Who is the greatest living filmmaker?

[itsfredtitmus]

[Sebastian Cobb]

That yer da?

[itsfredtitmus]

nah its me

[Bhazor]

whats ur favourite loach mine's probably family life or riff-raff

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRGEpm1AXRM

Pop a black and white filter on it. Classic Loach.

[itsfredtitmus]

my favourite loach is the really depressing episodes of steptoe and son

[Bazooka]

Takeshi Kitano
Park Chan Wook

Are both up there.

[greenman]

I haven't seen i, daniel blake yet I've heard it's really cloying (feel awful for saying that) but I'm glad it exists (feel awful saying that too)

anyways I'm waiting out for jim allen and tony garnett's "spongers" disability sanctions drama to show up on YouTube before I eventually see blake

Honestly though whilst you couldn't miss the benefits message I think the films main strength was taking apart working class clichés, not just the Daily Mail "lazy bastards" stuff but the BBC/Guardian "boorish bigots" view as well.

Best film making actually working today, maybe Yorgos Lanthimos?

[itsfredtitmus]

i watched the trailer and it looks fine really

i remember when it first got released a lot of tory cunts were saying that the carpenter protag was "too perfect" but he could literally be my dad and funnily enough my dad had quite a bad heart attack around that age and had trouble with the dole and work

[greenman]

i remember when it first got released a lot of tory cunts were saying that the carpenter protag was "too perfect" but he could literally be my dad and funnily enough my dad had quite a bad heart attack around that age and had trouble with the dole and work

The ironic thing though is that in a lot of respects the character does actually match what the likes of the Mail are claiming there fighting for(obviously not in reality of course) in the "political correctness gone mad" stakes, basically a bit out of touch and insensitive with his young black neighbours but not actually racist to any significant degree. Again in that respect I think it feels rather targeted at the London centric centralist crowd as well who are probably happy to play to that cliché to make it easier to ignore such people.

[Sin Agog]

I, Daniel Blake is the only film I've seen where at least a third of the audience were in floods of tears in the lobby afterwards.  One woman had to sit on the floor to recover.

[zomgmouse]

I've probably mentioned Jarmusch and Varda but they are definitely up there for me.

[MortSahlFan]

I, Daniel Blake is the only film I've seen where at least a third of the audience were in floods of tears in the lobby afterwards.  One woman had to sit on the floor to recover.

I'm curious where you live (don't have to be specific)

[Bazooka]

I'm curious where you live (don't have to be specific)

The Job Centre. (not aimed at Sin Agog of course, its joke based on the film).

[Sebastian Cobb]

My screening of Blake was fairly empty but I could hear pockets of sobbing in surround sound.

[Bronzy]

Kubrick if you're talking all time.

Right now my favourites are probably Haneke, Lynne Ramsay or Jonathan Glazer.

[itsfredtitmus]

My screening of Blake was fairly empty but I could hear pockets of sobbing in surround sound.

could make a ken loach film about that

[greenman]

Kubrick if you're talking all time.

If you can fake the moon landings you can fake anything...

[Gwen Taylor on ITV]

DAVID YATESHe wrote Harry Potter and directed it

[Bronzy]

If you can fake the moon landings you can fake anything...

Kubrick didn't exist, it was a fake persona of Ed Wood

[phantom_power]

Has anyone said AGFA yet?

[Monsieur Verdoux]

The original point of this thread was that people were supposed to provide reasons/explanation/appreciation for their picks (as I did in my opening post), so that discussion could ensue from that. As it is, it's now just a thread where every single vaguely critically acclaimed living director has just been listed off with minimal discussion. I didn't put my foot down on this early enough, so here we are. Does anyone want to elaborate on what they like about the filmmaker(s) they've picked?

[Bronzy]

The original point of this thread was that people were supposed to provide reasons/explanation/appreciation for their picks (as I did in my opening post), so that discussion could ensue from that. As it is, it's now just a thread where every single vaguely critically acclaimed living director has just been listed off with minimal discussion. I didn't put my foot down on this early enough, so here we are. Does anyone want to elaborate on what they like about the filmmaker(s) they've picked?

I like Kubrick because in his films he had lots of titties an shagging n stuff

[ieXush2i]

And you're clever if you watch them

[itsfredtitmus]

The original point of this thread was that people were supposed to provide reasons/explanation/appreciation for their picks (as I did in my opening post), so that discussion could ensue from that. As it is, it's now just a thread where every single vaguely critically acclaimed living director has just been listed off with minimal discussion. I didn't put my foot down on this early enough, so here we are. Does anyone want to elaborate on what they like about the filmmaker(s) they've picked?

Id just be rattling off truisms if I tried

[itsfredtitmus]

Andrew Kotting
I like how he investigates the English landscape and how his films are stepped in the formalist experimental film tradition (Brakhage, Tait) without being rigorous or academic

[Dr Rock]

Surprised to see Jim Jarmusch has made four films since Coffee & Cigarettes, haven't seen any of them. I'll put him alongside David Lynch and maybe The Coen Brothers as nominally working directors who may have their best work behind them. See possible Ang Lee also. All could come back with something fantastic though.

For directors currently churning out their best work I'd have to say I have enjoyed very film Paul Thomas Anderson has made. I think Inherent Vice is brilliant.

David O. Russell is on a roll, with The Fighter, Silver Linings Playbook,  American Hustle. Haven't seen Joy though.

To answer the question, 'why are these good movies' I can't put my finger on it right now, perhaps in a later post. All get the best out of the actors they use, and none are formulaic. I'm not keen on predictable movies.

[Shit Good Nose]

Surprised to see Jim Jarmusch has made four films since Coffee & Cigarettes, haven't seen any of them.

Five, if you include his doc about The Stooges (which, even though I'm not a fan of Iggy or The Stooges, I thought was excellent).

It's interesting as they are all fairly atypical Jarmusch films, and different from each other.  Of the five, the two weakest ones (in my opinion) are Only Lovers Left Alive (which could be seen as a distant kissing cousin to Mystery Train, but nowhere near as good) and The Limits of Control (which could be seen as a closer kissing cousin to Ghost Dog, but nowhere near as good), but neither are terrible.  A warning for the former, though - it combines the "acting" "talents" of Tom Hiddleston AND Tilda Swinton, which is enough to put quite a few people off for life.

I have a lot of time for Broken Flowers, but I know it put a lot of long-time Jarmusch fans (who saw it as him selling out and going full mainstream - it isn't really, it's too sedate and measured for that) off.  And Paterson is a VERY low-key and gentle character piece.  Adam Driver is brilliant in it.

[RedRevolver]

nah its me

you are limmy's da?

[newbridge]

I'll put him alongside David Lynch and maybe The Coen Brothers as nominally working directors who may have their best work behind them.

Excuse me sir, David Lynch just made arguably his best work.

[Dr Rock]

Excuse me sir, David Lynch just made arguably his best work.

Which one is that? The last film I can see he directed was 2014's 'Duran Duran: Unstaged'