Friday, November 1, 2024

Got a Tip?

The 100 Best And Most Exciting Directors Working Today

jeff-nichols-loving-joel-edgerton80. Jeff Nichols
There are a few splashy enfant-terrible types on this list but Jeff Nichols’ quiet, sober, deeply reflective films are their own, very singular sort of thrilling. Glancing off genres rather than diving into them, Nichols has so far made a sort-of family drama (“Shotgun Stories“), a quasi-thriller (“Take Shelter“), a skewed-perspective coming-of-age story (“Mud“) and a not-really-sci-fi sci-fi (“Midnight Special“). They’re all very different, but they’re all distinctly Jeff Nichols films, caring more about character interactions and psychology than plot, each with a central theme of father- or parenthood as a spine. Not only has this impressive and thoughtful catalogue gifted us some of the finest performances from Nichols’ constant collaborator Michael Shannon, but it’s built to this year’s “Loving” in which Shannon features but which stars Joel Edgerton and Ruth Negga, in what ought to be a star-making turn, and is, of itself, a beautiful, hushed love story that gently remakes the tired historical biopic genre.

Rian Johnson Joseph Gordon-Levitt Looper

79. Rian Johnson
Right now, Rian Johnson still feels like Hollywood’s best kept secret. He’s had commercial success — with 2012’s excellent “Looper” — but he’s far from a household name. But that’ll change in December 2017, because Johnson’s currently hard at work on the next movie in the main “Star Wars” saga, and if he holds up his usual form, it stands a good chance of being one of the best films in the franchise. So far, Johnson’s tackled three very different styles — the noir with debut “Brick,” the con-man movie with the underrated “The Brothers Bloom,” and sci-fi with “Looper” — but the all feel like they were born of a singular filmmaker, a playful genre-blender capable of melding textures and tones and reinventing familiar tropes into something fresh (witness the way the sci-fi thriller of his last film transformed into something else in its second half). We have no idea what his “Star Wars” film will look like, but we’d wager it’ll be amazing.

Barry Jenkins

78. Barry Jenkins
If you’ve been ahead of the game, you’ll have known who Barry Jenkins was for a while — his wonderful debut “Medicine For Melancholy,” a sort of San Francisco-set, African-American spin on “Before Sunrise” that snuck discussion of gentrification into its charming romantic plot, was a gem back in 2008, one that had him tipped for the top by the likes of Steven Soderbergh. But sadly, virtually no one saw it, and it took Jenkins eight years to follow it up. But his second feature “Moonlight” has exploded on the festival circuit, and rightly so: a three-part drama following the coming-of-age of young Chiron, it’s an utterly gorgeous, deeply moving look at racial and sexual identity, and the way we construct veneers for ourselves. With several of the year’s best performances from Trevante Rhodes, Andre Holland, Mahershala Ali and Naomie Harris, and a distinctive, almost European-vibe, it’s vaulting Jenkins to the status that he should have had long ago.

birdman-alejandro-gonzalez-inarritu77. Alejandro González Iñárritu
As it always does with the front-runner for the arbitrary award that is the Best Picture Oscar, in the lead-up to the 2014 ceremony it became vogueish to dismiss “Birdman“. But we stand by our assessment of Iñárritu’s eventual winner as a tremendously fun romp, that radically reinvented our idea of what the Mexican director was about. His filmmaking chops had never been in doubt, but all his films bar his electrifying first, “Amores Perros” — “21 Grams,” “Babel” and “Biutiful” — suffered from a self-seriousness for which “Birdman” felt like the antidote. And then came “The Revenant,” which netted Iñárrituhis second consecutive Best Director statue (meaning, as one wag pointed out, that Alejandro González Iñárritu now has more Best Director Oscars than women do) and we slightly wonder if we helped create a monster. Still, there’s no denying the director’s impeccable craft, and we’re very, very curious to see what happens next.

director_mikemills_beginners76. Mike Mills
Who knows how much higher Mike Mills might place on this list in a couple of weeks time after his third feature, “20th Century Women,” which stars a powerhouse trio in Annette Bening, Greta Gerwig and Elle Fanning, premieres at the New York Film Festival. But anyway, he’s here with flying colors after just two films, his debut “Thumbsucker,” which transcends the “quirky coming-of-age indie” ghetto by virtue of its witty scripting and terrific cast, and his sophomore title “Beginners.” Ostensibly another Sundance/indie movie mainstay — the offbeat relationship drama — “Beginners” is actually a charming, wise film about grief, love, and acceptance, and while both Ewan MacGregor and Melanie Laurent do lovable work, it’s Best Supporting Actor-winner Christopher Plummer as the father coming out late in life, who steals the show. Well, either him or Arthur the dog, and either way the real star is Mills whose semi-autobiographical script and whipsmart direction deliver a deeply moving, heartfelt delight.

 

nicole-holofcener75. Nicole Holofcener
It is the peculiar burden of writer/directors who make women their subjects that their work can be easily dismissed with the pejorative term “chick flicks.” But Nicole Holofcener’s sensitive, witty and insightful studies of women of various lifestages facing personal, professional and philosophical issues, threaten to give the “chick flick” a good name. Holofcener has supplemented her 20-year big-screen career with TV, especially on shows that also centralize the female experience – everything from “Sex and the City” and “Gilmore Girls” to “Parks and Recreation” and “Orange is the New Black.” But it’s her feature work we love most, whether the fantastic ensembles featuring the great Catherne Keener of her first four films – “Walking and Talking,” “Lovely and Amazing,” “Friends with Money” and “Please Give” or the career pinnacle that was her last title, the intimate, melancholically funny “Enough Said,” with Julia Louis-Dreyfus and a wonderful swansong performance from the late James Gandolfini.

ang-lee74. Ang Lee
With Inarritu, one of the few working filmmakers to have two Best Director Oscars, Lee’s a remarkable chameleon who’s tackled all kinds of bold, big films since he came to American attention two decades ago. Not all of his big gambles have worked — Civil War drama “Ride With The Devil” is underrated but flopped, “Hulk” is interesting (especially by modern superhero standards) but doesn’t 100% work, and the less said about “Taking Woodstock” the better. But on top form — with the finely-honed comedy of manners of his Taiwanese trilogy and “Sense & Sensibility,” the incredibly rich “The Ice Storm,” the wrenching “Brokeback Mountain,” the genuinely magical “Life Of Pi” — few A-list filmmakers can compete. It’s easy to take him for granted, so unassuming and fuss-free he seems to be. But the imminent Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk” might be about to remind us what an absolute asset he is the medium.

crimson-peak73. Guillermo Del Toro
We’re pretty sure that Guillermo Del Toro doesn’t believe in the principle of one-for-me, one-for-them. Whether he’s making a tiny Spanish-language ghost story set during the Spanish Civil War, a superhero sequel, or a film about giant robots fighting giant monsters, Del Toro treats them with the love and care that he’d treat his own child, fills them with his fetishes and fascinations, and turns them into macabre works of art. Yet his obsession with creatures, beasts, and ghouls is always deployed to tell stories about humanity, and it’s that — and his encyclopedic love for cinema in all its forms, that’s made him not just one of our best genre filmmakers, but one of our best filmmakers period. After the lavish, Powell & Pressburger-ish Gothic tale “Crimson Peak,” he’s downscaling for next year’s intriguingThe Shape Of Water,” starring Sally Hawkins and Michael Shannon.

laura_poitras_cjan-stu%cc%88rmann72. Laura Poitras
One area into which female directors seem to be making the biggest inroads is non-fiction filmmaking. And on the cutting edge of that phenomenon, alongside the great Amy Berg and following the trailblazing Barbara Kopple, is the Oscar-winning director of “Citizenfour,” Laura Poitras. Poitras, also nominated for her 2006 sophomore directorial feature about the Iraq War “My Country, My Country,” has since then not only directed a further two features prior to “Citizenfour,” but has produced and directed other non-fiction film and TV work. But it is her utterly gripping, thrilling Edward Snowden film that vaulted her to general attention (Snowden contacted her initially based on her track record prior) and it, coupled with the upcoming “Risk” about Julian Assange, which played in Cannes and awaits a release date, places Poitras’ levelheaded, insanely topical, unimpeachable journalistic investigations at the very forefront of our modern Golden Age of documentary.

ben-wheatley71. Ben Wheatley
Aside from being cinema’s foremost expert in grisly head trauma (virtually every one of his films so far has featured a bludgeoning or brain-splattering of some kind), Ben Wheatley’s one of the most exciting new voices to have emerged in the last decade. Prolific and wide-ranging in his subjects, which have ranged from Civil War-era English psychedelia to brutalist 70s concrete dystopia, but united in tone — darkly, slyly funny, always with an undercurrent of horror at the things people can do to each other — there are few filmmakers whose new efforts we look forward to more, especially because his films are always so entirely his (not that he can’t play in other’s sandboxes too — he did a good job on a couple of “Doctor Who” episodes recently). His enormously enjoyable new one “Free Fire” looks likely to introduce him to a bigger U.S. crowd, and we’re fascinated to see where he goes from there.

About The Author

Related Articles

72 COMMENTS

  1. Mrs. Jessica Kiang, I am a long time reader of your critical reviews of films, and, in general, I recognize that you have a «high taste» and a powerful prose to explain the «things of cinema». I admire you and I follow in general your views on the films that you analyze, qualify and quantify. But this time, the exercise you proposed to do, ranking the 100 best current film directors, goes beyond all limits of reason. In addition to not explain the criteria you use to rank the film directors, a task that would be logically impossible, you don´t realize the aesthetic absurdity of your exercise. To give you a comparison, could you hierarchize or rank the painters of the Italian Renaissance, or the painters of Dutch Baroque period? I think you could not, I think it would be an exercise doomed to failure. Mrs. Jessica Kiang I beg you to not continue with this exercise and recognize, humbly, before your readers that what you have done was no more nor less than an absurd, capricious and arbitrary hobby.

  2. Refn’s best movie wouldn’t exist without “Thief” and yet he’s way higher than Michael Mann.
    It’s too late now but I think an alphabetical order would be better than this. I know it’s just a game but I can’t stand watching Ang Lee, of all people, in a lower position than someone like Miguel Gomes or Andrea Arnold, who haven’t managed to break out of the festival circle and probably never will. People still talk about movies like Brokeback Mountain, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Lust Caution and Icestorm. Fish Tank? Not so much.

  3. Kelly Reichardt’s first film wasn’t Old Joy but a Florida -set movie called River Of Grass, which I actually think is one of her best movies. There’s a new restoration of it out this year and I’d strongly recommend people to track it down!

  4. Let me guess Paul Thomas Anderson will be in the Top Ten for some reason. I love his old stuff but after Master and Vice film buffs need to re evaluate if he is actually that good.

  5. I did this on my own in February-i only included 15.

    Top 10
    -Iñárritu
    -Cuaron
    -Wes Anderson
    -Nolan
    -Malick
    -Linklater
    -Coen
    -Fincher
    -PT Anderson
    – Tarantino
    Honorable mention
    -Dardenne
    -McQueen
    -Haneke
    -Russell
    -Scorsese

  6. i disagree with much of the list but love that you’re doing it. and it’s perfect timing as it’s kind of slow as you mention. i kind of love the “There are those who consider Andrew Dominik’s elegiac anti-western, “The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford” the best film of the new century, and those who are wrong about movies.” comment. haha. i’ve got it as my #3-5 film of the 21st century. great work here.

  7. Greatly enjoyed the list. I don’t care so much about the order, I’m more interested in discovering directors that are unknown to me. And there are many. If even a fraction of those are as good as the ones on the list I do know, it is going to be a busy winter.

  8. This is such a typical jerkoff film school list of directors. Like typical PTA, Fincher, Scorsese and the ridiculously overrated Glazer. Leaving out Bennett Miller and JA Bayona and Mira Nair (who all make consistently great films) is a joke and then you see Linklater is 93. This list was probably made by people who enjoyed American Hustle.

    • i like bennett miller’s films but he and nair and even bayona seem to be directors who make good films rather than great directors. that’s a key distinction. the people at the top of this list should both make great films and be auteurs. Miller would be on my top 100 but his imprint on a film isn’t the same as wes or PT anderson or even those like Glazer, QT, Sofia Coppola, etc.

        • Yeah, no. I’d put him on equal grounds with The Coens, and Malick for American directors. But Nolan and Linklater don’t have anything close to the films of Anderson in their oeuvre. Hell, Linklater have several films that I would consider below average. Nolan has about three in that hover around that rating. The Master and Inherent Vice are fantastic, especially, The Master.

        • The Master and Inherent Vice definitely aren’t terrible. Difficult, cerebral, whatever, sure. But terrible?

          They were both met with rave critical reviews (and mixed audience reactions) and as the years have progressed, they’ve only grown in their stature. Look no further than BBC’s Top 100 list that came out a month or two ago. Inherent Vice and The Master (and There Will Be Blood at #2) all made the list.

          I’m not saying these lists are scripture, but they do indicate that the critical consensus around these two films in particular is very strong and there are many many pieces around the internet exploring the complexity of those films.

          I get that people are tired of seeing him ranked so highly but I also think he’s undeniably one of our greatest and most challenging filmmakers out there.

          • I don’t think so from what i’ve seen. but as p-dub mentions it was on the BBC list. i think it will fade over the years. i just don’t think it’s as visually interesting as the rest of his work

          • What are you talking about? It’s gorgeous. I was actually lukewarm to it the first time. But it’s like a Coen Brothers film. It get funnier each time you watch it.

          • You’re just talkin’ crazy! There’s a 70MM print floating around rep houses that you should check out if you ever get the chance.

            I’ll never forget the first time I saw the opening image of the beach, with the gorgeous light and grain on the image, followed by Joanna Newsom glowing with the light of the sun beaming through her hair as in closeup while she narrates. My jaw dropped.

            As he gets older, Anderson seems to have taken more and more cues for the classic Hollywood directors, favoring mediums and composition over frenetic camera movement. There’s an argument to be made that he could have directed it in a more “FUN” way like Boogie Nights, but I am happy with how he went instead. The compositions are simple, but there are grace notes everywhere; whether that’s the lighting or color, the subtle camera movements, or absurd background details.

            Inherent Vice is a difficult film. The plot is purposely convoluted (but is easy to follow basically once you know everyones names.) It’s probably intellectually more satisfying than emotionally. It’s also a story that feels like things should come together somehow or be more clearly connected, but often don’t (though they are all thematically linked and loop around and bounce off each other throughout) on a pure plot level.

            I totally get why people dismiss it as just a weird misfire on first viewing. Yet I keep insisting that people watch it a couple more times. It works as a rich exploration of the changing era and death of a movements dreams, a pulpy noir, a slapstick comedy, and a melancholy look at love and the way it’s destined to break. I think it’s an absolute masterpiece.

            Sorry. I started typing and just started nerding the hell out.

  9. No Zack Snyder on this list? Can you name a director that captures the essence of the epic with his erotic touch and classical iconography? Every frame is a painting when it comes to Snyder. He has mastered the visual language of cinema and he brings it to bear on the epic and the intimate.
    He filmed WATCHMEN which studios had been befuddled by for decades. He is one of the most excitign and prolific directors in Hollywood with similarities to Stanley Kubrick and many of the same criticisms that Kubrick received when people did appreciate his talent.

        • It’s personal taste but I just don’t think IC is funny. For me, that’s what really kills the film. Visually I’m not very excited by it, it’s some of their weaker characters, and there’s very little to hold onto once it’s over.

          The Ladykillers also suffers from that same feeling of emptiness. I understand why it’s dismissed, but for me, I still find the film very funny. It is certainly slight and definitely seems like an odd note in their filmography, but I have to admit it makes me laugh a lot. Whether it is Tom Hanks doing just about anything, imagining the Coen’s writing Marlon Wayan’s dialogue, a kick ass gospel soundtrack, or just some of the profoundly strange tonal decisions that were made on the film.

          Both films have issues, but thankfully they were couched between two masterpieces like The Man Who Wasn’t There and No Country for Old Men. It was a weird time in the careers (they’d produced several flops previously and were more open to being for hire for studios at the time) and I’m glad they’ve found an amazing artistic groove that they seem to have been riding ever since.

  10. again- thanks for doing this list- disagree with much but it was lots of fun to read through each day… baumbach and sorrentino are glaring omissions … and this is an honest question- not trolling- where is david o russell? i can’t find him-

  11. hateful eight was tone deaf, hollow and empty? You cucks who write this shit are fucking losers lmao.
    Just like Spike Lee, you morons are mad that a white man can make a better movie about racial issues.

  12. When reading lists like this, especially from Playlist I tend not to care so much about the rankings as I do about what you have to say about each filmmaker. There’s no right list or wrong list but the fact that you guys are even taking the time to put together a list like this is greatly appreciated. Sure I would rank certain filmmakers higher or lower but I also appreciate that there are some filmmakers on this list I’m not familiar with and that it’s a completely international list. Great work guys (but seriously, Linklater should have been higher ranked ;))

  13. I have a soft spot in my heart for Stoker… Sorry, but it’s wonderfully Baroque in imagery and well-acted with a delicious wickedness and weird sensibility. If I didn’t know Park Chan-wook had directed it, I’d have guessed it was a terrific Tim Burton movie (with half the silliness that can mar some his work).

  14. Jeez, what an awful list. So forcefully “diversed” and in the same time shamelessly Americanocentric. Unbelievable ridiculous pick that you definitely cannot expect from the undoubtedly professionals who write for playlist

    • After I posted this I read the blurb on Zelig in the mockumentary list which explains your thoughts on modern Allen as having “interchangeable sameness”. That’s fair though Allen’s sameness is so refreshingly different from what everyone else is doing that I find that very forgivable. I won’t dwell on Polansky since he’s not the same caliber of director as Allen anyways.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisement -spot_img
Stay Connected
0FansLike
19,300FollowersFollow
7,169FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Latest Articles