The Top Ten Greatest Directors of All Time
by Ben ShapiroLast week, I stirred some folks up with my Top Ten Most Overrated Directors of All Time. To recap, they were: Ridley Scott, Michael Mann, David Lean, Darren Aronofsky, Mike Nichols, David Lynch, Quentin Tarantino, Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese, and Alfred Hitchcock. And by “stirred some folks up,” I mean faced down a virtual lynch mob. Who knew that Aronofsky supporters were fans of the film Fury?
A few quick items in response to that piece. First, it was not about “bad directors” (although some were plain bad, including Aronofsky), but about overrated directors. Alfred Hitchcock is nowhere near the worst director ever (I was probably too harsh to label him “slightly better than mediocre”), but it is a travesty to label him the greatest director of all time, as so many have. The same holds true for David Lean (I appreciate Great Expectations, Brief Encounter, and swaths of Bridge Over the River Kwai, I just think he doesn’t deserve to make the top 20 list). Second, I neglected three directors who clearly should have made the list: Roman Polanski (somebody stop the Chinatown cult!), Spike Lee (how can he make race relations this dull?), and Tim Burton (damn you for ruining Sweeney Todd). Third, two corrections:
(1) Rebecca and Suspicion are the same film, not Notorious and Rebecca; (2) the Orlando Bloom reference was to Black Hawk Down, not G.I. Jane, and I apologize for the obvious mix-up.
Now, to the real question: the top-ten greatest directors of all time. This is truly a rough decision – there are at least two score great directors who could make this list. Here is my one basic criteria: directors who provide me the most viewing pleasure over the course of their career. That means telling a great story in the best possible way. Subjective? Sure. Deal with it. I’ll admit that this list skews toward older directors, not because older movies are generally better than newer movies (though I think they are), but because directors in the period 1920-1960 generally made more movies, which means more opportunities for directors to shine.
I’ll start by explaining why certain directors are not in the top ten.
Francis Ford Coppola: He had a period of unbelievable creative magic. Within a ten year period, he made Finian’s Rainbow (1968), a charming musical; The Godfather (1972), which requires no commentary; The Conversation (1974), perhaps the creepiest movie ever made; The Godfather: Part II (1974), which matches its predecessor in quality; and Apocalypse Now (1979), a mad journey into the heart of darkness. Then he was done. How this talented filmmaker went from The Godfather to the atrocity that was Jack (1996) is utterly bewildering. It was tough to keep him off the top ten list. It was even harder to boot someone from that list to make room for him.
Peter Jackson: I believe Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy to be the finest directorial effort of all time, surpassing even Citizen Kane. That said, Jackson hasn’t done anything else. King Kong was overlong and CGI-obsessed. He has shown that he can produce with the best of them – District 9 is brilliant – but he needs to direct more great movies before he belongs in the top ten.
Christopher Nolan: I believe Nolan will one day make the top-ten list. He’s that talented. Watch one of his early efforts, Following (1998) if you don’t believe me – on a budget of $6,000, he creates a taut thriller. His last five movies have all been terrific: Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, The Prestige, and The Dark Knight. He is one of the few modern directors for whom I check the IMDB calendar to see when his next movie comes out. I look forward to Inception with bated breath. For now, however, it’s too early to chart his trajectory with certainty.
Orson Welles: Citizen Kane requires no explication – it is justifiably seen by many as the greatest directorial job ever. His Othello is similarly creative and inspired. The Magnificent Ambersons follows the pattern. But Welles destroyed himself and his career, and the fates should never forgive him for wasting his unparalleled talent.
Peter Weir: I love Weir. He is always creative and interesting. Although I didn’t enjoy Master and Commander as much as others, The Truman Show, Fearless, and Gallipoli are all minor masterpieces. As far as the top ten, my heart says maybe, my brain says no.
Stanley Kubrick: Overrated. Yes, he directed the wonderful Paths of Glory, Spartacus, and Dr. Strangelove, but 2001: A Space Odyssey is an abomination, A Clockwork Orange doesn’t hold up, The Shining is made a parody by Jack Nicholson’s scenery-chewing. He’s inconsistent, and that’s what knocks him off the list, as it should.
Vincente Minnelli: The best director of musicals of all time came close to making the list, too. Meet Me in St. Louis is delightful. An American in Paris is a joy for the senses. The Band Wagon is the best parody of Broadway ever made; Brigadoon is pretty if unfaithful to the source material (they cut a couple of the best songs from the Broadway version); Gigi is gorgeous; Lust for Life is well-done. Few directors have Minneli’s grasp of the music that film can be, the vibrancy that film can create. Again, this is just a case of ten being too few to fit him.
Fritz Lang: M is the best foreign language film ever made. Period. It is tight and tense and incredibly driving. Metropolis is fantastic too. Perhaps if I’d seen more Lang, I’d put him up in the top ten (the only other films I’ve seen of his are Fury and The Big Heat), so I’ll claim ignorance here.
Fred Zinneman: Perhaps the best conventional director of all time – a man who simply puts on camera what needs to be there. He’s not the artist that any of the top ten are, but he did create The Day of the Jackal, A Man for All Seasons, Oklahoma!, From Here to Eternity, and High Noon, a list to be reckoned with.
Victor Fleming: How hard was it to come up with this list? I had to leave off the guy who directed Captains Courageous, The Good Earth, The Wizard of Oz, some of Gone with the Wind, A Guy Named Joe, and Treasure Island. He also directed lots of films that ain’t quite as great, so his percentage is what keeps him off the list.
Stanley Donen: Stylistically, Donen was tops. He directed On the Town, Singin’ in the Rain, Charade, Damn Yankees!, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, and Two for the Road. The pure fun that is Seven Brides could put him on the top ten list. But Donen just can’t knock anyone else off.
Robert Rossen: His resume is simply too short. Three fantastic movies: Body and Soul, All the King’s Men, The Hustler. A great career. Not a top ten one.
John Huston: The best adventure director of all time, responsible for The Man Who Would Be King, Moby Dick, The African Queen, and The Maltese Falcon. Again, not enough versatility to put him over the top.
George Stevens: Tough to keep off the list, tough to make room. The Diary of Anne Frank, Shane, A Place in the Sun, I Remember Mama, Gunga Din – versatility, certainly, brilliance, certainly, sweetness, certainly. Off the list? Hesitantly, yes.
The Top Ten Greatest Directors of All Time
10. Steven Spielberg: This will be the most controversial pick on the list, to be sure. He’s got big hits, and he’s got big misses. His hits are clearly terrific – Raiders of the Lost Ark, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Schindler’s List, Jaws, Saving Private Ryan. His misses are pure awfulness – A.I., 1941, The Terminal, and the misery that was Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Of late, far more misses than hits. Still, that early canon of films, plus Schindler’s and Saving Private Ryan puts him over the top. No better popcorn filmmaker has ever been born. Yes, I hate his politics. But his artistry, when he’s at the top of his game and when he’s comfortable with the script, is unmistakable. Watch this scene again:
–
Nobody – nobody – directs action better. And Schindler’s List proved he can do drama, too. Is he the deepest guy on the list? Nope. Does he belong here? I say, yes.
–
9. Michael Curtiz: How can I possibly put the man who directed the monstrous farce that is Mission to Moscow on this list? Because he also directed Casablanca, the best movie of all time; White Christmas and Yankee Doodle Dandy, two of the best musicals; The Adventures of Robin Hood, one of the best adventure movies; Mildred Pierce, one of the best melodramas. Other films: The Sea Wolf, Angels with Dirty Faces, and Captain Blood. Renting his film canon, Mission to Moscow aside, is almost entirely wonderful.
–
8. Ingmar Bergman: No one made images like Bergman. The Seventh Seal is easily the darkest movie ever made, and it’s got some of the most stirring pictures ever put on screen. His version of The Magic Flute is a delight. Then there are his others, like Fanny and Alexander, Through a Glass Darkly, The Virgin Spring. Do you watch Bergman for a laugh? Not unless by laughter you mean suicidal depression. But no finer image-maker has ever stood behind a camera.
–
7. Billy Wilder: Nobody ever mixed drama and comedy like Wilder. And he was a master at getting great performances from his actors. Jack Lemmon was his muse, and he used him to the fullest: he made the ultimate Matthau/Lemmon comedy in The Fortune Cookie, the ultimate Lemmon comedy, Some Like It Hot, and the beautifully understated The Apartment. If Lemmon wasn’t his muse, William Holden was – and he’s got masterpieces like Sunset Blvd. and Stalag 17 to prove it. Or maybe it was Audrey Hepburn – Sabrina, and Love in the Afternoon. And that isn’t even looking at Witness for the Prosecution and Double Indemnity. The guy was a classics factory. And all of them are fast-moving and fun to watch.
–
6. Charlie Chaplin: It would be a crime to leave Chaplin off this list. Watch him toss around the globe as Hitler in The Great Dictator and tell me who you’d put in his place. The Kid is as affecting as any movie ever made. Modern Times is chock full of amazing sequences, and so are Modern Times, The Gold Rush, and many of his others. The silent movie era was never so magnificent.
–
5. Frank Capra: In my review of the top ten most overrated directors of all time, I wrote this about Martin Scorsese: “In the musical Damn Yankees, a group of hapless baseball players sing the following lyric: ‘You’ve gotta have heart / All you really need is heart!’ Martin Scorsese never saw that musical. His films are entirely devoid of anything resembling likable characters. They are cold and calculating and ruthless – and boring.” If Scorsese is the epitome of the heartless director, Capra is the embodiment of heart on screen. It’s a Wonderful Life is simply the most heartfelt movie ever made (and it’s Jimmy Stewart’s best performance). From It Happened One Night to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington to Meet John Doe to Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, nobody made movie magic like Capra. If you can sit through all his films without crying and smiling simultaneously, I’m betting there’s something wrong with your tear ducts or your cheek muscles.
–
4. Elia Kazan: Reviled by the Hollywood left, Kazan was also one of Hollywood’s greatest directors. His IMDB reads like a top ten list of films: A Face in the Crowd, East of Eden, On the Waterfront, Viva Zapata!, A Streetcar Named Desire, Gentleman’s Agreement, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. The performances Kazan elicited from his actors are groundbreaking and astonishing. Unlike some others on this list, Kazan’s films do not date (other than Gentleman’s Agreement, perhaps) – they remain timely and prescient. And they’re quick-moving and entertaining, which is tough to do with heavy drama. He does it with ease.
–
3. John Ford: The man revolutionized movie making, and is worshipped widely for all the right reasons. First off, the Western is the American genre, and Ford was the best. Name the best Westerns of all time, and you’ll be sure to come up with Stagecoach, The Searchers, She Wore a Yellow Ribbon and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. The Informer is an early masterpiece, and there’s no movie more fun than The Quiet Man (plus, the cinematography is enough to bring a tear to your eye). Mister Roberts is a chock full of great performances (Lemmon and Cagney stand out, of course). How Green Was My Valley is a beautiful film. The Grapes of Wrath and Young Mr. Lincoln are rightly credited with making Henry Fonda the quintessential American actor.
–
2. Akira Kurosawa: Nobody plumbed the depths of human emotion like Kurosawa. Ikiru is known by few outside the film buff community, but it is a masterful expression of human hope and tragedy. Ran is exciting and thrilling and brilliant. Throne of Blood is a wonderful adaptation of Macbeth. The Seven Samurai is tremendous, an adventurous expose of the best and worst mankind has to offer. Rashomon is a groundbreaking exploration of perspective. I could keep going, but there’s no point – few will argue with Kurosawa’s placement on this list.
–
1. William Wyler: Underrated beyond all rationality, Wyler was a master of all genres. He covered gothic romance (Wuthering Heights), period pieces (Jezebel) light comedy (How to Steal a Million and Roman Holiday), film noir (The Desperate Hours and Detective Story), epic (Ben Hur), morality tale (Friendly Persuasion), horror (The Collector), western (The Westerner) and wartime drama (Mrs. Miniver and The Best Years of Our Lives). His first tier films are unmatched (Dodsworth, Ben Hur, and The Best Years of Our Lives deserve to make anyone’s top ten list), and his second tier films (The Big Country, The Heiress) are better than most first-rate directors’ first-tier films. If you don’t believe Wyler’s range, watch these three scenes back to back:
–
–
–
That’s not even the best scene from The Best Years of Our Lives (the movie contains perhaps the most beautiful love scene in screen history, between Harold Russell and Cathy O’Donnell – and, in a lesson to Aronofsky and Lynch, he didn’t need to show T&A to do it).
Whom would you put on the list?
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
761 Comments
Nice to see The Truman Show get some love.
Re: Coppola – the man was certainly on a role, then he had to make One from the Heart and lose all his money. The film is interesting to watch (once) and has some decent songs (courtesy of Tom Waits) but it's not good at all.
Re: Spielberg – probably the most successful filmmaker of my generation (I'm 27). And regardless of where his politics might lie, his influence is undeniable. Besides, how many times have Jaws, E.T., and Raiders all been parodied? His last few films (especially Crystal Skull) have been lacking but I still think he's got another classic or two up his sleeve. I wouldn't say he's the best action director but, strictly in terms of camera placement, movement, blocking, etc., he's one of the greatest.
Re: Jackson – have you seen Heavenly Creatures? Highly recommended. (And from the reviews I've read of The Lovely Bones, it seems that Peter Jackson circa 1994 would've done a better job than Peter Jackson circa 2009).
Re: Kubrick – I haven't seen his earliest films but I don't think the man has made a bad movie, my favorites being Dr. Strangelove and Barry Lyndon. Eyes Wide Shut isn't great but I'm still kinda conflicted over it.
Re: Wyler – director Nicholas Meyer relates an interesting anecdote in the Star Trek II audio commentary (I'm paraphrasing): "Someone once asked Billy Wilder whom he thought was the greatest director and his answer was 'William Wyler.' When the interviewer asked 'Why?' Wyler said, 'Because he was stupid. He knew he couldn't just go in and make it all up on the spot. He knew he'd have to do the work.'"
Oh my goodness: William Wyler YES.
Spielberg: a resounding, thudding, you've got to be kidding me NO NO NO NO NO. I can't name a single movie this guy's made, even ones that I found over-all entertaining, that hold up throughout the entire film, let alone through the ages. He has yet to end a movie where I'm not going, "Wait a minute!" For example, his action-serial homage hero rides half way across the ocean, outside of a submarine no less, only to be strapped to a pole with his girl and then not he, but HE (GOD) saves the day. Talk about the ultimate Deus ex Machina. And then the put the arc in a warehouse. Uh huh. That's just Sci-Fi Channel inept story telling.
Vincente Minnelli, Fritz Lang, Fred Zinneman, Victor Fleming, Robert Rossen, George Stevens, Stanley Donen, and John Huston easily trounce SS in terms of excellence per film over many decades.
And frankly, any list that doesn't include Robert Wise, well, that's just pathetic, bro.
Re: Raiders – I think the filmmakers cut something which explained how Indy was able to ride the sub all the way to the island. Scroll to the bottom: http://www.theraider.net/films/raiders/deleted_sc...
But you hit on something interesting. Someone on another forum once asked, "Why did Indy have to be in the movie at all?" And he was right. If Indy didn't exist, the Nazis still would've obtained the ark, opened it, and had their faces melted off anyway! (I'm biased because I love the first three Indy films equally.)
Good call on Robert Wise.
You also neglected to give shout-outs to Sam Fuller and John McTiernan.
Nolte, not Noble. Sorry.
1 of 2
The Godfather is a great movie. A couple of nights ago, I was watching a 1 vs 100 rerun. The host asked the contestant, "Do you want the money or the mob?" I do a Brando imitation in my head and think/shout, "Give me the mob. When I finish, they are all gonna sleep with the fishes (probably a Puzo line).
Nevertheless, the 60s/70s were the years that serious deconstruction of traditional America was in full swing. Coppola was young and obviously romanticized the dark side of his Italian heritage. All we needed was to portray the hoods who were supplying drugs as good guys. I know in the film, the thing that distinguished the Corleones from the other gangsters was that the Brando/Godfather hated drugs, but that was in reality nearly complete bullsh*t.
Along with John Sturges, who directed The Magnificent Seven AND The Great Escape.
Come to think of it, where are Howard Hawks, Don Siegel, Andrew V. McLaglen, Henry Hathaway, J. Lee Thompson. Not even on the "not putting on the top 10 list?"
Grab a TIVO and use it.
Ditto that.
Apparently, Ben Shaprio has NEVER HEARD OF HOWARD HAWKS.
I agree that Casablanca may be the best movie of all time, (though I'd argue it's the Godfather I and II) but if you're going to talk about which director conquered more genres with more masterpieces, then the director of Scarface, Only Angels Have Wings, Bringing up Baby, Red River, Rio Bravo, Sergeant York, His Girl Friday, Hatari, Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, The Thing from Another World, To Have and Have Not, Ball of Fire, and The Dawn Patrol etc etc, must at LEAST be dealt with, not ignored.
But, I'm glad to see William Wyler near, if not at, the top. Too few lists have him in the Top 5 where he MUST be.
Lord of the Rings trilogy the finest directorial effort of all time? Really? Sweeping vista after sweeping vista after sweeping vista with the relentless overuse of closeups. Yes, I need to see Gandolf's giant 10 foot nose on the screen. Not impressed.
I would put Spielberg in the group that p#ssed away their talent. Like most directors of his generation his work has been poisoned by the incomprehenisble need to start making "message films" or to inject politics into any and everything he does. He's substituted activism in his filmmaking with making a good film.
Wyler didn't direct the chariot race in Ben Hur – Andrew Marton did. Ben Hur is two good sequences separated by hours of tedium. Given the choice, would you honestly rather watch it than 'North by Northwest', the film that Hitchcock made in the same year (1959)?
Akira Kurosawa directed a movie called "High and Low". It is the best thriller movie about police procedures and finding the bad guy the right way.
J. Lee Thompson made too many horrible movies from the 70s on after the great Guns of Navarone, Cape Fear and Flame over India. Death Wish 4, might not even be the worst of them! McLaglen was solid at BEST, but Seigel and Hathaway should have at LEAST made the kiss off list– but Hawks MUST make this list. And Keaton beats the crap out of Chaplin.
I have no great arguments with your assessments.
Kazan! Good to see him on the list. For people of a certain age (like me) On The Waterfront and Brando's performance in it, well, they defined us. "I coulda been a contenda." God did that strike a chord.
My problem with Spielberg is that there is something incurably jejune about him that permeates everything (yes, including Schindler's List) he has directed.
Slight caveats: I wish Zinneman, if for nothing other than his consummate professionalism, had made the cut.
And Rossen. The Hustler is so great, the greatest definition and defense of the worth of artistry (for that's what Fast Eddie and Minnesota Fats are, artists) in the final equation of who wins and who loses. For that film alone…
Movies were made before 1930, ya know. Yes, you mentioned Chaplin, but half of his films you praised were in the sound era. Where is D.W. Griffith or Allan Dwan? These men were prolific pioneers who created techniques that enabled later directors to make your list.
"2001: A Space Odyssey is an abomination"
wow… between this post and the "overrated" post, this may be the most asinine quote
Not sure I'd be that hard on Shapiro or Coppola. I do agree, however, that writers and directors – moviemakers in general – sometimes sacrifice truth and morality for the sake of drama and controversy. They bend the truth because it's not interesting enough. They invert morality to "explore the idea" or "start a conversation" – or sometimes just because they can.
I guess it's all about creativity. Hollywood is, after all, the great fantasy factory. "Reality" is clay in the hands of filmmakers. I get steamed when they take liberties with history, for example, but it's their prerogative.
This is frightening – I actually agree with your top choice, my favorite director of all time. I would disagree that The Heiress is second tier, it's just a brilliant film. And I'd add WIld River to your list of great Kazan movies.
And he made "Goonies."
Great to see Wyler get some recognition. The man really did have range.
Now for the much to be expected carping:
Oh, and speaking of range…Howard "Freaking" Hawks is quite a surprising omission. No love for Buster Keaton either?
Busby Berkeley deserves an honorable mention for all his pre-code "Golddigger" and "Dames' movies with his astonishing choreography and gritty depression era stories.
You sir are a pretentious little twit with about as much life experience as a tadpole. I know this is an opinion piece I can understand that but running off some names of some old directors, a few nobody has heard of puts you on the list of the same weenies that put out top ten music lists and mention indie rock bands. You seem to think if "I mention old movies,directors" that you know you would never watch unless it was mandatory viewing in school that it will some how prove you belong on big hollywood. Generational sell out. Lastly I do like you other stuff you write, so though keep up the good work!
On the topic of Tim Burton:
I'm not the huge Burton fan that I used to be, but I really have to say that Batman Returns is a woefully underrated film. It irks me that people treat Batman Begins as the first superhero flick to deal with mature issues, when really Burton and Sam Hamm beat Nolan to the punch by over a decade.
Amen to Sturges. Watched Ice Station Zebra last evening, not Sturges' best, but a fun watch nonetheless.
Cannot complain about any of the directors on your list, except for perhaps Chaplin. Great? Sure, but IMHO, he belongs more on the overrated list than on this one. You mentioned the globe scene in The Great Dictator. That scene did nothing for me. "You Nazty Spy!" by the Three Stooges was better war satire/parody. Moe's manic Hitler was tops.
The thing about Wyler is that since he directed more actors/actresses to Oscars, he gets overshadowed. His films are remembered for who is on the screen, not who put them there.
Your overrated directors list should be your top ten director list with John Ford and Howard Hawks put at numbers 1 and 2. You have to stop before people think Big Hollywood is satire and not serious.
The whole point of these lists seems to be to generate a lively conversation in the replies and putting a lot of controversial entries on the lists and making controversial comments about the entries is a sure way to do that.
How does Sam Peckinpah not make this list? Speilberg is soo overated.
Well, my favorite director was Preston Sturges. I'm not arguing that he should be tops on your list of ten, but he is tops on mine.
[...] more here: The Top Ten Greatest Directors of All Time This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
I agree!
I get so much s— from my friend for Batman Returns (and to a lesser extent, the first film). I enjoy the Nolan films and I know Burton and Co. didn't really feel the need to follow the comic 100% but I enjoy those films very much. My friend (who grew up reading the Frank Miller comics) even sat me down one day and asked, "Scott, why do you like Batman Returns? What is so entertaining about it?!?" I should've quoted John Nolte and said, "It casts a spell!"
I would swap Spielberg with Kubrick because Kubrick has had far fewer misses throughout his career. You can even compare the two in the same movie – A.I. You can pick out the portions between the two, and Kubrick's stand up better. It's Spielberg's urge to get schmaltzy as he always does when he films a movie involving kids and the emotionally draining deux ex machina at the end that will keep me from seeing the movie ever again.
Glad someone pointed this out. The chariot race is by far the best thing about Ben-Hur, and Wyler had little to do with it. On the other hand, all the tedious, maudlin, saccharine parts of the movie were directed by Wyler, so if the whole "healing of the lepers" thing works for you, Wyler is your man.
"I believe Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy to be the finest directorial effort of all time, surpassing even Citizen Kane. "
*choke*
If you're going to go ga-ga for PJ, at least cite Heavenly Creatures or that faux documentary he made for New Zealand TV. Lord of the Rings was a big noisy pile of special effects. Entertaining, yes. A directorial masterpiece? You might as well list Michael Bay in the Top Ten.
Hey Breitbart and Nolte, maybe you should actually look at the crap this guy writes before you post it. His "subjective" opinion on directors is an embarrassment to your site. It was obviously written to attract attention to himself and has no place here.
Has no one here heard of Jean Renoir? Or Fellini? Or De Sica? Or Ophuls? Or Duvivier? Or Rene Clair? Or Murnau? Or Pabst? Or Satyajit Ray? Very provincial.
RME
I'm glad to see Spielberg on the list. Despite what some of the posters have said, there is NO better craftsman in the HISTORY of film. I mean that. To explain:
In terms of pure cinematic artistry, a "bad' Spielberg film is STILL better than anyone else's "best" movie.
Because NOBODY understands FILM GRAMMAR better than Spielberg. Nobody.
Every camera move, every performance, every edit is EXACTLY right. Always. That's pure genius.
Again, he's made "bad" movies. There's no disputing that.
But they're bad simply because of one of two reasons: 1.) the script was lacking or 2.) because he let his ridiculous leftist policies seep into the film. Or both.
Even a "bad" film like Munich was bad because of its leftist politics. But from a purely directorial craft perspective, "Munich" is genius.
"Crystal Skull"? BAD script. Really bad. Spielberg's DIRECTING? Top form. Brilliant.
Even in his old age, he truly improves from film to film, which is amazing and why I always eagerly anticipate the next Spielberg film: even if the film as a whole misfires because of script or politics or both, I can still ALWAYS COUNT ON Spielberg putting on a clinic as a director.
And that's inspiring.
Answer to that is easy…it's not always the destination, it's sometimes the journey. Indiana Jones had a awesome journey. Not everything has to have a point or reason. Such is life.
I agree. My 1st first thought "Geez, he's doubling down on stupid."
Anyone can say sillyness like…."2001: A Space Odyssey is an abomination" . And then not support the statement. I can go anywhere for that. Shapiro is moving onto my "skip his posts" list since it's becoming pointless to read him.
Concerning Kazan, why is "Baby Doll" never mentioned? It is one of the best American comedies surprisingly from a director not much noted for a sense of humor.
I'm not qualified enough to comment on the list.
Speilberg? That I can. It's called 'throwing meat to a pack of wolves." Woof woof.
I long ago came to the conclusion that internet top ten lists were good for nothing but pissing people off.
I am not saying that either are evil. Coppola was young and inexperienced when he made the Godfather. I knew young guys who admired the Italian mob. Shapiro is young and inexperienced now. However, I doubt that either of them had a sister who had been raped at gunpoint by a Mafioso or whose parents who owned a local mom and pop business that were told to pay for protection or die. Neither while walking to school saw the body of the guy who opposed the union leader tossed at the door of the union hall.
Socrsese opened the door to the truth. On ideological grounds alone, he is way above Coppola on any great directors list. Coppola can make his movie. Shapiro can make his list. I can make my disagreement.
IMO, Shapiro has lived his youth in film studies and since he calls Scorsese heartless appears unable to face the reality of the word he uses. Where is the Godfather when you need him?, shaking Johnny Fontaine, demanding that he, “Be a man.”
Another wild card director to consider would be Terry Gilliam. Brazil, 12 Monkeys and Tideland are masterfully put together and take you to places you'd never imagine, and he's also got brilliant but flawed works like The Adventures of Baron Munchausen that are usually hurt not by his own ineptitude but the wiles and ignorance of his producers.
It's an opinion piece. The author threw his opinions out for comment. Some I agree, some I don't . In the end, I really don't worry too much about the director.
But then, I'm as artistic as I am tactful, and I have the tact of a jackhammer
On what planet where people actually know a little something about movies has William Wyler ever been underrated? Seriously, a few weeks of watching TCM will make you aware of how good and appreciated he is. Sorry kid, but your film knowledge is flimsy at best. It feels like you read the syllabus for Film 101 and the b u lls **ted your final. True, everyone has a right to their opinion, but on a site specializing in film, I expect a higher level of film commentary.
Other than the both starred Joan Fontaine, and were directed by Alfred Hitchcock, and both have one word titles, how on earth are Rebecca and Superstition the "same film"?
P.S.: Please tell me you knew that there would be a shitstorm after that first list.
Thanks- that puts your other list in better perspective- one thing your choices clearly show though is that you're old !
That's only because it's entirely based on a Ed McBain novel. The best writer of police procedurals ever.
To Ben Shapiro – These are fun lists and inspire hours of pleasurable debate on the best, worst and most overrated. For example – Where the hell is Robert Wise? He is one of the very best directors in film history sporting a resume that includes every type of movie and every type of character. Much like Fred Zinneman (excellent pick) Wise was a consumate craftsman and superb cinematic storyteller. For what it's worth (not much in my case) I'd give him Chaplin's place since all of Charlie's films should so self-conscious you may as well have a placard on them saying "Great Artist at Work."
One thing we can all agree on. Ray Teal,( featured above in the "Best Years of Our Lives") clip was one of the best chaacter heavies in movies fromt he 1940's and 1950's. His bit here with Harold Russell is a masterpiece of nastiness. Nobody played corrupt cops ("Ace int he Hole") or brutal prison guards ("Brute Force") like Teal. Apparantly he was pretty fair sxophonist and bandleader too.
A friend and I were watching Close Encounters and I suggested that Spielberg's heyday was really the 1980s. He's came out of nowhere with Jaws – and what made that movie so good was that the mechanical shark was giving them so much trouble and Spielberg had to resort to a tactic that "bad director" (Hitchcock) used – the audience's imagination and anticipation.
I believe to be on a top 10 list one should have great works from the beginning to the end of your career -
Orson Welles?
To paraphrase Peter Griffin:
"It was the goddam sled. There I just saved you 3 hours of torture."
Rebecca and Suspicion are NOT the same movie either, but getting warmer, they both feaure big houses and distant husbands.
These pieces are awful, can we not have any more?
RE: Curtiz and "Mission to Moscow."
You are aware that Curtiz spent his entire career working within the studio system. It's not like he had script control or could choose his projects.
I hate to quote Martin Scorsese, because I don't particularly like him or his work, but he is extremely knowledgeable about film.
"Stanley Kubrick is the father of modern cinema — we (filmmakers) are all sons and daughters of Stanley Kubrick."
I agree.
I agree with many others on the egregiousness of omitting Howard Hawks. I think you're going to have to somehow justify his absence in your next critique. I mean, come on: Red River, The Big Sleep, Sergeant York, The Big Sky, Twentieth Century, To Have and Have not?
Also, you should have discussed Gregory La Cava somewhere for "My Man Godfrey" in your congenial inquisition – it is a genuinely ageless comedy with a strikingly serious undercurrent of hard times.
McTiernan: Die Hard, Hunt For Red October, Predator. Enough said — good call.
I don't see any mention anywhere of some of my favorite directors:
1. Don Siegel, who directed some of the greatest movies of all time, such as "Hell is for Heroes", "The Shootist", "The Invasion of the Body Snatchers" (the original), and his true masterpiece, "Dirty Harry."
2. Robert Aldrich, who did the classic "The Longest Yard", "The Dirty Dozen" and "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?"
3. Henry Hathaway, who directed the Duke in his Oscar-winning role in "True Grit."
In defense of Mr. Shapiro to all his critics (and they are legion):
If you had the opportunity to pen a list of your top ten directors, you would generate as much controversy and disagreement as he has. As a previous poster said, "Top ten lists are created to piss people off." May I add, they are also created to stir up a lively, interesting debate. In this, Mr. Shapiro has been wildly successful.
Believe it or not, I've been demanded to explain my affection for Batman Returns as well. My response was something along the lines of, "Because I like Batman, and I like Richard III. Put 'em both together, and you have a recipe for success."
At any rate, it's good to know that other folks still remember and appreciate the grandeur of Burton's Batman flicks!
First, Ben, I will concede, I was too harsh against you on Hitchcock, I hope you can forgive.
But you are still wrong.
Spielberg peaked in the early nineties with Jurassic Park and Schindler's List. LOST WORLD had its moments, such as the tall grass raptor chase. But after that it was downhill with a few great moment (D-Day scene in SAVING PRIVATE RYAN*). He became overrated when he, like Lucas, started to buy too much into his own hype. MINORITY REPORT and WAR OF THE WORLDS are good, but pale in comparison to his early work and INDY IV, well, I could never get out of my mind that this was a Sci-Fi Channel tv-movie. His seventies and eighties works (Indy, Jaws, ET, Close Encounters, etc.) are classics that a generation thinks of when they think of the Joy of Film.
*SAVING PRIVATE RYAN: I have heard some conservatives rail against this so I will have to give it a second viewing as I have not seen it in several years. But the D-DAY scene ranks as one of the greatest battle scenes of all time.
(cont.)
Akira Kurosawa: SEVEN SAMURAI was awesome. KAGEMUSHA was great (and beautifully shot, the COLORS!) but needed an editor willing to tell Kurosawa to go $%#@ himself.
Chaplin: Always charming, always enjoyable.
John Ford: Amazing director.
Peter Jackson: LOTR fan here. His movies introduced me to the classic trilogy. Loved LOTR. KING KONG was to long (rhyme!).
Coppola: GODFATHER Part I was great. Never seen 2 or 3. OUTSIDERS was a ecent film too. DRACULA was a disappointment in so many ways (Why put the reincarnated dead girlfriend into it? Why make Mina a slut? Why make Dracula lovesick? A waste of Hopkins and Oldman.).
William Wyler: BEN-HUR and ROMAN HOLIDAY are the only ones of his I have seen and was disappointed by neither.
Well now we can understand your previous list. You are anti-auteur. Which is okay. I actually agree with alot of your picks. Ford, Kurosawa and Wilder on on my top 5 directors list (along with Huston and Hitchcock). And I was really glad to see you mention Ikiru (the greatest film no one talks about).
Those are all greats, too. But you'd be taken more seriously if you said "Why aren't these greats on the list" instead of the American bashing. After all, Chaplin, Kazan, Wilder, Curtiz, Kurosawa, Bergman are all foreigners.
Great calls on Wyler, Kazan, Wilder, Curtiz, and Bergman. De Sica, Fellini, Truffaut, Goddard, Peckinpah, Leone also deserve mention — but it's your list. As for modern guys, Nolan, Mel Gibson and Michael Mann are the only guys whose work I run out to see.
Off the top of my Top 10 would be:
1. Stanley Kubrick
2. John Ford
3. Akira Kurosawa
4. Alfred Hitchcock
5. Billy WIlder
6. Elia Kazan
7. David Lean
8. Francis Ford Coppola
9. Howard Hawks
10. Sam Peckinpah
For posterity's sake, Demille and Griffith should be mentioned on any director list.
Hitchcock _may_ be overrated today, but only because of an overcorrection from his terribly underrated status through most of his career. If anyone is interested in learning about real cinema and actually understanding Hitchcock, I suggest reading Truffaut's enlightening and entertaining interview of the master of suspense.
(link)
Alien is not slow, it's one of the greatest monster movies of all time (if not the single greatest).
Yes, Chinatown is probably overrated. It's also really, really good.
Aronofsky is probably overrated, BUT it's difficult to overrate his influence on modern cinema. At this point I'm SICK of his steadicam-mounted-on-the-subject shot it's been used so often and so clumsily – it's worse than lens-flare in the 90s, but you can't deny his impact! It's like saying the Wachowski brothers had no effect on action sequences. Pi was a fantastic first film, especially since it was his NYU Masters Thesis. Requiem for a Dream was very well crafted and elicited some great performances. (Has Marlon Wayans EVER been nearly as good?) The Fountain is really his only failure – and that's because it was improperly budgeted. The film wasn't terrible, it was self-indulgent and a little sloppy, but it was also beautiful. The subject matter, synopsis and style couldn't bring in a large enough audience – but I wouldn't fault the director for that as much as the producer.
No, the LOTR trilogy is not the finest directorial effort of all time. Yes, it was big. Yes, they were good movies, for the most part. But Return of the King wouldn't friggin' end, and the adaptation from page to screen clumsily shattered one of the most complex and well-crafted works of storytelling and world-building ever created. Tolkien made LOTR great, not Jackson. Jackson simply didn't screw it up enough to make it bad until the end of the trilogy when all his hatchet work showed its effect in the last two barely-fit-on-the-platter-if-it-were-any-longer-we'd-NEED-an-intermission-to-rethread-the-projector reels.
How can you keep John Huston off your list for having "not enough versatility" yet include Chaplin?
Jack Lemmon was Billy Wilder's muse? Do you even know what a muse is?
Christopher Nolan is certainly a tremendous talent, he's one of my favorites, I love most of his work (and perhaps he will belong in a top ten one day) – but he is also currently overrated. Prestige was NOT that good (obvious twist, anyone?), and Insomnia is even worse if only for squandering a talent such as Pacino. And in this case even your writing is misleadingly poor. Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, The Prestige and The Dark Knight are not only Nolan's “last five films,” THEY'RE ALL OF HIS FILMS excepting the previously mentioned Following. That's just sloppy.
Speaking of sloppy, the myriad of great talents you neglected to include, even if only to disparage their names, is indefensible. Others have mentioned Howard Hawks and Buster Keaton, who should have been included in even a cursory examination. There was also mention of Siegel, McLaglen, Hathaway, Thompson, McTiernan, Fuller and Wise all of whom deserved mention, especially since you seem to have such a liking for musicals. But there are even BIGGER and more important directors who you seem to have completely forgotten, if you've ever heard of them: EISENSTEIN, FELLINI, TRUFFAUT, GODARD, RIEFENSTAHL and let's not forget D.W. GRIFFITH who actually invented the feature film! You also neglect DePalma, Levinson, Kasdan, Altman, Hughes, Gilliam, Eastwood and, yes, Cameron; all of whom should have been included within the realm of your pathetic "entertain me" criteria if not in an actual “best ten directors” list.
Sigh.
He is a craftsman and he has designed some of the most exciting scenes in film history. But scenes, even great ones, are never an entire film. He has no idea to this day how to end a story (JAWS and Close Encounters are just two glaring examples).
To me, he is best summed up by Amazing Stories: "Gee, what would it be like to have a train come out of time and go through someone's house." Well, that one scene would look terrific, but the story behind it was painfully poorly executed. In fact, there was no there there.
Aldrich: Emperor of the North. WOW!
Spielberg. Chaplin and not Keaton. Sigh.
When I was very young I went to see a double feature once of the uncut "Hound of the Baskervilles" (what was uncut? "Watson, the needle!" And I thought, I'll stay and see this 45 minute movie that's on with it, something called "Sherlock Jr." The most amazing film I've ever seen.
Huton belongs where you put him, though I dearly love "The Man Who Would Be King." Huston was the master Chinese chef of movie directing; two hours of preparation, ten minutes of cooking. Choose the perfect cast and cinematographer then sit back and watch. Brad Douriff expressed horror that Huston sat in his director's chair and read a newspaper while he and the cast and crew were making the masterpiece "Wise Blood." Huston had already done his work, it's one of Huston's masterworks. But if he didn't get the right cast and crew, if he was stuck with Gregory Peck playing Ahab, he had a hard time making it work.
I would have added Don Siegel and Sam Peckinpah, who was, as Kael put it, the best director ever of individual scenes. There are great individual scenes in his worst movies; there is an astounding fight scene near the end of "The Osterman Weekend," and the death scene of Slim Pickins and L. Q. Jones in "Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid" will tear your heart out.
Funny you say Wyler is your favorite and then linked the Ben-Hur chariot race, as he didn't even direct that scene.
Yes, I love Preston Sturges. He didn't make a lot of movies, but there were wonderful. Sullivan's Travels is one of my favorite movies of all time.
I don't know how you include Spielberg despite his misses, and leave out Kubrick. Kubrick was a revolutionary director. I would have included him in the top 10 before about 5 of the ones you included. 2001 an abomination? Lay off the booze when you write.
anybody want to bet whether Shapiro's even seen The Treasure of the Sierra Madre or Key Largo?
I can NOT put Spielberg as a 'top' director. To earn that, one has to transcend from entertainment to enlightenment – of human nature, of a truth, of history, of something, etc. But Spielberg doesn't. He merely entertains. It's damned good entertainment but the lack of awareness, lack of a moral imperative or spiritual need or an intellectual awareness is what dooms Spielberg. And that lack was painfully evident in 'Schindler's List'. In the hands of Wyler or Wilder or Ford, you would have seen the emotional and spiritual horror of the Holocaust. In Spielberg's hands, you saw only an ambitious director wanting to elevate himself with the cry, 'Look, I can be a great director too!'
Thanks for the dancing scene from Jezebel, always my pick for best movie. That the dress was so red in a black and white film, spoke volumns. Switch Spielberg (overrated) with Hitchcock and your lists won't be so shaky.
Also missing: Peckinpah , Lucas, Sturges, DeMille…
I doubt I'll ever look at anything you write again, Ben. Certainly nothing about film – what's the point? I might as well ask Ray Charles about colors.
There is some debate on whether the credit goes to Andrew Marton or Yakima Canutt. Most modern historians credit Canutt. I find BEN HUR a very moving and inspiring film, not hours of tedium.
You're referring to set-pieces. Of which there are countless great ones in Spielberg's work, like the train sequence in the "Ghost Train" episode of Amazing Stories.
But that's not what I'm referring to. Set pieces ALWAYS stand out to the casual observer. They're easy to pin-point because of their grandness.
I'm saying look deeper, past mere set-pieces and look at the rest of the film.
Lets take that same episode of Amazing Stories. Sure, the train sequence was spectacular, especially for TV and especially for 1987.
But what's impressive and inspiring is Spielberg's work when there isn't a train going through the house. For instance, watch how he stages the scene where the doctor gives Old Pa the sedative. The way he reveals that the shot has been administered or the shadows on the wall as Old Pa is subdued a beat later.
Or earlier, watch when Old Pa and the boy going looking for the tracks of the train. The way the camera moves and settles at the exact right moments. The foreground background compositions. The timing of the performances.
Watch the scene where the boy complains about living in that house, as Old Pa listens.
It's all exquisite and masterfully done.
THAT'S what's I'm talking about. Craftsmanship of the film entire (or in this case: episode) .
Nobody else does it as well as Spielberg… or again, IMNSHO: nobody ever has.
I'm with you on Kubrick, Scott although I would put Weir in at #10 instead of Spielberg who brought us Munich. I'm o.k. with Wyler at #1. Still, I think Ben should have name his list "the ten directors who gave me the most sustained viewing pleasure over the course of their career." Why confuse that with the concept of being "the greatest."
Well, not entirely. The characters aren't carbon copies of McBain's — they have the Kurosawa touch.
Okay, as one who reacted negatively to your original list I will grant that you are not as ignorant as you originally came off. You have seen some black and white movies. Framing your list as directors who have provided you with the most entertainment is a better way to put it, because there is a difference between determining a list of great directors based on what you like and a lists that cites great directors based on influence. This is why Orson always makes great directors lists of historians, they factor in more than what they like but technique and influence on other directors. I can't stand watching Bergman movies (do I really need to depress myself like that?) but there are good reasons to rank him as one the greatest directors of all time. As long as you make clear this is about what you like, leave the actual ranking to historians with more knowledge. And kudos to your appreciation of THE BAND WAGON, but to better understand Minnelli you need to see his non musical works: LUST FOR LIFE, THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL, THE CLOCK, THE COURTSHIP OF EDDIE'S FATHER, FATHER OF THE BRIDE (Spencer Tracy is brilliant). SOME CAME RUNNING, TEA AND SYMPATHY, TWO WEEKS IN ANOTHER TOWN.
Sigh, the "Perez Hilton" of movie commentary strikes again.
Enjoy your superficial clicks and hits–so much better than intelligence and integrity anyway.
Why do people get so butthurt over other people's opinions?
Unfortunately, I think he is correct and Wyler typically isn't rated very high. Most lists I see don't even mention him as a top director, let alone top 10.
"Alfred Hitchcock is nowhere near the worst director ever (I was probably too harsh to label him “slightly better than mediocre”), but it is a travesty to label him the greatest director of all time, as so many have. "
No, it's not a travesty, it's an opinion. A travesty is when a twit gets a column to express his twit opinions.
Charles Laughton directed one of the most unique, brilliant and beautiful flops of all time, "Night of the Hunter," his only effort.
*Note to self:
Never accept invitation to "movie night" at Ben Shapiro's house.
Akira Kurosawa definitely. RAN is a masterpiece.
Ugh, The Truman Show is crap. It's so utterly and completely stupid that it lowers the IQ to merely sit through the whole thing (really, the director tries to murder a guy on live TV and nobody cares?). It's faux drama on the level of a soap opera. The only difference is the acting isn't as bad.
Great list. I'm one of the few who sided with you on your previous one (although I agreed that putting Hitchcock #1 while leaving off Moore, Lee and and Polanski was a bad misstep). I don't know if I'd disagree with a single selection here. Nolan will have to be on the list with one or two more movies of the quality of Dark Knight. The same with Jackson (and I agree the trilogy is the finest film making achievement in history, even if the third one is a touch below the astronomical standards of the first two).
speaking of your name……it's a list of hollywood directors! not something, well, you know, important.
Yes, because so many of us watch 2001 on a weekly basis, right? You have to be kidding. That movie is so utterly bloated and stupid it makes Eyes Wide Shut seem like a masterpiece. Please….
Can anyone remember the last time anyone they knew actually watched that pile of crap? B-O-R-I-N-G
It's one of those movies people fondly remember while not ever being interested in sitting through again.
"Best ever" compilations like this require perspective and context. Need to be done by a person born before 1990 to have any merit. Sorry. Both of your lists have significant omissions. Naive. Try again in 20 years when you have some mileage under you and can see what stands the test of time.
Since your criteria for inclusion is your personal feelings there's no arguing with your list, nor any way to support it. It is, in a word, arbitrary.
2001: A Space Odyssey is an abomination? I saw it on the big screen (and I mean back when big screens were BIG) way back in 1968, and never looked back at Mary Poppins and Disney again. It was transformational, and even at eight years old I understood it from beginning to end.
That's as far as I had to read, Ben. Maybe you should have quit after you jumped the first shark.
I always find it odd that in discussions of film everybody seems to forget about MICHAEL POWELL AND EMERIC PRESSBURGER. The genius of that collaborative team is readily apparent in "The Red Shoes", "A Matter of Life and Death", "Black Narcissus", "The Tales of Hoffman", "49th Parallel", "The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp" etc. etc.
I'd switch out Bergman for The Archers any day of the week.
And I'm not entirely sure how Cocteau was omitted but… Charlie Chaplin's there? And, not that Wyler doesn't deserve a spot but I'd still switch him out for Luis Bunuel.
I'd add John Frankenheimer to the list. It's a preference but the world would be a worse place without The Manchurian Candidate, Ronin, The Train, Seven Days in May and other gems like The Iceman Cometh.
You must be logged in to post a comment.