Herzog. Herzog has almost equal importance in the documentary community but of course that’s not counted here. I’m a much bigger fan of his five Kinski collaborations than TSPDT and not as sure on his work with Bruno S. Of course here I rated Herzog better than his compatriots (Wenders and Fassbinder) from the New German Cinema era. His best films are just simply better than Fassbinder’s best films but the depth of Fassbinder is pretty overwhelming so that could change over time. Herzog has three films in the top 500 (very good for this far down on my countdown)

Griffith.  Five years ago I would not have Griffith in the top 50 directors of all-time. Another example of why this is an always-evolving list that I hope to pause and update every 4-5 years. As I’ve written before, I believe The Birth of a Nation’s disgustingly racist content unfairly drops its reputation as a work of art. Also, I believe my Intolerance viewing in 2015 was one of those jaw on-the-floor-can’t-believe-what-I-just-saw-cinema viewing moments. It’s very hard to compare Griffith to his contemporaries since he really didn’t have any. I’m obviously happy with his spot on this list because of the size of

Kalatozov. With only three (3) films in the archives (I’ve tried to find others but no luck yet) Kalatozov is an interesting case. His three films are big stylistically muscular ambitious films and the images below alone make a strong case (and of course can’t fully take into effect his revolutionary work with camera movement). It is simple- he if he had more films like this he’d be closer to a top 10 filmmaker than a top 50 filmmaker- he’s a major “style-plus” auteur. Best film:  I Am Cuba.  It took me a long time to get to Kalatozov’s I

Satyajit Ray. He’s much more than just the Apu trilogy as recent viewings of Charulata, The Big City and The Music Room have proven. Ray’s case is he is a Mount Rushmore realist (along with Rossellini, De Sica and perhaps the Dardenne brothers or Kiarostami at this point but that 4th is a good debate) with an impressive 5 top 500 films. If I ever fully come around on the Apu trilogy (I have all three outside my top 300) he may shoot even farther up this list. Best film:  The Music Room. I think Ray unquestionably improved as

Tarantino. Tarantino is clearly a style-plus auteur (a term I made up to help distinguish even the greatest auteurs on this list) influenced by exploitation cinema, De Palma, Scorsese, Woo, Leone, Godard (though QT disputes that mostly). Despite his influences he creates his own post-modern, violent film world that is entirely his own every bit as much as Lynch, Wes Anderson, Fellini. His influences might be mostly B-cinema but he is clearly a maker of super-produced (very un-B-cinema) films who not only is one of the most accomplished writers in the history of cinema but a masterful craftsman behind

Spike Lee. Spike has given us three masterpieces in three consecutive decades. BlackKklansman from 2018 wasn’t quite that- but a really strong film nonetheless and his best in 20 years (He Got Game in 1998). His strength is he’s a style-plus director (trademark stylistic flourishes—the reflexive looking at the camera, the double-dolly shot, use of primary color) with three of the best 250 films of all-time. I’ve studied all of his non-doc films and many of them miss the top 10’s of their respective years and that’s the weakness. You usually don’t see that from top 50 auteurs but

Kieslowski. I’ll be the first to admit I still have some work to do on Kieslowski’s work in the late 70’s and early to mid-80’s. His strengths here are his brilliant 572-minute top 10 of the 1980’s masterpiece Dekalog and his Blue/White/Red trilogy. These are staggering works. Like many others on this list he died really young (55). I will say that Red has faded on me a little over the years. It used to be a film I had in my top 10 of the 1990’s and I no longer think that to be the case- but I’m overdue for a revisit.

Fincher. David Fincher has now spent 25 years as a top filmmaker. His includes nine (9) archiveable films, three (3) in the top 500 (Fight Club, Zodiac, Seven), and another two (Social Network, Gone Girl) that should enter when the top 500 when the 10 year moratorium lifts. Fincher makes films that are not only consistently brilliant but brilliantly consistent.  When searching for images for this post it’s interesting- unlike most auteurs you’re not looking for a highlight shot or image from their work—you’re looking for the typical Fincher look/lighting/mise-en-scene. That’s an unbelievable compliment. Best film:  Fight Club. Fortunately,

De Sica.  It feels late to finally be adding one of cinema’s great realists. Bicycle Thieves is an all-time film (14th all-time on my top 500) and with Umberto D, Shoeshine and Two Women we have four top 500 films. This is the same amount as Rossellini (and De Sica is the one with a top 100 film--- and his in the top 15!) and ahead of the Dardenne brothers and Kiarostami.  Satyajit Ray has five films so with a longer proper study he may pass De Sica but for now De Sica remains ahead with Ray’s films all failing to fall

Wilder. Wilder is one of the best screenwriters in film history. You won’t get a ton of argument from me if you want to call him the single best but regardless- any list without him in the top 5 is incorrect. This, however, is not a list of the best screenwriters of all-time but a list of the best directors. Wilder all but agrees with me- Wilder admits he became a director out of necessity—so no other director would screw up his writing.  This may be an oversimplification and some self-deprecation but still—TSPDT has him as the 16th best

Polanski. I’m higher than some on Polanski because of my esteem for both of his occult films: Rosemary’s Baby and Repulsion. I think both are masterpieces, which, when paired with Chinatown, made Polanski one of the world’s best filmmakers at only age 41. However, he has not really capitalized on that amazing start to his career (4 of his best 5 films are before 1975). I read somewhere (forget now) that people had thought he would be David Cronenberg from 1977-onward and I can totally see that; making eerie, masterful films.   If you combine his early work with Cronenberg’s career you have

Jarmusch. He is an auteur with five (5) films in the top 500, a film as sublime as Ghost Dog as his 9th best, and certainly a distinct style. I’ll get to it more below in the style section but he’s one of the few auteurs who is here, first and foremost, because of his structural formal mastery. He is a supreme editor (long ellipsis or dissolves) and can make beautiful films (Dead Man, The Limits of Control) but it’s the repetition, structure, numbering and rhythm here that make up the essence of the case for Jarmusch. a stunner