Haneke. Haneke’s strength for the purposes of this list are the 3 top 500 films (very few of those left at spot #72 here) with remarkable stylistic and narrative consistency in his oeuvre. Dominant during the 2000’s—Haneke gave us 4 films that found their way into the decade’s top 100. I’m not sure he’s a “style-plus” auteur but his films follow a rigid form and are intellectually superior and consistent. He is certainly no caretaker or game manager of great films. Unlike many great auteurs on this list he got his start very late in the game. In fact, Benny’s

Lumet. It is an incredible filmography (17 archiveable films, 5 in their respective decade’s top 100, spanning 50 years) and there’s enough consistency in his work to consider him an auteur for sure. Still, he’s a “style-minus” director on a list like this and doesn’t have the top 200 all-time film so it’s easy to see why he’d fall. I’m also sure he’ll eventually be passed but a handful of current auteurs that are still in their prime and adding major pieces to their resume. However, even if he is “style-minus” I have him ranked #53 in my filmography

Tarr. I might be another watch of The Turin Horse and especially Satantango away from shooting Tarr up to my top 50 directors of all-time. According to the consensus, Satantango is the 103rd best film of all-time and I have it as a Must-See (top 5 of the year) film- quite a ways apart there. Obviously I adore Tarr and his bravura so we’ll see if that changes with another viewing. Clearly the weakness for Tarr for the purposes of this list is he is extremely unprolific and can’t even round out a top 5. Beyond the filmography he’s a “style-plus” director in every sense

Demy. Demy’s ten year run from 1961-1970 was something to behold. I did a demy study in 2014 and I’m both pissed it took me so long to get to him and thrilled to have finally “discovered” his oeuvre and to watch and rewatch and enjoy the rest of my days. I think he was overlooked by me, and is overlooked by many even today, for a few reasons. 1. He works in a genre that just isn’t as in-step today (musicals) 2. He came out in a time when cinema was at its absolute peak (debut in 1961)

Gilliam. There’s no way he’s on here ahead of many deserving auteurs if I didn’t think Brazil was much closer to the 50th best film of all-time than the 183rd best where TSPDT consensus has it. Man, I wish he made both more overall films and more archiveable films-  and without an archiveable film since 1998 I fear it may be over for Gilliam. Unmistakably, his case is hurt by having only 6 archiveable films but although there may be some misses along the way in his career there is no compromise in Gilliam. I adore his individual creative signature. production design bliss

Tati. Tati has a very small filmography but was certainly a style-plus director with a distinct look and a tight marriage to mise-en-scene and comedic architectural set-up.  The consistency in his work is worth more than someone who had a higher scoring filmography but made films that could have been directed by another craftsman. Tati films are Tati films.  I’m also very close to a masterpiece on both Mon Oncle and Playtime. I’d be surprised if another visit of each doesn’t take them from strong “must-see” (typically reserved for the best 5-8 films of a year) film to “Masterpiece” (typically reserved to

Melville. Melville is a great place to start for anyone who doesn’t think old or foreign (or black and white…or all 3) movies can be entertaining. For the purposes of this list he’s a little hurt by the fact that he doesn’t have a top 100 film but he has a remarkably deep and consistent oeuvre (Léon Morin, Priest is his 7th best film? Wow). He’s known as sort of the French co-godfather of the New Wave (he’s featured as an actor in an homage from Godard in Breathless) along with Renoir and frankly the films of the New Wave resemble his

Wesley Anderson. Wes’ strengths, for the purposes of this list, is both the filmography and the aesthetic quality (and consistency) in his work. He already has three top 500 films and a whopping six films that are in their respective decade’s top 100. That’s remarkable. I think it’s less likely that he’ll ever have a Tree of Life or In the Mood For Love- level masterpiece but if he can keep cranking them out every 2-3 years and have such great depth (like a Fassbinder or Ozu) he should easily creep into the top 25-50 of all-time when it’s

De Palma. When talking about De Palma people either start with either a) talking about him as a brilliant technician/stylist or b) talk about him being a Hitchcock imitator or c) talk about him the maker of dumbish’ pulp films. I think all three things are somewhat undeniable and I officially have no problem with them. I mean Obsession is a pretty straight Vertigo remake. Dressed to Kill has elements of Psycho but it certainly doesn’t stop there either with Hitchcock or other homages or pilfering. A brilliant sequence in The Untouchables steals from the Odessa Steps sequence in Battleship Potemkin. Scarface is obviously an updated remake of the early Howard

Varda. I have to preface that my neither my page, nor my ranking/evaluation of Varda, includes her documentary work (which is substantial). She shares this with Werner Herzog and a few others. Varda has three top 500 films and is the unsung heroine of the French New Wave. All three films (her top three below) are not simply great films—but pretty stunningly stylistically directed and beautiful.  Her background is in photography and that artistic predisposition comes through in her work. She’s political, interested in realism, and her best work, Cleo, is a massive formal achievement. La Pointe Courte came

Bresson. I have two big masterpieces for Bresson (A Man Escaped, Pickpocket) that show well in my top 500 but that’s it for Bresson there. I’ve yet to have a 3rd (or 4th or 5th) film from him emerge. Until then, it’s unlikely I’ll have Bresson move up my list. Two interesting quotes here I found on Bresson from great sources. “Bresson is perhaps the only man in the cinema to have achieved the perfect fusion of the finished work with a concept theoretically formulated beforehand”- Tarkovsky. “He is a great director, even if no other great director seems less intrigued

Lars von Trier. The Dogme95 movement is an important movement in the story of realism in cinema and von Trier is the central figure. I have Breaking the Waves as the best film of the 1990s. Obviously that has a huge impact on my list here but he’s far from being a one-hit wonder. However controversial he may be, I don’t think his talent as an artist can be argued. Is there any other great auteur as polarizing to critics? Perhaps David Lynch. Anyways, von Trier is certainly a “style-plus” director even if I hope he beefs up his