Who is the better director

[Xer34]

There are many more to add to that list. I like Cameron, but best director? I think not. I love Tarantino and I am a HUDGE FAN but He has not been around long enough to add him to that list.

Agreed.

[autodefe]

I can't believe you snubbed Coppola.

Anyway, I voted for Kubrick.

[ceminess]

Quinton Tarantino :x he is got to be one of the worst directors of all time.

[autodefe]

Anyone see this?

http://entertainment.msn.com/news/article.aspx?news=164173

[AmpCoder]

I like Steven Spielberg's type of films, so I voted for him.

[sanctified Veteran]

of those, Kubrick, hands down.

But todays best living director its Aronofsky, period.

[icecaveman]

People you are talking about directors here, a good director can make a horrible movie but still be a good director, he is not the writer and he is not the producer, sure he is powerful and can make lot of things the way he wants but he is still working under limits set by people above. You don't chose who is a good director by if he made any entertaining movies or not but you chose by his directing talent or else you are not really selecting directors. Often directors are also producers, then they can do pretty much whatever they want and some only chose special film generes.

If you don't like drama movies and a director focuses on drama movies and does them good you can't call him a bad director unless you don't understand what director does.

Example of a good directing skill many people don't consider is their ability to turn limited budget into wonders. There are so many things to consider the "yonger" generations don't understand.

[El_Hotsausage]

,Jul 16 2004, 01:18] of those, Kubrick, hands down.

But todays best living director its Aronofsky, period.

Not if he remakes Lone Wolf and Cub, I'll kill him.

[AgEnTsMiTh]

,Jul 15 2004, 17:18] of those, Kubrick, hands down.

But todays best living director its Aronofsky, period.

Man I would have to agree with you there. He is Brilliant.

[AgEnTsMiTh]

People you are talking about directors here, a good director can make a horrible movie but still be a good director, he is not the writer and he is not the producer, sure he is powerful and can make lot of things the way he wants but he is still working under limits set by people above. You don't chose who is a good director by if he made any entertaining movies or not but you chose by his directing talent or else you are not really selecting directors. Often directors are also producers, then they can do pretty much whatever they want and some only chose special film generes.

If you don't like drama movies and a director focuses on drama movies and does them good you can't call him a bad director unless you don't understand what director does.

Example of a good directing skill many people don't consider is their ability to turn limited budget into wonders. There are so many things to consider the "yonger" generations don't understand.

You are 100% correct with that post. I could not have said it better.

[Emile]

Out of your choices...Spielberg

But my favorite is Coppola

[Ivand]

OF those, Spielberg

[Parasite]

I'm bias towards directors who write there films (for the most part).

voted Cameron.

Very hard choice.

[mAcOdIn Veteran]

Cameron is.

Spielberg is overrated as is Tarentino and Kubrick, Hitchcock would be my second choice.