The Top 250 Director of All Time according to 'They Shoot Pictures Don't They'

[Tequilla]

I love theydontshotpictures . It's , by far , the best compilation site regarding motion pictures. Yes i dont agree with a lot of stuff. So what ? That doesnt diminish anything. Its only my opinion. It's still a valuable piece of information.

And its great because of two reasons. It has a global vision of motion pictures. From an historical point of view (it doesn't restrict itself to a period. We are talking about a 100+ years art !!) and from a worldwide point of view (suggestions from all over the globe).

It's also fantastic site to look for films to watch. I've used it many times.

John Woo?

Please, the guy turned Mission: Impossible 2 into a weird ass kung fu movie.

I dont know if you're joking , but Woo was the most important asian filmmaker during late 80's , beginning 90's. His heroic bloodsheds action extravaganzas were a huge contribution to make hk cinema a global brand , and he had quite a influence on action cinema.

 

[Lord]

Christopher Nolan is a good filmmaker, but he still need to climb some more stairs, the site does seem to like his films.

 

[Evil Twin]

Chaplin is considered a much much greater DIRECTOR than Keaton. And remember this film is ranking film-making.

These are the films they list for Chaplin

CHARLES CHAPLIN - City Lights (1931 / USA / 86m / BW) ▪29
CHARLES CHAPLIN - Modern Times (1936 / USA / 89m / BW) ▪43
CHARLES CHAPLIN - Gold Rush, The (1925 / USA / 82m / BW) ▪63
CHARLES CHAPLIN - Great Dictator, The (1940 / USA / 128m / BW) ▪159
CHARLES CHAPLIN - Monsieur Verdoux (1947 / USA / 123m / BW) ▪265
CHARLES CHAPLIN - Kid, The (1921 / USA / 60m / BW) ▪324
CHARLES CHAPLIN - Limelight (1952 / USA / 145m / BW) ▪485
CHARLES CHAPLIN - Woman of Paris, A (1923 / USA / 81m / BW) ▪555
CHARLES CHAPLIN - Circus, The (1928 / USA / 72m / BW) ▪613

These are the films they list for Keaton

BUSTER KEATON & CLYDE BRUCKMAN - General, The (1926 / USA / 74m / BW) ▪36
BUSTER KEATON - Sherlock Jr. (1924 / USA / 44m / BW) ▪103
BUSTER KEATON & EDWARD SEDGWICK - Cameraman, The (1928 / USA / 69m / BW) ▪400
BUSTER KEATON & CHARLES F. REISNER - Steamboat Bill, Jr. (1928 / USA / 71m / BW) ▪411
BUSTER KEATON & JOHN BLYSTONE - Our Hospitality (1923 / USA / 74m / BW) ▪545
BUSTER KEATON & DONALD CRISP - Navigator, The (1924 / USA / 59m / BW) ▪587
BUSTER KEATON - Seven Chances (1925 / USA / 56m / BW) ▪757

Keaton's films were co-directed often times. And Chaplin simply has more more masterpieces to his name.

It's pretty easy to recognize a Keaton film, so the co-direction isn't a big deal to me as it's clear that Keaton was doing the lion's share of work.

Keaton is, undoubtedly, a more experimental and innovative director than Chaplin. Chaplin's work is excellent, but a lot of it is basically vaudeville skits, while Keaton was working with camera and editing tricks and space. Nothing Chaplin did is remotely on the scale of The General. Nothing Chaplin did is as innovative as Sherlock Jr.

Which is not to knock Chaplin, but only to say that Keaton is every bit the director that Chaplin is. I think there's a good argument to be made that Chaplin's greatest strengths were as a performer and writer.

Don't get me wrong, Chaplin made some great, great films and belongs on the list near the top. City Lights and The Great Dictator are, at a minimum, masterpieces. But, Chaplin vs. Keaton has been an eternal debate and they're very linked. The Chaplin is a much, much greater director than Keaton is an argument I've never seen.

Although, it really should be noted, there's probably a razor's thin edge between all of these rankings.

 

[Evil Twin]

I love Star Wars, but ranking Lucas over some of the folks they did because of that film and Graffiti (over Pabst with Laura, Loach with Kes, the King Kong directors, Whale with Frankenstein) and ranking Nicholas Ray that high (for what, possibly, Rebels Without a Cause -- another film I love, but still -- In a Lonely Place, or Johnny Guitar?) over von Stroheim, the director of Grande Illusion and Yang, director of Yi Yi and Brighter Summer Day? Odd, but not horrible or anything. I don't begrudge Lucas too much anyway, though it seems more like a personal favorites list I might have put together myself than a survey of film experts.

Renoir directed Grande Illusion. Stroheim just appeared in it.

 

[Airwings]

A lot of strange names I haven't even heard about.
Geez, this is a list of 250 directors, guys like Baz Lurhmann, John Frankenheimer, Richard Donner, John Landis, Ivan Reitman and Walter Hill should at least have been included (even at the bottom).
There's many others missing too, but you seem to have mentioned all of them in this thread

 

[redhawk23]

Again look at how the list was compiled, it is largely derived from critical consensus, Landis and Reitman especially have made some movies that have gotten torn to shreds critically. In that respect not knowing when to stop or making crap films late in your career greatly brings your ranking down.

 

[Airwings]

I can't understand how Tobe Hooper is ranked higher than Robert Zemeckis, Oliver Stone, Tim Burton, David Fincher, Ang Lee, Peter Jackson and Dario Argento.

Anyway my own top ten of the names in black are (in no particular order):

Alfred Hitchcock
Stanley Kubrick
Sergio Leone
Robert Altman
George A. Romero
Louis Malle
Tobe Hooper (in fact, I actually included him)
Blake Edwards
Mel Brooks
John Hughes

I've went with the ones who have entertained me more over the years than just impressed me with one single film. That leaves out Bergman, Capra, Fellini and Truffaut, sorry to say. But I can still see their greatness

 

[Airwings]

My top ten of the missing names in no particular order, excluding the great Bond directors 1962-89 + Martin Campbell (they would take up too much of the list) :

Sam Raimi
Robert Rodriguez
Bryan Singer
Matthew Vaughn
Christopher Nolan
Baz Lurhmann
Richard Donner
John Landis
Zack Snyder
E.B. Clucher

With JJ Abrams, Darren Aronofsky, Reitman and Joe Dante right outside the list.

 

[Rocketman]

Christopher Nolan, Aronofsky, Darabont, Raimi some of the greatest directors of all time.

The only way they could get on to the list is if they made films which can be considered some of the greatest of all time. And none of these guys have done that.

 

[Lord]

My top ten of the missing names in no particular order, excluding the great Bond directors 1962-89 + Martin Campbell (they would take up too much of the list) :

Sam Raimi
Robert Rodriguez
Bryan Singer
Matthew Vaughn
Christopher Nolan
Baz Lurhmann
Richard Donner
John Landis
Zack Snyder
E.B. Clucher

With JJ Abrams, Darren Aronofsky, Reitman and Joe Dante right outside the list.

lol

 

[Airwings]

It was really, really difficult this time. I had to leave out lots of great ones like Scorsese, Polanski, Ridley Scott, De Palma, Reiner, Stone, Verhoeven, Zemeckis, Ang Lee, Argento etc
But here's my top ten names in red (no order). And it's my personal favorites, the still active directors who has meant the most for moi with their films.
Hey, don't blame me!

Steven Spielberg
Quentin Tarantino
Lars von Trier
David Cronenberg
James Cameron
John Carpenter
Terry Gilliam
David Fincher
Tim Burton
Peter Jackson

Have to do a honorary mention of Herzog's Nosferatu though. Such a great film!

lol

Whats funny with admiring Snyder? Should I have Emmerich on the list instead? Or Petersen? Or Columbus? They have meant much too.

 

[Airwings]

Then at last, my blue list in no order.

David Lynch
Bernardo Bertolucci
Milos Forman
George Lucas


Much weaker/smaller list. And neither of them are big favorites. But they have managed to impress me 1-2 times.

 

[Travesty]

It's pretty easy to recognize a Keaton film, so the co-direction isn't a big deal to me as it's clear that Keaton was doing the lion's share of work.

Keaton is, undoubtedly, a more experimental and innovative director than Chaplin. Chaplin's work is excellent, but a lot of it is basically vaudeville skits, while Keaton was working with camera and editing tricks and space. Nothing Chaplin did is remotely on the scale of The General. Nothing Chaplin did is as innovative as Sherlock Jr.

Which is not to knock Chaplin, but only to say that Keaton is every bit the director that Chaplin is. I think there's a good argument to be made that Chaplin's greatest strengths were as a performer and writer.

Don't get me wrong, Chaplin made some great, great films and belongs on the list near the top. City Lights and The Great Dictator are, at a minimum, masterpieces. But, Chaplin vs. Keaton has been an eternal debate and they're very linked. The Chaplin is a much, much greater director than Keaton is an argument I've never seen.

Although, it really should be noted, there's probably a razor's thin edge between all of these rankings.

I would say that Buster was a better performer, while Chaplin was a better director.

 

[Lord]

Whats funny with admiring Snyder? Should I have Emmerich on the list instead? Or Petersen? Or Columbus? They have meant much too.

Did i say you should have those instead?

 

[Farren]

I find these sorts of lists helpful as a means of exposing myself to films I'd never heard of. Other than that though, I don't see much value in them.

(I do think the way TSPDT went about compiling the list is interesting though. Gives you a nice sense of the average consensus).

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Christopher Nolan is a good filmmaker, but he still need to climb some more stairs, the site does seem to like his films.

I agree. If Nolan is not there already, he'll be very soon.

 

[MrMaooz]

I dont know if you're joking , but Woo was the most important asian filmmaker during late 80's , beginning 90's. His heroic bloodsheds action extravaganzas were a huge contribution to make hk cinema a global brand , and he had quite a influence on action cinema.

I was playing around in a way, but Mission: Impossible 2 did kinda suck.

 

[Lord]

I was playing around in a way, but Mission: Impossible 2 did kinda suck.

It still did a lot of money though

I find these sorts of lists helpful as a means of exposing myself to films I'd never heard of. Other than that though, I don't see much value in them.

(I do think the way TSPDT went about compiling the list is interesting though. Gives you a nice sense of the average consensus).

I agree about helping know more movies and directors, these lists are allways very tricky, there's really no right or wrong in most lists (in least the ones done by professional sites, those done by fans are generally more geared towards their preferences). While i wish certain directors were on the list (Tarantino, Nolan and Sam Raimi are my favorite directors, and 2 of them aren't even on the list) i still think it's a strong one.

 

[MrMaooz]

I won't deny that the action in M:I 2 was good though. Kudos to Woo.

 

[Airwings]

Did i say you should have those instead?

No you didn't. But I asked you!

 

[Lord]

No you didn't. But I asked you!

Oh, ok then.

 

[Evil Twin]

Seriously, why has J.J. Abrams' name come up at all here? The only movie he's directed that isn't part of a pre-existing franchise is a Spielberg homage. And not as good as the real thing.

At this point, Abrams really has no legacy or long-term influence in film. Yeah, Star Trek is an entertaining film, successfully relaunching the franchise, but I don't think anybody considers it particularly groundbreaking. Abrams is hardly the first filmmaker to make fast paced action adventure films and/or use lens flares.

 

[Lord]

Yeah, he's pretty much the perfect studio director, takes a franchise and makes a strong film about it, but his work isn't exactly game changer or worth analysing in the same depth of these directors's

 

[MrMaooz]

The guy knows how to do direct an amazing summer blockbuster though.

I love M:I3, Super 8, and his two Treks.