Who are the best Dramatic Directors of All Time

[Qrazy]

This thread isn't just about which directors can get very good performances out of their actors, although that's certain a factor. It's more about which directors understand dramatic rhythm and emotional content better than all others. Directors who know how long to hold any given moment, how to build up tension between characters and when a line of dialogue needs to be spoken.

I'll start with five:

Elia Kazan
Orson Welles
John Cassavetes
Andrei Tarkovsky
Federico Fellini

[balmakboor]

This thread isn't just about which directors can get very good performances out of their actors, although that's certain a factor. It's more about which directors understand dramatic rhythm and emotional content better than all others. Directors who know how long to hold any given moment, how to build up tension between characters and when a line of dialogue needs to be spoken.

I'll start with five:

Elia Kazan
Orson Welles
John Cassavetes
Andrei Tarkovsky
Federico Fellini

Boy. None that you've listed came to mind for me and I'm not sure I agree with any other than possibly Kazan.

First to my mind was Sidney Lumet.

[Dukefrukem]

Spielberg. Some of the most memorable drama and tension driven scenes are from him.

[Qrazy]

Boy. None that you've listed came to mind for me and I'm not sure I agree with any other than possibly Kazan.

First to my mind was Sidney Lumet.

Not sure how you could disagree with any of them except Tarkovsky but I think he holds his own personally although he frequently operates in the realm of monologues (Writer in Stalker, Bellmaker in Rublev).

I agree with Lumet though.

[Russ]

I'd add Leo McCarey to that list.

[Ezee E]

Definitely not Tarkovsky.

Ingmar Bergman should be the consensual #1.

[number8]

Oh, definitely Lumet.

[Qrazy]

Definitely not Tarkovsky.

Ingmar Bergman should be the consensual #1.

When he's great he's great but he's uneven. Directing your actors to express dead eyed melancholy, to turn away from each other and stare into space or to express fits of hysteria is not excellent dramatic direction.

Tangentially, Anatoly Solonitsyn is an infinitely superior actor to Liv Ullmann.

That being said I do agree that in general Bergman is an excellent dramatic director.

[B-side]

Tangentially, Anatoly Solonitsyn is an infinitely superior actor to Liv Ullmann.

Que?

[dreamdead]

Richard Linklater
Lee Chang-dong
Max Ophüls
Leo McCarey
Orson Welles

Linklater for the general artistry and tense inflection that imbued many of Before Sunset's best moments. Lee for Oasis and Peppermint Candy, films that depend on their actors to convey the right meaning even as Lee focuses on them. McCarey for knowing the right rhythms to drama in Make Way for Tomorrow and for exploiting pathos and sensuality in the very end of The Awful Truth.

Tarkovsky at his best had such wonderful dramatic moments, though, so I'm on board with that choice. And Bergman, though there's times when his pathos dips close to Qrazy's critique indeed.

[Spinal]

Directing your actors to express dead eyed melancholy, to turn away from each other and stare into space or to express fits of hysteria is not excellent dramatic direction.

There's probably a little more to it than that.

[Qrazy]

There's probably a little more to it than that.

You're just saying that because you love fits of hysteria.

Kidding. But yeah I only meant that when he's at his worst his dramatic direction can become a little formulaic in that direction. When he's at his best he's fantastic.

[Melville]

Ingmar Bergman should be the consensual #1.
Yes, Bergman is king here. However, I think Mikey and Nicky might be the best movie I've seen that's built entirely on the dramatic interaction between the characters. So Elaine May deserves a mention for that.

[Qrazy]

Yes, Bergman is king here. However, I think Mikey and Nicky might be the best movie I've seen that's built entirely on the dramatic interaction between the characters. So Elaine May deserves a mention for that.

That one felt like it was ghost directed by Cassavetes to me but May probably does deserve a lot of credit.

[Qrazy]

I guess I'll have to check out more Leo McCarey. Which films do you guys have in mind aside from Make Way for Tomorrow?

[Russ]

I guess I'll have to check out more Leo McCarey. Which films do you guys have in mind aside from Make Way for Tomorrow?I wish I was more familiar with his work so as to give you some. I'd highly recommend Ruggles of Red Gap and, although it's a comedy, there's one standout scene which I won't give away here that I think embodies everything you're looking for. Jean Renoir had a famous quote about him: "Leo McCarey understood people better than any other Hollywood director." Pretty high praise, and pretty accurate too.

[balmakboor]

Jason Reitman

[Qrazy]

I wish I was more familiar with his work so as to give you some. I'd highly recommend Ruggles of Red Gap and, although it's a comedy, there's one standout scene which I won't give away here that I think embodies everything you're looking for. Jean Renoir had a famous quote about him: "Leo McCarey understood people better than any other Hollywood director." Pretty high praise, and pretty accurate too.

Awesome. I'm definitely going to be checking out more Ophuls soon too. I like what I've seen a lot.

[Winston*]

Mike Leigh

[Qrazy]

Jason Reitman

Hehe, good one.

[Ezee E]

Mike Nichols. It took me a while to think of him.

[Qrazy]

Mike Nichols. It took me a while to think of him.

Good call.

[Fezzik]

Since someone mentioned "tension" I have to add:

Alfred Hitchcock
Quentin Tarantino


For pure drama, though:

Wong Kar-Wai
Frank Capra

[Qrazy]

Since someone mentioned "tension" I have to add:

Alfred Hitchcock
Quentin Tarantino

For pure drama, though:

Wong Kar-Wai
Frank Capra

Just to be clear I'm talking about dramatic tension. Tension between characters or the communication of psychological tension within a certain character. Not tension in relation to the more general atmosphere of the film. Although you may still feel those two directors qualify I thought I'd just clarify that point.

[Derek]

Mikio Naruse
Jean Renoir
Ernst Lubitsch
Paul Thomas Anderson
Arnaud Desplechin
Lars von Trier
Robert Altman
Spike Lee
Alfred Hitchcock
Howard Hawks
Douglas Sirk
Nicholas Ray
G.W. Pabst

EDIT: And von Sternberg!

[Russ]

Derek nailed it with Naruse, whom I forgot. Total agreement.

[Derek]

Derek nailed it with Naruse, whom I forgot. Total agreement.

Naruse/Takamine might be my favorite director/actor-actress collaboration out there.

[Russ]

Derek, my experience with Naruse's films is very limited, but I love what little I've seen. Takamine was stunning in Floating Clouds, and I would tend to agree with your Naruse/Takamine comment. But, have you seen any of the films he made with Kinuyo Tanaka? Her brilliant performance in Mother, and Naruse's direction, is what had me coming back to this thread to post him as an omission. Until you beat me to it. :)

[number8]

Just to be clear I'm talking about dramatic tension. Tension between characters or the communication of psychological tension within a certain character. Not tension in relation to the more general atmosphere of the film. Although you may still feel those two directors qualify I thought I'd just clarify that point.

Hmm.

Atom Egoyan?

[Qrazy]

Mikio Naruse
Jean Renoir
Ernst Lubitsch
Paul Thomas Anderson
Arnaud Desplechin
Lars von Trier
Robert Altman
Spike Lee
Alfred Hitchcock
Howard Hawks
Douglas Sirk
Nicholas Ray
G.W. Pabst

EDIT: And von Sternberg!

I agree with Altman and Anderson in particular. I don't agree with Hawks or Ray. Which isn't to say I think they're bad. I just don't think they're top tier dramatists.

[Qrazy]

Do you guys think Kubrick is top tier?

[Derek]

Derek, my experience with Naruse's films is very limited, but I love what little I've seen. Takamine was stunning in Floating Clouds, and I would tend to agree with your Naruse/Takamine comment. But, have you seen any of the films he made with Kinuyo Tanaka? Her brilliant performance in Mother, and Naruse's direction, is what had me coming back to this thread to post him as an omission. Until you beat me to it. :)

She was great in Flowing and very good in Her Lonely Lane, though Takamine's wonderfully bizarre performance totally outshines everyone in the latter film. I've been more impressed with her performances for Mizoguchi, particularly Life of Oharu.

I really need to get around to seeing Mother.

[StanleyK]

Definitely Ingmar Bergman. Special mention to PT Anderson- Magnolia is pure over-the-top melodrama, and it's wonderful.

[soitgoes...]

When he's great he's great but he's uneven.I'm not sure what this means. Directing some 60 films, there is bound to be some unevenness. The question wasn't who consistently churned out the highest quality of dramatic films of all time.


Directing your actors to express dead eyed melancholy, to turn away from each other and stare into space or to express fits of hysteria is not excellent dramatic direction.I'm pretty sure it isn't fair to boil Bergman's style down to just these few points.


Tangentially, Anatoly Solonitsyn is an infinitely superior actor to Liv Ullmann.Ah! I see! This was actually a joke post. Oh Qrazy! :|

[Spun Lepton]

Uwe Boll.






(*runs away*)

[megladon8]

I definitely agree with the sentiment that Bergman should be #1. His movies are just...Godly in their perfection.

I'd also like to add in Roland Emmerich and Brett Leonard.

[Boner M]

Michael Snow

[Spun Lepton]

Roland Emmerich

:|

[Chac Mool]

First name that came to mind upon reading the thread subject was Bergman -- glad to see so many agree.

Sergio Leone is another no-brainer.

From the modern fellas, Almodovar and Trier seem to stand tall, as does, strangely enough, Spielberg.

[megladon8]

:|


Godzilla >>>> Shakespeare

[Qrazy]

I'm not sure what this means. Directing some 60 films, there is bound to be some unevenness. The question wasn't who consistently churned out the highest quality of dramatic films of all time.
I'm pretty sure it isn't fair to boil Bergman's style down to just these few points.

Ah! I see! This was actually a joke post. Oh Qrazy! :|

No, it wasn't. Liv Ullmann is not that great. I am not a fan. As to the question, I asked it, so I think I know what it entails. I am not as taken with Bergman as many of you seem to be, although I like many of his films a great deal. I agree with Bergman's self-criticism.

"My discovery of Tarkovsky's first film was like a miracle.

Suddenly, I found myself standing at the door of a room the keys of which had, until then, never been given to me. It was a room I had always wanted to enter and where he was moving freely and fully at ease.

I felt encouraged and stimulated: someone was expressing what I had always wanted to say without knowing how.

Tarkovsky is for me the greatest, the one who invented a new language, true to the nature of film, as it captures life as a reflection, life as a dream."

I feel this is true not only of his general style but also of his dramatic direction. He is of course a little too hard on himself. And for the most part his drama has excellent flow, his writing is certainly superb and he is able to capture a number of remarkable performances.

[Ezee E]

Almodovar is a great pick.

[SirNewt]

Wong-Kar-Wai is brilliant with that whole love sick thing.

Renoir probably hits close to the top of the list with "The Rules of the Game" alone.

As much as I love Fellini and Bergman they don't spring to mind specifically for dramatic directors. Yasujiro Ozu might actually be my number one. No one could make people look hurt and defeated like that guy. A lot of the time he kept it very low key too.

I think categorizing drama in films is tough. Soundtrack, setting, and camera contribute to the drama of a film which probably isn't what we think of when talking about the stage. Tension in particular I think often contributes to drama. Or we confuse the two if that's your perspective. A lot of the truly best thrillers feel very dramatic even if there's little dialogue or character interaction. Take Z or Army of Shadows for example.

I agree with Lumet and Kazan. Don't know if they're the best but some other names come to mind.

Eric Rohmer,
Milos Foreman,
Scorsese,
William Wyler,
George Stevens,
Welles,
Anthony Asquith

oh and Mizoguchi

[number8]

Do you guys think Kubrick is top tier?

No. Atmospheric tension, yes, but Kubrick has always been too cold in his approach to characters to be raw enough to have that dramatic intensity.

[Qrazy]

No. Atmospheric tension, yes, but Kubrick has always been too cold in his approach to characters to be raw enough to have that dramatic intensity.

Yeah I think I'm probably inclined to agree. Although both films he did with Peter Sellers feature some damn fine drama. And I would say the drama in Paths of Glory is way up there as well. However, I find he also worked with a number of middling actors (even though he would get their career best performances).

[Qrazy]

William Wyler

Yeah I think drama is one of the strong suits of Wyler's cinema also.

[soitgoes...]

No, it wasn't. Liv Ullmann is not that great. I am not a fan. I am not as taken with Bergman as many of you seem to be, although I like many of his films a great deal. I agree with Bergman's self-criticism.

"My discovery of Tarkovsky's first film was like a miracle.

Suddenly, I found myself standing at the door of a room the keys of which had, until then, never been given to me. It was a room I had always wanted to enter and where he was moving freely and fully at ease.

I felt encouraged and stimulated: someone was expressing what I had always wanted to say without knowing how.

Tarkovsky is for me the greatest, the one who invented a new language, true to the nature of film, as it captures life as a reflection, life as a dream."

I feel this is true not only of his general style but also of his dramatic direction. He is of course a little too hard on himself. And for the most part his drama has excellent flow, his writing is certainly superb and he is able to capture a number of remarkable performances.Just because Bergman thinks Tarkovsky's the best doesn't make it the truth. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point Tarkovsky stroked Bergman the same way. Kieslowski said of Bergman, "This man is one of the few film directors—perhaps the only one in the world—to have said as much about human nature as Dostoevsky or Camus." That holds as much weight as anything Bergman said about himself or Tarkovsky, which is nothing more than one man's opinion.

Even limiting the comparison to two actors really doesn't make too much sense. Couldn't I counter that Bergman got better acting out of multiple actors (Sydow, Bibi and Harriet Andersson, Björnstrand, Josephson, Thulin) which in turn is a stronger case for the question. Wouldn't that be more meaningful that Actor X is better than Actor Y? I'm pretty sure the Solonitsyn>Ullmann was meant more as a dig at Ullmann (or rep for Solonitsyn) than as an actual detraction to Bergman being the best dramatic director. After all there's more to both Tarkovsky and Bergman than the performances of one actor.


As to the question, I asked it, so I think I know what it entails. I wasn't trying to be salty. I just think that it is hard comparing evenness of two directors when one has 60 films and the other 10 or 20. Sure Tarkovsky's body of work is probably more even, but he had less chances to slip up. Personally I'm as much a Bergman fanboy as you are a Tarkovsky fanboy, and if asked I would tell you he only made one or two "bad" films out of the 30+ I've seen.


Personally, while I think Bergman should be discussed, the real answer to the question is Ozu.

[Qrazy]

Just because Bergman thinks Tarkovsky's the best doesn't make it the truth. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point Tarkovsky stroked Bergman the same way. Kieslowski said of Bergman, "This man is one of the few film directors—perhaps the only one in the world—to have said as much about human nature as Dostoevsky or Camus." That holds as much weight as anything Bergman said about himself or Tarkovsky, which is nothing more than one man's opinion.

Yeah Tarkovsky stroked Bergman as well. I also think Bergman is very good as I have said a couple times now. But I do happen to agree with his criticisms of himself. When I watched Wild Strawberries I saw precisely the stilted, spelled out expression of dreams of which he seems to be chiding himself about. The bolded part of the citation is why I provided the quote, not because he stated that Tarkovsky was the best.


Even limiting the comparison to two actors really doesn't make too much sense. Couldn't I counter that Bergman got better acting out of multiple actors (Sydow, Bibi and Harriet Andersson, Björnstrand, Josephson, Thulin) which in turn is a stronger case for the question. Wouldn't that be more meaningful that Actor X is better than Actor Y? I'm pretty sure the Solonitsyn>Ullmann was meant more as a dig at Ullmann (or rep for Solonitsyn) than as an actual detraction to Bergman being the best dramatic director. After all there's more to both Tarkovsky and Bergman than the performances of one actor.

I said tangentially.


I wasn't trying to be salty. I just think that it is hard comparing evenness of two directors when one has 60 films and the other 10 or 20. Sure Tarkovsky's body of work is probably more even, but he had less chances to slip up. Personally I'm as much a Bergman fanboy as you are a Tarkovsky fanboy, and if asked I would tell you he only made one or two "bad" films out of the 30+ I've seen.

Reasonable.


Personally, while I think Bergman should be discussed, the real answer to the question is Ozu.

I'll have to see more.

[SirNewt]

Just because Bergman thinks Tarkovsky's the best doesn't make it the truth. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point Tarkovsky stroked Bergman the same way. Kieslowski said of Bergman, "This man is one of the few film directors—perhaps the only one in the world—to have said as much about human nature as Dostoevsky or Camus." That holds as much weight as anything Bergman said about himself or Tarkovsky, which is nothing more than one man's opinion.

Even limiting the comparison to two actors really doesn't make too much sense. Couldn't I counter that Bergman got better acting out of multiple actors (Sydow, Bibi and Harriet Andersson, Björnstrand, Josephson, Thulin) which in turn is a stronger case for the question. Wouldn't that be more meaningful that Actor X is better than Actor Y? I'm pretty sure the Solonitsyn>Ullmann was meant more as a dig at Ullmann (or rep for Solonitsyn) than as an actual detraction to Bergman being the best dramatic director. After all there's more to both Tarkovsky and Bergman than the performances of one actor.

I wasn't trying to be salty. I just think that it is hard comparing evenness of two directors when one has 60 films and the other 10 or 20. Sure Tarkovsky's body of work is probably more even, but he had less chances to slip up. Personally I'm as much a Bergman fanboy as you are a Tarkovsky fanboy, and if asked I would tell you he only made one or two "bad" films out of the 30+ I've seen.


Personally, while I think Bergman should be discussed, the real answer to the question is Ozu.

called it

(Unless someone said Ozu before me. I can never get ahead on this site. You people have lightning refresh skils.)

[soitgoes...]

called it

(Unless someone said Ozu before me. I can never get ahead on this site. You people have lightning refresh skils.)I wasn't under the impression that each director was limited to only one poster. Good pick all the same.

[SirNewt]

I wasn't under the impression that each director was limited to only one poster. Good pick all the same.

Hey, I don't make up the rules. But I'll trade you a Mizoguchi if you've got something good.

[kuehnepips]

First to my mind was Sidney Lumet.

Same here.

So: Billy Wilder.

I'm serious.

[Qrazy]

Same here.

So: Billy Wilder.

I'm serious.

Good call.