This is an “objective” list of mine, and has very little to do with my own tastes in movies:
12. Ford Coppola
16. De Sica
17. Fritz Lang
18. David Lean
What’s your list??
From old to new (more or less):
16. S. Ray
Special mention to: Polanski, Bergman, Ophuls, Ozu, Visconti and someone from the NV (Resnais, Godard…)
In 30 years i would include: Lynch, Kar Wai and Tarantino
Not a top 20. Just some names, that people seem to forget sometimes.
@ Jennifer: Add Agnes Varda, Claire Denis and Chantel Akerman
@ Alex: In 30 years you’d add Tarantino, yet no NV directors?
Whoops, your last post only appeared now for some reason. I thought you were just making a list of some prominent female directors. But yeah, cool list. Not sure who forgets Maya Deren though?
Judging by influence and not by personal taste?
The general consensus seems to look something like this:
1. Alfred Hitchcock
2. Orson Welles
3. Stanley Kubrick
4. Akira Kurosawa
5. Federico Fellini
6. Ingmar Bergman
7. Martin Scorsese
8. Jean-Luc Godard
9. Francis Ford Coppola
10. John Ford
11. Steven Spielberg
12. Jean Renoir
13. Charles Chaplin
14. Billy Wilder
15. Sergei Eisenstein
16. Yasujiro Ozu
17. Andrei Tarkovsky
18. Fritz Lang
19. Luis Bunuel
20. F. W. Murnau
The ranking of those last six or so are pretty arbitrary.
In terms of importance and influence on the development of the practice of filmmaking, I believe Griffith must be on the list.
No love for Rossellini? i don’t believe he is the best Italian director or the one with greatest films, but i believe he is the most important / influential.
@ le tigre
Not sure. i m talking individually, i think Tarantino talent/importance could become even higher for the next young generations, he is reasonable young and can still make great films.
“I have never really hated Hollywood except for its treatment of D. W. Griffith. No town, no industry, no profession, no art form owes so much to a single man” – Orson Welles
@Alex: I know what you mean, it’s just that Tarantino himself is highly influenced by the French New Wave, so it seems a little strange to be adding him without recognising anybody else from the original movement.
I second Citizen Kane
INFLUENCE could be objective, but not IMPORTANCE, there it goes our personal taste and we can’t do nothing about it. I also included Billy Wilder instead of Ernst Lubitsch, if we talk about influence it should be other way around.
If influence can be objective, then so can importance. I’d like to emphasize the “can”. Anyway, good for you. I dig Tarantino as well. That did sound like quite critical; I was merely making an observation. Apologies.
I’ve made this list of the top30 influential, but i want to make it 50, any suggestions?
I will include Tarkovsky, Ophuls, Mizoguchi, Visconti… what more? do you find the inclusion of Tarantino-WKW-Lynch a bit excessive?
Wong Kar Wai
Unordered and unbiased:
Influence can’t be objective. It depends on how we’re defining influence and if “wideness” is factored in. For example, Duke Ellington probably influenced more in terms of volume when it comes to jazz but Ornette Coleman has damn near a stranglehold on the interpretation of free or experimental or however you care to label it jazz.