Originally Posted By: Revis_Island
Originally Posted By: Camarel
Originally Posted By: Revis_Island
And just curious, why would Tarantino not even be in your top 20? If you look at it objectivity can you really say that there's 20 directors with better résumés than Tarantino? I understand that he's not in your top 20 favorite directors but if you were lookig at it objectively would you put him up there? As a matter of fact name your top 5 best directors of all time.


What are you talking about? There is no objective ranking of directors. There are plenty of respected film critics for instance that wouldn't have QT in their top 50, and there are plenty of respected film critics who think he's the greatest ever. Neither are correct, both just have opinions like me or you.

My top 5 directors:

1.Martin Scorcese
2.Alfred Hitchcock
3.Akira Kurosawa
4.Billy Wilder
5.John Huston

Also another 15 in no particular order to make it 20:

Paul Thomas Anderson
Sergio Leone
Steven Spielberg
Francis Ford Coppola
Park Chan-Wook
Howard Hawks
Bong Joon-Ho
Frank Capra
Coen Brothers
William Friedkin
Elia Kazan
Stanley Kubrick
Wes Anderson
David Lynch
David Fincher


There are objective ways of looking at film. Personally idk how but the film experts and movie buffs always tell me that there is. For instance, you might ny be the biggest lebron James fan but looking at it objectively you would have to say the guy is great.


I see what you are saying, but the LBJ example is not a good one imo. For LBJ we have stats to analyze, that make it objectively true that he is great. We don't have anything similar for films. When it comes to The Godfather vs Goodfellas for instance, how can we say one is objectively better than the other? The answer is we can't, i personally prefer The Godfather but that's only my subjective opinion.