[Monique]

My favorite director is Martin Scorcese because he had the great talent to search the bad side of the human soul and present it the New York way.

He makes use hesitate to watch violence but he compels us to do so at the end.

Close behind is Joel Coen because he is a great artist and a great satarist.

They are truly great American directors making movies into cinema and a work of art.

[Korv]

Kubrick.
Spielberg.
Fincher.

Just off the top of my head. That's the who, I'm going to have to put some thought into why. I'll get back to this thread in a day or so.

[Daishi]

Jerry Bruckheimer. I can't think of any other director who's produced more probing and insightful films than he.


Ahem.

[Macintosh]

Oliver Stone because of cinematography. JFK and Any Given Sunday.

[sek929]

Darren Aronofsky for his brilliant work in Pi and Requiem for a Dream....just some awesome perspectives and camera angles.

And Kubrik is a tie for first....enough said, just a kick-ass director who incorperates music perfectly for every scene.

[ 07-09-2001: Message edited by: sek929 ]

[Taloston Man]

Well, I just finished watching Requiem for a Dream, so I'm a bit biased, but Darren Aronofsky did some absolutely INCREDIBLY WRENCHING things with that film. That endind was heartbreaking, all the way.
On a broader scale though?
I love the Coens and the very original and inexplicably lovable work they produce between them. Stanley Kubrick was a brilliant director partly because of the work he chose to get into and partly because of the widely varying and creative things he did once inside that space. Spielberg has that certain sense of wonder and magic that no one else has been able to quite top, and Terrence Mallick, while making them few and far between has created masterpieces with Badlands and The Thin Red Line, the latter being one of the most touching and powerful films I've seen.

I'm sure I'm forgetting my natural favourite, as that appears to be a hobby or skill of mine....

Trevor Haldenby

[Macintosh]

Where is Cipher to chime in on this one, I meant Cipher13.

[simifilm]

Stanley Kubrick.
Wong Kar-Wai.
Jim Jarmusch.
Rainer Werner Fassbinder.
Jean Renoir.
Billy Wilder.
Charlie Chaplin. (<- no one has mentioned him before!)
Buster Keaton. (<- no one has mentioned him either)


and the great Barney Gumble.

edit: misspelled Barney!!!

[ 07-09-2001: Message edited by: simifilm ]

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by Macintosh:
<STRONG>I meant Cipher13. </STRONG>

Was that um... meant to be, like, funny or something?
Cause it... well, it wasn't...
I'm sorta wondering what to do here...

It wasn't funny, I don't know if it was meant to be funny, and it would be low of me to insult your grammatical abilities... or lack thereof...

[mrfrost]

Kubrick in the lead for the reason mentioned by sek929 and for just having made a lot of my top-10 movies
Tim Burton for the awesome visual style he has !!
John Carpenter for making me buy almost all of his movies (yea..even Precinct 13 ) The only JC movie missing in my collection is "Vampires" because well...I thought it sucked !! I think I have every other JC movie..(wow..cool now that I come to think of it)
Then there are the Coen Brothers for the awesome storytelling , Darren Aronofsky for still having the guts to try out something new. and uhm....Ridley Scott for making Blade Runner and Alien !!

As soon as I can think of more Directors I admire and the reasons why I will come post back here a.s.a.p.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Daishi:
<STRONG>Jerry Bruckheimer. I can't think of any other director who's produced more probing and insightful films than he.


Ahem.</STRONG>

Yes. Well, he's a producer, not a director.

[scottiB]

Alfred Hitchcock. No reason needed.

[maxelson]

Hitchcock and Wells... again, no reasons really needed.
Alan Parker- most creative with the visuals. PIcks really great story lines.
David Mamet- a very aquired taste- the acting style he prefers is very spartan. Let's the audience do the work... almost all of it. He's one of my favorites because he pushes NOTHING at me. Nothing. I have paid for the priveledge of interpreting the art myself. He lets me do that. He's also one of my favorite writers (novel, script, screenplay).
Jim Jaramusch (sp?). Another king of subtlety. Spartan style- relies on the story instead of the tricks. Simple drama shown simply. Not afraid to go ut on a limb, but does not make it a red badge of courage. And hey- any guy who uses that much Tom Waits music in his films can't be bad. One of the founding members of the Lee Marvin Society. The guy is just cool.

Least favorite director: Oliver Stone. Seriously. How much of a beating can a paying audience member take? He may be excellent with the cinematographic work- he compiles a great team- but can you say "director with an agenda"? Every time I see one of his movies I come back feeling abused. He does not, quite frankly, trust me to "get it", so he throttles me with his themes. NEVER. EVER abuse your audience with your agenda. It is insulting.

[simifilm]

Originally posted by maxelson:
<STRONG>
Least favorite director: Oliver Stone. Seriously. How much of a beating can a paying audience member take? He may be excellent with the cinematographic work- he compiles a great team- but can you say "director with an agenda"? Every time I see one of his movies I come back feeling abused. He does not, quite frankly, trust me to "get it", so he throttles me with his themes. NEVER. EVER abuse your audience with your agenda. It is insulting.</STRONG>

I couldn�t agree more. And his agenda is so simple: "Where is the great America of our fathers? It has been stolen from us by some mean guys". Uaaaahhh.

After JFK and "Natural Born Killers" I decided never to pay again money for a Stone film.

[maxelson]

You. simifilm. I'm hoppin' a plane to somewhere between Zurich and Berlin and taking you to a Mamet film. Why? Because usually, when I voice my opinion about this Stone character, I get slammed. I'm used to it, but it is just nice to see that the first response wasn't a flame fest.

[Timo]

Bergman. The distopias this guy creates never seem unreal, even though the can also been seen as fables or fantasies or metaphors. This is true especially of his earlier films. Later films are about inner landscapes -- messed up people tormenting each other. Not exactly "entertainment", but also not that "I've been had" feeling I've had leaving movies this summer.

T

[pathogen]

Craig McCracken, Director and Creator of The Powerpuff Girls. Not joking, I think the satire and animation-timing are brilliant. May have changed my life.

Know who else I think is the Sh-t? James Ivory, man. Mind you, he's been putting Nick Nolte in his movies lately, but I think that I just have a personal bias against Nolte sometimes. I also don't Like Helena Bonham Carter, but it hasn't stopped me from enjoying quite a few of his films. Anyhow, there are lots of good directors.

[simifilm]

Originally posted by maxelson:
<STRONG>You. simifilm. I'm hoppin' a plane to somewhere between Zurich and Berlin and taking you to a Mamet film. Why? Because usually, when I voice my opinion about this Stone character, I get slammed. I'm used to it, but it is just nice to see that the first response wasn't a flame fest.</STRONG>

I don't think I've seen any film by Mamet besides "Spanish Prisoner", and I didn't like that too much. The ending was very weak IMO.

Besides that: How could I possibly forget Hitchcock on my list? Shame on me! He's the master. Everybody else is dust compared to him!

[tonton]

Originally posted by simifilm:
<STRONG>Stanley Kubrick.
Wong Kar-Wai.
Jim Jarmusch.
Rainer Werner Fassbinder.
Jean Renoir.
Billy Wilder.
Charlie Chaplin. (&lt;- no one has mentioned him before!)
Buster Keaton. (&lt;- no one has mentioned him either)


and the great Barney Gumble.

edit: misspelled Barney!!!

[ 07-09-2001: Message edited by: simifilm ]</STRONG>

Oh my god! Someone else mentioned Wong Kar-Wai! Brilliant.
I've also got to mention Wim Wenders (I know lots of people hate him) and the late Krystov Kieslowski (I know I hacked his name to pieces). Also Zhang Yimou for his gorgeous cinematography and heart-wrenching material and Ang Lee for his comedies Wedding Banquet and Eat Drink Man Woman, and his drama the Ice Storm, though I thought Crouching Tiger was a disappointment.

[Taloston Man]

Mmmmm...I loved Spanish Prisoner, loved it just to death....

And the one director that I knew I'd inevitably forget despite the quality of his or her work? Tim Burton, but he's already been mentioned so I don't feel quite as bad as I could have.

Off to Apple I go....

Trevor Haldenby

[simifilm]

Originally posted by tonton:
<STRONG>
Oh my god! Someone else mentioned Wong Kar-Wai! Brilliant.
I've also got to mention Wim Wenders (I know lots of people hate him) and the late Krystov Kieslowski (I know I hacked his name to pieces). Also Zhang Yimou for his gorgeous cinematography and heart-wrenching material and Ang Lee for his comedies Wedding Banquet and Eat Drink Man Woman, and his drama the Ice Storm, though I thought Crouching Tiger was a disappointment.</STRONG>

Wong Kar-Wai is IMH the most interesting director alive. When I saw "Chungking Express" for the first time it was like entering a whole new world. I was only thinking "That's also a way films can be done, I haven't know about it for so long."

As for Wenders: I have just seen "Der Himmel �ber Berlin" (I think the english title is "Wings of Desire") and I thought the same as with most Wenders' film I know: he's very good in creating moods and athmosphere, but he's not a story teller. He's too much in love with his characters and locations to really tell something or find an end.

Originally posted by Taloston Man :
<STRONG>
Mmmmm...I loved Spanish Prisoner, loved it just to death....</STRONG>

Didn't you find the ending very cheap? Pure deus ex machina, not very subtle or clever.

Robert Altman hasn't been mentioned yet. "Short Cuts" alone would justify a place among the best directors.

[finboy]

Wells (People thought Martians had landed)
Hitchcock (Mother. Nuff said.)
Kubrick (Real horrorshow)
Speilberg (Jaws is STILL scary)
Ridley Scott (Bladerunner)
Ivan Reitman (Who ya gonna call?)
John Hughes (Save Ferris!)
Tim Burton (Sleepy Hollow)
Terry Gilliam (12 Monkeys)
Scorcese (pick one)
The Coens (Raising Arizona)
The Farrellys (Something about Mary)
Wilder.
Capra.
Hawkes.
Ford.
Bluth (imagine what it takes to direct DRAW'RINGS).
Altman (because he doesn't give a f*ck about Hollywood).
Besson (Leon AKA The Professional)
Coppola (except for his relatives)
The Wachowskis. (one hit does not a catalog make, but Bullet Time was cool).

[Edited 7/11 because I was on CRACK or something and left out Burton, Scott and Gilliam yesterday.]

[ 07-11-2001: Message edited by: finboy ]

[gwrjr33]

John Sayles. I'm partial to writer-directors. Here's a partial, representative list of his work. He wrote all of these except for Matewan (one of my favorites) and The Brother from Another Planet.

Lone Star (1996)
The Secret of Roan Inish (1994)
Passion Fish (1992)
City of Hope (1991)
Eight Men Out (1988)
Matewan (1987)
The Brother from Another Planet (1984)
Men with Guns (1997)
... aka Hombres Armados (Spanish title)

Not a dog in this list - nothing but serious, story-driven cinema here. I especially liked the sheer audacity of Men With Guns which he wrote partially in a language that is not his primary language. He came out with this film after Lone Star, his biggest commercial success - not exactly the obvious choice for him.

I also second Monique in her selection of Scorsese. And Woody Allen, again the writer-director thing.

[ 07-10-2001: Message edited by: gwrjr33 ]

[Monique]

Thank you for the response so far it will give lots of ideas to rent movies. Since the director being the soul of the movie it is nice to know that many people feel like I do.

[Matsu]

What's that? Borderline obsessive personality/psychotic?

[runningdog]

David Lynch

He's more than just a director. He's an artist in all kinds of media: paint, sculpture, film, tv, music, computers, comic strips, inventing. If you've never seen a Lynch film then check out Blue Velvet. His television show, Twin Peaks, is my favorite. And the guy is a Mac user. Currently, Lynch is using an iMac to build his web site. And he's used ProTools to mix his music. This coming fall he will have a new movie out in theaters, Mulholland Drive. Lynch split for best director in this year's Cannes film festival for Mulholland Drive. Lynch's last movie was The Straight Story and his first movie was the wild Eraserhead.

LynchNet

David Lynch's website

[simifilm]

Originally posted by runningdog:
<STRONG>David Lynch
[...]
And the guy is a Mac user. Currently, Lynch is using an iMac to build his web site. And he's used ProTools to mix his music.</STRONG>

That's a good reason, you convinced me.

Seriously: Twin Peaks was the best thing that ever happened to TV. It changed my life.

[Retrograde]

Well, a lot of people have been listing great directors that I would include amongst my favs too, however I'm surprised that no one has yet mentioned David Cronenberg! ... Shame on you Canadians!

[juanvaldes]

I can't believe that no one has mentioned Quninten Tarantino! His movies are awesome! I simply love Resavore Dogs, and Pulp Fiction! Simply masterpieces, Pi, that was a cool head trip. Liked it.

A cool head trip movie to check out is "cube"

[SillyMonk]

Originally posted by gwrjr33:
<STRONG>John Sayles. I'm partial to writer-directors. </STRONG>

John Sayles is a fine fine director.

I am not a big fan of the auteur theory of filmmaking that basically says the director is the author of a film the way a painter is the creator of a painting. Firstly, films are entirely collaborative by their very nature. Secondly, the vision starts with a screenplay, the creative kernel of a film is the writing. Thirdly, there is so much that can happen after the film is shot to give the movie its meaning. If you have ever edited film you know what I mean. So I basically think that directors are idolized at the expense of other worthy artists. Some directors have enough clout that they can collect the kind of team that they want (like Clint Eastwood) and make the movie that they want to make, but they are basically working as producers at that point, with fingers in many pies.

I heard a director say that their job is basically to make a million decisions a day. Some directors are obviously auteurs, like Hitch, where every movie has a pretty indelible mark of authorship. But others, like Ridley Scott, I find less so. His movies usually have a strong visual element but there are not the unifying themes across all of his work. I think true auteurs are few and far between and most directors really have a style of filmmaking rather than a cohesive expression.

For example, look at the difference when Spielberg writes his own screenplays (Close Encounters, A.I.) versus when writers write them (Schindler's List, Jaws, Empire of the Sun, E.T.). His own writing is rather muddled (in my opinion) but Spielberg puts good writing to good use. There are some imagery that he likes to use again and again (like water) but this is a visual style and not really the foundation of his films.

Some writers that I like:
Tom Stoppard
Joel and Ethan Coen
John Sayles
Stephen Zaillian
Robert Towne
Harold Ramis
P.T. Anderson

Some of which are directors!

-John

[maxelson]

Originally posted by simifilm:
<STRONG>

Didn't you find the ending very cheap? Pure deus ex machina, not very subtle or clever.

.</STRONG>

'Kay. YOu have to take a good look at Mamet in order to really see these endings. Mamet focuses on very simple drama. The average guy in drastic circumstance. Clever has nothing to do with what this guy writes. Simple drama. Let's take The Edge. This film was written by Mamet, directed by someone else. One might say that the ending here was a little too trite. I do not think so. "They died saving my life." There was no other line possible. This film ended in the only way it could. Same for the Spanish Prisoner. If Deus ex Machina is what you saw, that is probably what was intended. BUt there is an ironic twist. The whole con was mechinized... why not the ending? The story is about events beyond the main character's control. At the end, he realizes he was in control the whole time- every action depended on his actions, including the ending (I am desperately trying not to give anything away, here). Most of Mamet's stories are like that- almost all involve simple people in extraordinary circumstances because these tales make for the most effective drama. Ever seen "Homicide"? What starts out as a cop story evolves into a search for identity (spurred on by extraordinary circumstances), which turns into a tale of manipulation. Who is pulling who's strings is the exploration. "House of Games". Same thing. All different explorations of manipulation, identity and the ordinary guy... the best part is that you are left to make the determinations yourself. "Oleanna". See that film (or better yet, the play if you can find one running). Two characters. The manipulations in this story line are so subtle yet so devistating. In the end, we still are left to decide for ourselves who was manipulating whom. When the play opened in Boston, the second act was actually delayed because people were actually arguing... fighting about who was in the wrong- who was the antagonist- the manipulator... not THAT, my friends is what we call truly great and effective drama.
Again, cleverness has nothing to do with that ending. What is the only logical conclusion, given the events? What road has the protagonist traveled? Mamet focuses on the ONLY ending there can be. If you glimpse back at the story, I think you'll find that this IS the case. Any other ending would have been cheap and untrue.

[poocat]

ridley scott (bladerunner knocks everything else down)
kubrick (full metal jacket/2001/you all know the drill...)
hitchcock (rear window is my fav.)
wong kar-wai (incredible. that's all i can say)
terry gilliam (brazil!)
burton (visual style... someone else said it, but he's great, it's true)
frank darabont (ok... first movie ever... shawshank?!)
ang lee (ice storm/eatdrinkmanwoman/cthd, and yes you know the fight's coming)
coens (miller's crossing.)
david fincher (fight club/the game)


[edit: include fincher]

[ 07-11-2001: Message edited by: poocat ]

[maxelson]

The Coens. Love them. Adore every ONE of their films. "Millers Crossing" is a particular top 10 favorite. The scene of Albert Finney chasing down his would be assassins with a tommy gun, all to the sound track of "O Danny Boy"... shivers.
"What've ya done for me lately?"
Or this:
"Let's see where the twist flops." Now, cmon... any directors/ writers who can pull off a line like that with style and grace... I know, it's a little thing, but it's aaaallll in the details.

[simifilm]

Originally posted by maxelson:
<STRONG>

'Kay. YOu have to take a good look at Mamet in order to really see these endings. Mamet focuses on very simple drama. The average guy in drastic circumstance. Clever has nothing to do with what this guy writes. Simple drama. Let's take The Edge. This film was written by Mamet, directed by someone else. One might say that the ending here was a little too trite. I do not think so. "They died saving my life." There was no other line possible. This film ended in the only way it could. Same for the Spanish Prisoner. If Deus ex Machina is what you saw, that is probably what was intended. BUt there is an ironic twist. The whole con was mechinized... why not the ending? The story is about events beyond the main character's control. At the end, he realizes he was in control the whole time- every action depended on his actions, including the ending (I am desperately trying not to give anything away, here). Most of Mamet's stories are like that- almost all involve simple people in extraordinary circumstances because these tales make for the most effective drama. Ever seen "Homicide"? What starts out as a cop story evolves into a search for identity (spurred on by extraordinary circumstances), which turns into a tale of manipulation. Who is pulling who's strings is the exploration. "House of Games". Same thing. All different explorations of manipulation, identity and the ordinary guy... the best part is that you are left to make the determinations yourself. "Oleanna". See that film (or better yet, the play if you can find one running). Two characters. The manipulations in this story line are so subtle yet so devistating. In the end, we still are left to decide for ourselves who was manipulating whom. When the play opened in Boston, the second act was actually delayed because people were actually arguing... fighting about who was in the wrong- who was the antagonist- the manipulator... not THAT, my friends is what we call truly great and effective drama.
Again, cleverness has nothing to do with that ending. What is the only logical conclusion, given the events? What road has the protagonist traveled? Mamet focuses on the ONLY ending there can be. If you glimpse back at the story, I think you'll find that this IS the case. Any other ending would have been cheap and untrue.</STRONG>

I haven't seen the other films, so I can't comment on them. But as for "The Spanish Prisoner" I stick with what I said. I just don't think this kind of story is interesting. It is so constructed, it could end any the author wanted. While watching the movie you realise very soon that nothing is what it appears to be. But after the second twist this gets boring IMO, because you know the film could go on and on adding twist after twist. The only "surprise" is when the film decides to stop. But I think it's not very elegant to add characters in the end that never appeared during the movie. For me this was almost like as if the character was waking up at the end, realising it was all a dream. I think it's very boring if a film only manipulates is audience to show that it can manipulate the audience. Forgive me the comparison, but "Spanish Prisoner" reminded me of "Wild Things" which I also found quite boring...

But tastes do differ.

And to all who mentioned Ridley Scott: Watch "1492","GI Jane" and "White Squall" and then dare to say again that he's a great director....

[poocat]

raaaaaaaaaaaa!

war, war, war on you!

ridley scott rules.
absolutely rules.

bladerunner is (imnsvho) hands down the best movie ever made!

ok... back to seriousness.
yes, he's made some stinkers.
but bladerunner, alien, thelma & louise, and gladiator definitely put him into the "good/great" category of directors. i'm incredibly biased because of how much i like bladerunner, but if you look around and see it on so many top ten lists, then the guy has to, i mean, has to, be a great director.

i mean, most everything everyone has to say bad about ai they end w/ "we should just go see bladerunner again instead"...


poocat.

[grok420]

terry gilliam - every film is a jewel and completely original

jim jarmusch (sp) - even if Dead Man was his ONLY film, he'd be on the list.

kubrick - symbolism at its finest. so complex and subtle at the same time.

coen brothers - they make perfect movies. met a woman who worked on Raisiing Arizona with them. She said the chase scene after Cage robs the store (Hunter leaves him, hijakes truck, dogs, cops, clerks, cars, don't forget the huggies...) was COMPLETELY SCRIPTED before they began to shoot. Every detail. i can't even dream that. too brilliant.

hitchcock - people still can't do it like he did.

orson welles - so much a pioneer, you can't even see what he did because they edited them all. no one ever got him. mabye no one ever will.

too tired to think of others. gonna have to check out some of your suggestions, everyone. don't know some of them:-) I love that!!

[gwrjr33]

Originally posted by poocat:
<STRONG>
i mean, most everything everyone has to say bad about ai they end w/ "we should just go see bladerunner again instead"...</STRONG>

Still haven't seen AI so I can't comment on that. But as for Blade Runner, a lot of what makes that movie great is Philip K. Dick's original story. This isn't to say that Scott didn't do a good job. He did. But Dick is truly in a class by himself. (Don't know about you but I just love noir stuff. )

I don't know if Dick had anything to do with the screenplay. He died in 1982, the year Blade Runner was released.

[ 07-12-2001: Message edited by: gwrjr33 ]

[simifilm]

Originally posted by poocat:
<STRONG>raaaaaaaaaaaa!

war, war, war on you!

ridley scott rules.
absolutely rules.

bladerunner is (imnsvho) hands down the best movie ever made!

ok... back to seriousness.
yes, he's made some stinkers.
but bladerunner, alien, thelma & louise, and gladiator definitely put him into the "good/great" category of directors. i'm incredibly biased because of how much i like bladerunner, but if you look around and see it on so many top ten lists, then the guy has to, i mean, has to, be a great director.

i mean, most everything everyone has to say bad about ai they end w/ "we should just go see bladerunner again instead"...


poocat.</STRONG>

Blade Runner is a masterpiece, Alien is great. No doubt about that.

But Thelma & Louise? That was ok, but not more. And Gladiator? Come on. Gladiator was the most humourless movie ever. It take itself so serious, it was almost embarrassing.

[ 07-12-2001: Message edited by: simifilm ]

[poocat]

arright... i'm in it too deep to back out now.

gladiator, while the script sucked in many regards, was beautifully shot, and that's why i like it.

now, just so there's no mistake, let me state for the record that, having seen all the nominated movies,

THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT CROUCHING TIGER WAS THE BEST MOVIE MADE LAST YEAR.

(just so no one thinks i'm defending gladiator's oscar)

but it was a great visual movie. the first scene alone is worth most other movies.
thelma & louise was no great shakes as far as genre development goes, but it was quite a good flick.
i mentioned it merely to note that he'd done other good movies.

oh.
having read "do androids dream of electric sheep" several times, i must say that i see almost no relationship between it and bladerunner, for which dick did nothing that i know of.

that's why bladerunner is so brilliant. it takes this incredibly brilliant but disjointed and obtuse story,
and transforms it into a work of brilliance, relevance, and sheer beauty that has influenced not only every sci-fi flick since, but every noir flick since, and was truly revolutionary. many sci-fi stories have used the scenery established in bladerunner as the background, and the fact that there is no attribution merely speaks to it's overwhelming influence on modern culture.

poocat.

[mrfrost]

ok...this is not a "best movie " thread but I just had to mention one more movie. And I didn't want to go and drag the "best movie poll" out of the dirt so....here it goes.....

DUNE....

[tomra]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by poocat:
[QB]raaaaaaaaaaaa!


ridley scott rules.
absolutely rules.

bladerunner is (imnsvho) hands down the best movie ever made!

---
Well it is at least very close!
Tim Burton`s "Edvard scissorhands" is also a true masterpiece.
For those of you ( like me" who like Burton "stuff", check this out:
http://www.rustboy.com

Great 3D work!

Tom

[gwrjr33]

Originally posted by poocat:
<STRONG>
... having read "do androids dream of electric sheep" several times, i must say that i see almost no relationship between it and bladerunner...</STRONG>

Go here.

[simifilm]

Originally posted by poocat:
<STRONG>THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT CROUCHING TIGER WAS THE BEST MOVIE MADE LAST YEAR.
</STRONG>

That was actually "In the Mood for Love" by Wong Kar-Wai.

But this thread isn't about best movies but about best directors, and I think a "best director" should have a certain standard of quality, and Scott - who is without any doubt a great visual talent - does not have it. He made some really terrible movies. Not just not good, really terrible. This rules him out IMO.

[maxelson]

I have a new favorite film: O, Brother, Where Art Thou? Them Coens, I'll tell ya.
SEE IT.