it was real. I don't know you and you don't me for so for now how about neither one of us makes an assumption about the other.

Yes i am. Glad to see you can't take criticism without wetting yourself.

Now apologize for the name - calling.

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
I'm "wrong" and don't appreciate a movie because I don't know someone who "lived like he did"?

Mr Prophet, Mr Addiction...

Irrespective of whether you need to "know" how accurate a portrayal is to make a judgment - it's subjective. It may be a great performance, but still be a poor movie... Yes Scarface is in some respects Depalmas Godfather Lite, but it's far from his best work.

And many people thought Pacinos performance was at best caricature-ish, and at worst - slightly racist.

I wont attack you Myth, your a cool guy, but I disagree with your point about Scarface having the greatest character development in movie history. IMO when Tony started out he was a loudmouth tough guy who cussed a lot, the end of the movie he was a loudmouth tough guy who cussed a lot who had gone crazy with inhaling to much sticky icky.

I look at Pacino's peformance in Godfather I and II where he was good natured at the start but turns into a monster because of being in the mob business or De Niro's as Travis as although you could sense that something was wrong with him at the start he seemed good natured but turns against everything as he hates all the crime, sex thats around him and the mistakes he made because he didnt know better like taking a girl to a porn movie.

I found those peformances much better than Tony's character, because at least IMO it isnt really tough to play Tony as you just have to go all out while Micheal and Travis are a lot more complex characters as they change their personalities because of their surroundings.

1) I'm not "wrong" if all I did was exclude a minor plot point pertaining to origin. The story isn't about refugees in general.

2) You're absolutely right, you don't have to tell me shit, but your credibility here has been on trial time and time again, and you'll never be taken seriously. if you can live with that, so can I.

3) If you're not a kid, why do you chose to present yourself as such, instead of the cultured filmmaker extraordinaire you claim to be? Really?

4)..



Well, I'm not a drug lord, but I did stay beside one at the Holiday Inn Express! Doesn't that mean I know everything he does? Nope.

5) I didn't make any assumptions. You're the only one guilty of that, like I said in my last paragraph..



That said, don't take it so hard. It's just a movie.

Not me JP...

I gave you props for that - hitch was variable, but at his best he was way up there.

Just like to chime in at this point (I'm pretty sure none of them haven't mentioned them yet):

1) John Carpenter
2) Michael Mann
3) Spike Lee--it's not so much that I like Spike Lee (in fact, he mostly pisses me off), but I was a fan of "Bamboozled", and I have to at least acknowledge what a lucrative racket he's made of racial agitation over the last couple of decades.

Speaking of agitators...has anybody mentioned Kevin Smith yet?

EDIT: Dang! Just remembered John Ford and Sam Peckinpah! Duh!

peter jackson sucks

Here's the thing about John Carpenter.

He has had about 3 movies that were just brilliant, and stand the test of time. "The Thing", "They Live", and of course "Halloween".

For the genre, he is fantasic. Much like Romero, Craven, Raimi, Argento, Fulci, etc. But in the grand scheme of things, these guys works will be over looked.

I would definitely include "Escape from New York" on that list, though; plus, "Assault on Precinct 13", "The Fog", "Christine", "Starman", "Big Trouble in Little China", "Memoirs of an Invisible Man" and "Vampires", collectively, have enough shining moments to count as at least a couple more jewels in his crown, right?

All but "Vampires", were made before 1986, and half of those were more cult classics than anything else, included my aforementioned films.

Given the evolution of cinema, his being seemingly absent is going to hurt his bid for greatest anything of all time.

So saying I'm probably a kid is not an assumption? I never said I was a filmmaker. I didn't know the person for one day as you used the example I knew this person for many years. What makes you think I take you seriously? So why would I care if you do?

Okay, so Carpenter isn't really in the running for "Greatest" whatever, even within his own genre. I just had to throw him in there for the good work he has done.

Two more: John Landis and John Hughes.

You don't have to take me seriously, because I don't exaggerate. My legitimacy is automatic.



I think he's one of the greatest Horror directors, personally. He just confined himself to one genre, for the most part.

Landis' reign was even shorter lived. 1977-1983. After that, 3 mediocre comedies. "Spies Like Us", "Coming to America", and "The Stupids".

Hughes, another period director. 5 brat pack flicks in 3 years. That's it.

This is turning into a Favorite directors thread after all.

So what? Stop being so contrary. The important thing is, most or all of these directors can be credited with making enjoyable, enduring films throughout the years, and naming a "best of all time" is not as easy as letting the sun rise and set on your own tastes to decide it.

Assault on Precinct 13 - set the JC standard.
Prince of Darkness & At the Mouth of Madness - genuinely creepy horror.

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
You don't have to take me seriously, because I don't exaggerate. My legitimacy is automatic.


Sure it is

Not JC's fault, sadly people wont fiance him to make anything other than horror.

You've got it all backwards.

"It sure is."

Contrary? This thread is about the greatest filmmakers of all time. If you think these guys would vie for such a dubious distinction, then so be it.

Personally, they were good for their time, but by no means do they deserve to be in this thread.

Didn't mean to upset you. Jeez.

"Your mom goes to college."

--Kip Dynamite

Since the conversation has turned towards horror filmmakers, I'll chyme in with my opinion on the top horror directors of all time....


George Romero is definately a name that any horror fan should expect on any list involving horror film makers. His Trilogy of the Dead are among not only the finest horror series ever made, but among the finest of all film series. They are all well respected by both mainstream audiences and genre audiences, something that's nearly unheard of when it comes to a horror film maker. His zombie films set the standard that are still used to this day.

Tobe Hooper deserves a mention, if for no other reason, then for creating what is often sited as the the most innovative horror film of all time, the TCM. I won't praise this movie, I've done that numerous other times in other threads, just rest assured this movie is gold, and he deserves all the credit he can get for that amazing film.

Argento and Fulci are both also great artists who's works aren't quite as apreciated as they should be. This is especially true for Fulci, the master of gore.

Reggero Deodato deserves mention for his beautiful and insanely original Cannibal Holocaust, the definitive cannibal film. It is disgusting, humerous and most importantly, believable. Also has a great musical score and some outstandingly poigneant social commentary. Arguably the most under rated horror film of all time.

As for Craven and Carpentor, I think they're both a bit over rated. Craven, on one hand had some outstanding first films. Last House on the Left and The Hills Have Eyes are both extremely innovative in the horror genre, and their infulence is seen still today. Carpentor's brilliance is in his ability to use both horror elements and combine them seamlessly with Sci Fi elements. Also he had some genuinely creepy films. Although I dislike his most famous film - Halloween, he has made some others that I truly love.

Tobe Hooper is a bad director. FACT!

I know this thread - as all good threads do - has skewed off topic but the idea that tobe could show up in a Most Talented Filmmaker Of All Time discussion is laughable.

Other than TCM - a point-and-shoot which, thanks to the script and subject matter is actually aided by his ineptitude (in a kinda Blair-witch shakeycam precursor) the man is responsible for some of the most appalling directed spew ever committed to celluloid. His resume is a list of shame and despair.

Oh, I'm well aware of his shitty resume of films. As I said, I simply mentioned him because he's responsible for the great TCM, which doesn't fit your overly simplistic description of the film.

Also, if you're going to quote something someone says, do not change what is said into something patronizing, it's simple courtesy. Either do a direct quote or don't quote at all. What you did is looked down upon as it serves no purpose other then being an indirect insult.

F*ck no I'm not apologizing. You attacked my intelligence like 3 times. Its one thing to "criticize" or "disagree" with one of my views, but you tried to attack my intelligence just because I answered 'my' favs all time rather than the people more known for being the 'best.' I told you to back off and I expected an apology myself or at least the minimum of you not attacking again so why would I apologize?
Take this for example: If somebody were to ask "What is the best movie?" Somebody (including myself) may answer "Pulp Fiction." You don't jump on their back like some ******* and say "No you retard, at least say something along the lines of the Godfather. You must not actually care about what topic a thread is addressing."

Dr Stranglelove - Thats cool with me. I have no problem with somebody disagreeing with one of my opinions as long as they are not an ******* about it like some people are.

Didnt intent to be patronizing to you, i was paraphrasing. Trust me when i say that because I have nooooo problem with being patronizing.

So - I'm curious, if you think TCM is so well directed, what the hell went wrong with Tobes brain afterward that put his talent in the pooper?

No sweetie, what i did was creatively express my disbelief when you flat out admitted that you didnt care what the thread was about, you just wanted to list your personal faves.

Also - I'd never call someone a retard - But if someone said the "best film" was Showgirls, and then when asked admitted they didnt think it was the best film, it was just one they liked to jerk off over I'd have to wonder if they were - yanno - paying any attention to the discussion in the forum of just in love with the sound of their own typing.

Now try to play nice - there's a good boy.

i think that pacinos performance in scarface was better than godfather...if anything godfather is overrated......OMG thats right....i said it.....pacino worked off of duvall, caan, and brando plus coppalla directed it...yea i cant spell it.....pacino pretty much carried scarface yea he had a good director and worked with some good actors in it but not the likes of a brando or duvall

someone asked if anyone mentioned kevin smith and i hope the ansewer is no...he's a good writer and director but not in the same league as all the other names that were mentioned

please people can we quit arguing in here..I'll have to close the thread and i really don't want that.

I think its a debate

Yes a debate

I'm happy to debate about whether we are having an argument?

You may not have intentionally patronized Backfire but you did intentionally patronize me.

First you ridicule people with this post:

This is an attack on my intelligence (after I admitted my mistake btw leaving no need for an attack):


Patronizing again:

After I tell you to back off you still post this to re-acknowledge a mistake:

Look! Its that ******* patronizing people again!

Patronizing:

Patronizing:

No argument there - you are 100% correct.

Lets get back on topic!

He simply shot his wad with TCM. He had one good film in him and that was it. I'll be the first to admit he's something of a one hit wonder, but I felt his name was worth mentioning since he's ultimately responsible for such a great and important film. However, I'm also well aware that much of the credit for the films greatness goes to the cinematographer.

Brian Depalma

Stanley Kubrick

Tobe Hooper--I thought "Poltergeist" was a well-made film, so he can be at least considered more than a one-hit wonder.

Kevin Smith--frankly, I've never cared for the delivery of dialogue in most of his films. The actors sound like they just memorized paragraphs of Smith's own thoughts on life, love and pop culture, and are repeating it without giving much thought to what the words mean (or maybe that's just the actors' fault; it's not as though Jason Mewes is the DeNiro of his generation).

Anyway, I've enjoyed Smith's movies overall, since they make me laugh and keep me watching, without resorting to 90 minutes of Rob Schneider-esque pratfalls 'n' farting.

Kevin Smith is a great writer but not such a great director especially with his last film Jersey Girl.

Well, it's a pretty large rumor that Spielberg did most of the directing for that movie. But who really knows.

Tsui Hark or kevin smith

Well, Spielberg did produce, write the story, co-write the screenplay and act as uncredited editor, so it's safe to say his influence is evident (plus it has the "look" of a Spielberg movie; for many years, I just assumed he WAS the director). Now, it's not as if I'd know, but doesn't a producer have the money/clout to tell the director how to direct (often leading to fights, firings and the dreaded "Alan Smithee" credit)? If Tobe Hooper thought he didn't keep enough of his creative input into the film, I should think there would have been more of a blow-up about it.

Myself oviously.

I don't think anyone has mentioned Spike Lee yet.

Because he's a closet racist, with a personal agenda, a laundry list of social hang ups, and most of his movies really aren't anythin groundbreaking, other than social satires?

I wasn't saying he was a good director I wasn't saying he was a bad one all I was saying is nobody mentioned him thats all.

Gotcha, there's a good reason he hasn't been mentioned, is what I am saying.

Good. Glad we can understand eachother now.

Im going with Winddancer Akira Kurosawa was awesome, The Seven Samurai is a classic, Ridley Scott is good too though for Alien, and Gladiator

First time I've seen Ridley Scott mentioned.

I mentioned him in my very first post in this thread. Aside from "Alien" and "Gladiator", there's "Blade Runner", "Legend", and "Matchstick Men" amongst others.

Thats probably why I didn't remember.

And I mentioned Spike Lee on page four.

He is not the most talented but I just thought I would mention Stephen Summers.

i would say, these are not in order, just saying them

Scorses <sp?
M. Night
Cameron
Speilberg

In my oppinion Spielberg and Cameron deserve to be on this list but M. Night still has to prove himself.

spielberg, Brian singer, and Ron howard.

Once again Spielberg and Howard might be there but Singer still has to prove himself with a few more films just like M. Night.

Great choises... I thought I was the only one in here who knew Dreyer.

M. Night Shyamalan
Peter Jackson
Tim Burton

Steven Spielburg-

E.T.? anyone.

Hes done alot of great films.

S. Eisenstein...No doubt!

The Alpha, The Omega,...Akira Kurosawa.

I got lucky - we had one small indy cinema in the city I grew up in and I'd go to it every week no matter what was showing. They had a CT Dreyer season one summer and I was hooked.

Incidentaly, I see that TNT - Turner Classic movies is having a season of Dreyer movies this September.

Sunday, September 5
10:00 PM - Carl Th. Dreyer: My Metier ('95)
12:00 AM - The Passion of Joan of Arc ('28) (also Silent Sunday Night)
2:00 AM - Vampyr ('31)
3:30 AM - Carl Th. Dreyer: My Metier ('95)

Sunday, September 12
10:00 PM - Day of Wrath ('43)
12:00 AM - The Parson's Widow ('20) (also Silent Sunday Night)
1:30 AM - Michael ('24)

Sunday, September 19
10:00 PM - Ordet ('55)
12:15 AM - Leaves from Satan's Book ('19) (also Silent Sunday Night; special start time)

Sunday, September 26
10:00 PM - Gertrud ('65)
12:00 AM - Master of the House ('25) (also Silent Sunday Night)
2:15 AM - Carl Th. Dreyer: My Metier ('95)


No doubt I'm wasting my breath - but you folks in the USA could do worse than broaden your horizons beyond L.O.T. ****ing R.

I think I'll watch some of those too

Speilberg all the way.

Pete got a long way to go still. Well he is was an Inde director, so cant really say much bout his past works.

Lets see what happens when Spielberg directs The Transformers.

Let me just list my top five one last time.

RANDOM ORDER

James Cameron
Steven Spielberg
Tim Burton
Sam Raimi
Brian Depalma

I'm adding Michael Mann to my list as well. Collateral was a nice follow up to Ali and Heat. A little slower, but the mood was great (I like Mann's choice of flim medium), and Jamie Foxx did a lot better than I thought he would in his role.

I would share my oppinion on Michael Mann but I haven't seen Collateral yet. As soon as I see it I'll add my oppinion.