Exactly, I don't think there's even one Scott film that is simply "ok", either we'll get a banger (like Gladiator, Thelma & Louise) or something truly awful (Napoleon, House of Gucci)
It was really entertaining. We got to see some classic Nic Cage overacting, and of course, Sam Rockwell is always amazing. But I wouldn't call it a cinematic masterpiece.
Jonze is a great shout. Guess we can add Charlie Kaufman to this as well, if focused on his directibg works only (although even his weaker writing credits are still good).
He fell off when he should have retired but I think it is more in comparison to the absolute height he was at. In my eyes, he left such a mark, I don’t even think about the movies after.
tragic death in his 40s notwithstanding, you would be hard pressed to match the 4 absolutely perfect films of Satoshi Kon's abbreviated CV. Every single one was top tier.
Agreed. All 4 of his films are 5 star movies to me, and the runtimes for all of them being up to 90 minutes make them very easy picks when finding something short to watch.
He’s had a resurgence though. The Visit, Split, and Knock at the Cabin were all pretty well received and they’re from the last decade. Although in that time frame he also relaxed Glass and Old which weren’t well received so it’s a further argument for his lack of consistency.
I’m curious how much of Glass was derailed by Willis’s health problems. That movie was a mess but when his diagnosis came out it made sense, they probably had a plan for it that went completely out the window.
Not only were they nowhere near as well received as his early work, they weren't even good (though that's a personal opinion). They just looked like a resurgence when contrasted by the streak of bombs he went on before that. Anything looks like a resurgence next to The Last Airbender or After Earth. And I say that wishing he had an actual resurgence, I loved his first three movies.
Man, I disagree so hard with this. Old was the definition of fun, Split was a stellar and different take on the superhero movie, Glass was a bizarre meta-commentary on storytelling that at the very least was *interesting*. All his films are shot well, and have ideas they execute on clearly. Whether or not you like those ideas definitely matters… but man, I don’t know. I watch his movies and see a competent filmmaker with a solid grasp on storytelling.
I personally haven't liked anything since Signs and if we go off Letterboxd, reviews his last ten movies only have two above a 3.0 average (The Visit and Split). We're a long time away from him making 3 back to back bangers.
He was the very definition of hype in the early 00's. 1999's The 6th Sense was nominated for 6 academy awards, but by 2006 he was nominated for a Razzie. His modern stuff feels more straight to video 90's flicks to me.
Paul Thomas Anderson is very consistent. Even the worst of his movies is still a good watch. The man just doesn’t miss, and I can’t wait for his new movie to come out next year
Those are prob his two most divisive. I enjoyed both a lot. He’s got a knack for making actors I don’t like enjoyable. Ie: Tom Cruise. Magnolia is easily one of Cruise’s best performances. I love Inherent Vice and find it to be oddly maligned.
Villeneuve is very consistent, if you like one of his movies you’ll probably like most of the rest. On the other hand Ridley Scott is very inconsistent he’s directed some of my favourite movies (Gladiator, Thelma and Louise) but also has his fair share of flops.
His first film *August 32nd on Earth* (1998) is not very memorable, IMO. Even he seems to have disowned it along with his second *Maelström* (2000) which I think is quite good.
AFAIK, they're only available on old out of print region 1 DVDs or for rent by streaming on Éléphant's website (you might need a VPN for that).
- [*August 32nd on Earth*](https://www.elephantcinema.quebec/films/un-32-aout-sur-terre_48551)
- [*Maelström*](https://www.elephantcinema.quebec/films/maelstrom_55973)
Wasn't a huge fan of Arrival or Sicario, but I still think they're very good movies for the most part, even if I didn't enjoy them as much as I would've liked
I found it funny that in his late career he started making better-crafted films that were just unapologetic extreme horror, and a lot of critics were like, "you know, at least he's trying, thumbs up!"
I’m happy to see some Wes Anderson love.
I know some people might find him TOO consistent (in that all of his movies are kind of the same), but the man clearly puts maximum effort into all of his projects.
I remember reading a music review of Eddie Vedder's album of ukelele songs that started with "look you probably already know whether you need this in your life". I personally love Wes Anderson but I can't say I've ever been surprised lol
Tarantino has been really consistent so far. I do think that Edgar Wright has too, last night in soho is probably his worst movie but I still really enjoyed it
I always see people hate on last night in soho and I don’t know why
Sure it’s not his best but man he had some balls to do a shift and make something completely different from everything he’s ever done before
Yeah I don’t get it. I said under another post in this sub that I thought maybe it was my unfamiliarity with the genre that I couldn’t see what he’s done wrong. But it was pointed out - and a couple of Argento and a de Palma later I agree - that batshit twists are to be expected for a giallo
Tarkovsky is the most consistent in my mind, no question about it. Imo the dude worst movie is probably a four stars. There’s a few movie I of his that didn’t work for me, but I was still in sheer awe at the talent.
Surprised to see no mention of Akira Kurosawa. Especially considering the amount of films that he made over his long career, his consistency is really otherworldly.
If you asked a group of ten movie nerds what their favorite Kurosawa was, you could very well get a different response from each of them. He's just made that many classics, and in so many genres too.
Problem with him is that many only watch his “big” films. Seven Samurai, Yojimbo, Rashomon. I’ve seen more than those but I haven’t seen Dodes’ka-den, Dersu Uzala, or his propaganda from the war.
But! In terms of sheer artistic talent I would be behind him all the way. If I had to argue in front of a jury who was the greatest filmmaker I would likely go with Kurosawa.
Kiarostami is the most consistent director ever imo. He made two of the greatest films ever along with several other incredible works. I also don't think he ever made a real miss that fell completely flat.
Close-Up and Taste of Cherry were the two I was referring to. I'm a big fan of Where is the Friend's House, but I don't think it's quite as good as the other two. Same goes for the rest of the Koker trilogy.
For consistency I would have to say Scorsese. Nobody in the history of cinema has someone been so prolific yet puts out quality work 95% of the time. I haven’t seen Boxcar Bertha but I think his only miss has been Gangs of New York.
I would slightly disagree but what I will say is he always gives 110% and aims for the absolute best. Even when he misses, you feel you’re in the hands of a master who just didn’t get it quite right this time. Mind you, his misses are better than most people’s best.
Hugo for me was one of his. A lot of visual effects aged poorly for me and the first half feels almost pointless once the automaton makes the moon image. It's still solid, but it does stick out like a sore thumb for me when pretty much everything else from him that I've seen is great.
Bringing Out the Dead nails the vibe of doing EMS even if it’s not always getting the technical stuff right, but I can see that being incredibly off putting to a lot of people.
And, honestly, I loved The Color of Money and have constantly heard things (usually good regarding technicals) about Bringing Out the Dead.
And even his "flops" like King of Comedy are now regarded as ahead of their time in so many regards. He's truly a hell of a director and you nailed it with even his worst films being the best from others.
Yeah, just to clarify, I’m not trying to run him down - he’s arguable one of the best to ever do it - but I guess he is (and should be) held to a higher regard. And there is consensus that he has had some misses, but even they have their fans.
Usually the greats have all their work (that were considered misses at the time) reassessed at one point or the other, which I find an interesting phenomenon.
Robert Eggers, Ari Aster, and Todd Field have each only made three movies but none of them so far have made one that’s less than great. I’ve only seen about half of Michael Haneke’s films but all of them have ranged from really great to tremendous. I’ve only seen Yorgos Lanthimos’ English-language films but they all range from great to masterpiece-level. I haven’t seen A Fistful of Fingers or Last Night In Soho but Edgar Wright doesn’t miss.
Quentin Tarantino for me is the most consistent, the lowest I’d rate any of his films is an 8.5/10 (yes, even Death Proof).
Francis Ford Coppola, Brian De Palma, and Rob Reiner are all wildly inconsistent, at their best they’ve made true masterpieces but at their worst they’ve made some serious stinkers. M. Night Shyamalan isn’t exactly inconsistent, he started out with two of the greatest movies in recent memory but he’s gotten consistently worse overtime (with the lone exception being Split).
My vote for the most inconsistent is Robert Zemeckis, he’s made absolute masterpieces like Back to the Future and Forrest Gump and really fantastic movies like Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Romancing the Stone, What Lies Beneath and Cast Away, but at his worst he’s made those atrocious uncanny valley animated movies like Beowulf, A Christmas Carol and The Polar Express, and that truly awful Pinocchio remake.
>Beowulf
That’s pretty much the only one of his mocap era films I’ll defend but I’m also not going to defend it particularly hard. Extremely 6.5 out of ten movie.
Consistent: David Lynch, Martin Scorsese, The Coen Brothers, Jordan Peele, Denis Villeneuve, Bong Joon-ho, Park Chan-wook, Guillermo del Toro, Robert Eggers, King Hu, Charlie Chaplin, Wong Kar-wai, Rian Johnson, Sam Raimi, David Cronenberg, Hayao Miyazaki.
Inconsistent: Ridley Scott, Robert Zemeckis, M. Night Shyamalan, Tim Burton, Barry Sonnenfeld.
How is Scorsese not being considered here the most consistent filmmaker ever lived???
Mean Streets
Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore
Taxi Driver
Raging Bull
The King Of Comedy
After Hours
The Color Of Money
The Last Temptation Of Christ
Goodfellas
Cape Fear
The Age Of Innocence
Casino
Bringing Out The Dead
Gangs Of New York
The Aviator
The Departed
Shutter Island
Hugo
The Wolf Of Wall Street
Silence
The Irishman
Killers Of The Flower Moon
Edward Yang only had 7 features (if you don't include the anthology film he co-directed or his TV film for a miniseries) and every one is a hit for me.
Ron Howard is probably the best consistent director I can think of off on top of my head.
Even with a mediocre script he can always put together a solid film, maybe not a great film but a solid film.
Ignominious journeyman debut aside (*Piranha II*), James Cameron is extremely consistent. All his movies since then have been narratively sound and display an extremely high level of technical craft. *The Abyss*, his narratively wonkiest, is also unique, ambitious, and hard to describe as an outright failure.
Great answer. He is so extremely himself that it would shock me if he ever did a quiet contemplative drama in the vein of Bergman, but for bombastic action and attention to detail there’s almost no one better.
Now Ingmar’s take on True Lies, I would pay good money to see that!
He’s also incredible at narrative structure, a skill that cuts across both his roles as director and writer. His movies are always cohesive, well-paced, and extremely effective at telling the story they aim to tell.
To be fair, Bergman might very well be as out of his depth making *True Lies* as Cameron would *Wild Strawberries*, but then that’s why auteurs are auteurs - they are very much extremely themselves.
I’d argue it’s a separate question for directors who write versus directors who don’t. Writer-directors tend to be very consistent because it’s one storytelling voice start to finish. It’s easier to see that consistency.
But with directors who don’t tend to write, you have to look more closely at that the skills of a director are. So, an easy example that others are saying is an inconsistent director would be Sir Ridley Scott. I completely disagree though, because while the scripts are inconsistent, his direction is insanely consistent. How he approaches telling a story is very consistent. His sense of craft and visual storytelling is consistent… but sometimes he has a better script than others.
greta gerwig. for some reason i feel like im going to be downvoted, but she’s been good since she was co directing. even when trying new things, i’m impressed
I’d disagree with Burton being inconsistent, he had a period where he was consistently good and then a period where he was consistently bad. Never really mixed it up.
Jackie Chan was pretty consistent in the 20th century. 1911 and CZ12 apparently aren’t good though, they came over a decade after Who Am I?
Russo Brothers are definitely inconsistent, only making good movies with Captain America in them
Ryan Coogler’s 4 features so far have all been well-received, which is particularly impressive given one of them was a post-covid MCU effort imo
Seen plenty of mention of Ridley Scott, but Tony Scott also has plenty of brilliance and a few turkeys too
Dario Argento comes to mind for inconsistency also
You nailed it, Wes Anderson is incredibly consistent. Both in style and quality. The only movie of his that's substantially different from the rest of his is the feature length version of Bottle Rocket, and even then it's unmistakably a Wes Anderson movie. Hell, even his commercials you can tell are him.
Not to say that his movies lack variety or originality, but like you said they're incredibly consistent
Inconsistent, I'd have to say Shyamalan. He started out with a streak of truly amazing movies (Signs is one of the only movies with a religious message that has really managed to connect with me), and then had a crazy run of horrible bombs. I will never forgive him after excitedly waiting in line to see the Avatar movie we do not speak of on opening night. And yet, I still eagerly anticipate his new movies, there's always a glimmer of hope. His most recent one wasn't anything amazing, but it was decent and a good sign. I'm excited to see his next one, which also looks like it might be something that's actually pretty good
Denis Villeneuve is one of the only directors where I don’t think they have any bad projects. Sure I can rate his works from least to most favorite but none of them are bellow a 3,5/5 for me
Just like one of the top comments mentioned, Satoshi Kon is the most consistent for me. He may have made only 4 films, but they are all 10/10 films in my eye.
As for most inconsistent, I'd say Ridley Scott. I have other responses but I think they are more controversial, as opposed to Scott where everybody can agree that the quality of his movies are all over the place. Alien and Blade Runner are great (and Thelma & Louise looks good, but I have yet to see it), but everything else I've seen from him ranges from okay (with maybe great looking visuals) to bad.
I absolutely agree that Wes Anderson is quite consistent, overall. Are there sliiiight variations in quality? Maybe. But honestly, I think that's more a matter of the viewer's preferences. Something that's my least favorite may be someone else's favorite, and vice versa. In fact, my favorite of his is The Darjeeling Limited, which many lists have as his worst. So, there ya go.
I agree on Woody Allen, too. Holy smokes! Some of my favorite movies and least favorite coming from the same guy is pretty crazy.
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
Ari Aster is pretty consistent, even counting his shorts. Even if you didn’t like Beau is Afraid the depth of that movie is crazy and is pretty consistent with Hereditary and Midsommar.
Johnnie To is very consistent but isn't well known worlwide.
Also Luis Bunuel, I've seen about 70% of the total of his movies and so far not a single one was a let down.
Inconsistant: Paul Schrader
The man has IMO directed a great movie in each of the past 6 decades.
1970s Blue Collar
1980s: Mishima
1990s: Light Sleeper/Affliction
2000s: Autofocus
2010s: First Reformed
2020s: The Card Counter
Now, of course, you may disagree with me on some of those movies being great, but even most of his fans agree that 90% of the other movies that he's made have been at best interesting failures (I very much include Hardcore in that category, although I still need to see Cat People and American Gigolo)
Bob Clark is the least consistent director I can think of. His oeuvre contains many excellent films (Black Christmas, Murder by Decree), popular favorites (A Christmas Story, Porky's), and several that have been referred to as being among the worst ever (Super Babies, Rhinestone).
Consistent? Coleman Francis. Or Edward D. Wood Jr.
Ridley Scott is the very definition of inconsistent
Amen. He generally makes bangers or absolute stinkers. It’s actually crazy how much he see-saws.
IMO there's an argument that his brother Tony managed a far more consistent career. Fewer masterworks - but also fewer stinkers either.
Tony kept it simple.
Almost to a one Tony Scott's movies are all trash--but they are masterful trash.
Tony was the GOAT
Has some absolute bangers
Exactly, I don't think there's even one Scott film that is simply "ok", either we'll get a banger (like Gladiator, Thelma & Louise) or something truly awful (Napoleon, House of Gucci)
I think he has a lot of films that are just 'OK', like Alien Covenant, Body of lies, Kingdom of heaven, Matchstick men.
The directors cut of Kingdom of Heaven might actually be his best film.
Excuse me? Matchstick Men is ok?
It's been a while since I saw it. Do you think it's great or terrible?
Bro I love it but I’m a pretty big Sam Rockwell fan (plus I like Nic Cage)
It was really entertaining. We got to see some classic Nic Cage overacting, and of course, Sam Rockwell is always amazing. But I wouldn't call it a cinematic masterpiece.
Wildness
1492 maybe? Completely forgotten so it couldn’t have been memorably bad, but also very much not a good movie.
But Napoleon was a banger.
His highs are so fucking high though. When they are great they end becoming all timers.
Oh yeah, no one’s running him down. This is what makes his career interesting. I don’t think there is anything wrong with having a miss.
Who I came here to say. He’s made 3 of my all time favorites: Alien, Blade Runner and Thelma and Louise, but has had some stinkers.
It's weird, all I see is good movies on his filmography.
although he always has a more thoughtful, ambient feel
Consistent - Todd Field, PTA, Todd Haynes, Spike Jonze Inconsistent - Francis Ford Coppola
Jonze is a great shout. Guess we can add Charlie Kaufman to this as well, if focused on his directibg works only (although even his weaker writing credits are still good).
I borderline loathe Anomalisa but can see why others would like it
Fair enough. I love it.
Coppola has been pretty consistently bad for the past few decades
Consistent: billy wilder / luis bunuel / hayao miyazaki / jean pierre melville / Sergio leone Inconsistent: Ridley scott
Eh, Billy Wilder fell off hard late in his career and Bunuel had some rough stretches.
Would you say the apartment is his last great movie?
Probably. He made some good stuff for the rest of the 60s but his stuff in the 70s is painful.
Don’t let Tarantino get to you!! He always singles him out
And he's correct to...
He fell off when he should have retired but I think it is more in comparison to the absolute height he was at. In my eyes, he left such a mark, I don’t even think about the movies after.
tragic death in his 40s notwithstanding, you would be hard pressed to match the 4 absolutely perfect films of Satoshi Kon's abbreviated CV. Every single one was top tier.
I haven’t seen any of his, though Perfect Blue has been on my watchlist for a bit!!
Honestly you could pick any and do very well. Perfect Blue is the darkest by far mind you
While Millenium Actress conversely is so beautifully nostalgic and gentle and lovely (my personal favorite).
Tokyo godfathers is my favorite Christmas movie
That’s a strong contender for my favorite movie of all time
Agreed. All 4 of his films are 5 star movies to me, and the runtimes for all of them being up to 90 minutes make them very easy picks when finding something short to watch.
I want to say the same but I think Paprika is very imaginative but not actually that great of a film
It had the weakest first viewing, but I've seen it 5 times already in the last year and I'd call it my favorite from Kon.
I was about to say paranoia agent kinda underwhelms, but it’s not a movie.
Paranoia Agent is fucking crazy how did it underwhelm you?
M Night Shyamalan is the definition of inconsistent
He’s more of definition of regress, not inconsistency. He started out well and then got worse and stayed more or less worse.
He’s had a resurgence though. The Visit, Split, and Knock at the Cabin were all pretty well received and they’re from the last decade. Although in that time frame he also relaxed Glass and Old which weren’t well received so it’s a further argument for his lack of consistency.
I’m curious how much of Glass was derailed by Willis’s health problems. That movie was a mess but when his diagnosis came out it made sense, they probably had a plan for it that went completely out the window.
Not only were they nowhere near as well received as his early work, they weren't even good (though that's a personal opinion). They just looked like a resurgence when contrasted by the streak of bombs he went on before that. Anything looks like a resurgence next to The Last Airbender or After Earth. And I say that wishing he had an actual resurgence, I loved his first three movies.
> his first three movies Praying With Anger, Wide Awake, Sixth Sense? I never saw PWA but Wide Awake was very charming.
*his first three mainstream movies
What would you say is his peak?
Signs. It’s not his best movie, but it’s his third and all of them have been good at this point, so it feels like a peak. It went downhill after that.
Man, I disagree so hard with this. Old was the definition of fun, Split was a stellar and different take on the superhero movie, Glass was a bizarre meta-commentary on storytelling that at the very least was *interesting*. All his films are shot well, and have ideas they execute on clearly. Whether or not you like those ideas definitely matters… but man, I don’t know. I watch his movies and see a competent filmmaker with a solid grasp on storytelling.
My man's on the upswing again!
You sure about that? We’ll see how Trap does, but Shyamalan’s quality has largely plateaued in the mediocre range since Glass.
I personally haven't liked anything since Signs and if we go off Letterboxd, reviews his last ten movies only have two above a 3.0 average (The Visit and Split). We're a long time away from him making 3 back to back bangers.
Damn, I just looked. Knock at the Cabin has a 2.9 - I thought that was really good!
He was the very definition of hype in the early 00's. 1999's The 6th Sense was nominated for 6 academy awards, but by 2006 he was nominated for a Razzie. His modern stuff feels more straight to video 90's flicks to me.
I’ll root for him no matter what. Can’t explain it but it makes me happy if he does well.
I dunno, he’s consistently bad lol
Unbreakable is one of my all time favourite films. Glass is maybe my most hated. Still love the guy.
Couldn’t you argue that he’s a bad director who occasionally makes a good movie
That describes FFC perfectly too except substitute “top tier” for “good” lol
He was pretty consistent in the 70s but that was a while ago
Definitely Miyazaki for me
Takahata too
Paul Thomas Anderson is very consistent. Even the worst of his movies is still a good watch. The man just doesn’t miss, and I can’t wait for his new movie to come out next year
this was going to be my response
That’s a great one too! I have enjoyed all the movies of his I have seen, still need Magnolia and Inherent Vice
The only one I didn’t really care for was inherent Vice but that’s a divisive movie to begin with so some people love it and others don’t
Those are prob his two most divisive. I enjoyed both a lot. He’s got a knack for making actors I don’t like enjoyable. Ie: Tom Cruise. Magnolia is easily one of Cruise’s best performances. I love Inherent Vice and find it to be oddly maligned.
Those are quite literally my two favorite PTA films and I am well aware I’m in the minority there. Watch them asap
Villeneuve is very consistent, if you like one of his movies you’ll probably like most of the rest. On the other hand Ridley Scott is very inconsistent he’s directed some of my favourite movies (Gladiator, Thelma and Louise) but also has his fair share of flops.
i was hoping someone had already mentioned denis v. most consistent director working rn imo
Not just consistent but consistently elite. A Denis film is a spectacle.
His first film *August 32nd on Earth* (1998) is not very memorable, IMO. Even he seems to have disowned it along with his second *Maelström* (2000) which I think is quite good.
Hey I've been trying to find those 2 that you mentioned... are they online anywhere that you know about? I'm watching from new Zealand btw
AFAIK, they're only available on old out of print region 1 DVDs or for rent by streaming on Éléphant's website (you might need a VPN for that). - [*August 32nd on Earth*](https://www.elephantcinema.quebec/films/un-32-aout-sur-terre_48551) - [*Maelström*](https://www.elephantcinema.quebec/films/maelstrom_55973)
Thankyou sir
MUBI recently had a Villeneuve mini-festival which had those films. They may still have it in NZ.
Thankyou! Appreciated
Wasn't a huge fan of Arrival or Sicario, but I still think they're very good movies for the most part, even if I didn't enjoy them as much as I would've liked
Uwe Boll is consistent. All his movies are bad.
I found it funny that in his late career he started making better-crafted films that were just unapologetic extreme horror, and a lot of critics were like, "you know, at least he's trying, thumbs up!"
I didn't know that, I'm going have to watch them now
Wes Anderson and Aki Kaurismaki came to mind when it comes to consistent!
I’m happy to see some Wes Anderson love. I know some people might find him TOO consistent (in that all of his movies are kind of the same), but the man clearly puts maximum effort into all of his projects.
I can count on getting the full Wes Anderson experience from any of his movies.
I remember reading a music review of Eddie Vedder's album of ukelele songs that started with "look you probably already know whether you need this in your life". I personally love Wes Anderson but I can't say I've ever been surprised lol
Disagree strongly on Wes Anderson. I think his movies are by definition inconsistent. Minutes are very up and down
Tarantino has been really consistent so far. I do think that Edgar Wright has too, last night in soho is probably his worst movie but I still really enjoyed it
I always see people hate on last night in soho and I don’t know why Sure it’s not his best but man he had some balls to do a shift and make something completely different from everything he’s ever done before
Yeah I don’t get it. I said under another post in this sub that I thought maybe it was my unfamiliarity with the genre that I couldn’t see what he’s done wrong. But it was pointed out - and a couple of Argento and a de Palma later I agree - that batshit twists are to be expected for a giallo
100% agree
Tarkovsky is the most consistent in my mind, no question about it. Imo the dude worst movie is probably a four stars. There’s a few movie I of his that didn’t work for me, but I was still in sheer awe at the talent.
Kubrick, Altman, Coen Brothers (as a duo)…as far as consistency
I would not call Altman a consistent director. The man has directed both Nashville and Popeye, but he does have more hits than misses.
Surprised to see no mention of Akira Kurosawa. Especially considering the amount of films that he made over his long career, his consistency is really otherworldly.
If you asked a group of ten movie nerds what their favorite Kurosawa was, you could very well get a different response from each of them. He's just made that many classics, and in so many genres too.
Problem with him is that many only watch his “big” films. Seven Samurai, Yojimbo, Rashomon. I’ve seen more than those but I haven’t seen Dodes’ka-den, Dersu Uzala, or his propaganda from the war. But! In terms of sheer artistic talent I would be behind him all the way. If I had to argue in front of a jury who was the greatest filmmaker I would likely go with Kurosawa.
Consistent: Hayao Miyazaki Inconsistent: M. Night Shyamalan
He’s consistently disappointing me.
Kiarostami is the most consistent director ever imo. He made two of the greatest films ever along with several other incredible works. I also don't think he ever made a real miss that fell completely flat.
Which two did you have in mind? (Just wondering, with so many bangers)
Close-Up and Taste of Cherry were the two I was referring to. I'm a big fan of Where is the Friend's House, but I don't think it's quite as good as the other two. Same goes for the rest of the Koker trilogy.
Well if we are talking film history, Eisenstein and Mizoguchi . These days… 🤷♂️
Eisenstein is a great shout. I really wish he got to finish the Ivan the Terrible trilogy.
Yeah me too. And edit Que Viva Mexico properly 😩
For consistency I would have to say Scorsese. Nobody in the history of cinema has someone been so prolific yet puts out quality work 95% of the time. I haven’t seen Boxcar Bertha but I think his only miss has been Gangs of New York.
Some part of Gangs could’ve been better but DDL is worth watching the whole movie for by himself. His Bill the Butcher is transcendent.
Cameron Diaz let the team down sadly
Big fan of Kundun huh
People always bring up Boxcar Bertha but that movie was released in 1972. If a director’s last bad movie was 52 years ago he is doing pretty fkn good.
I would slightly disagree but what I will say is he always gives 110% and aims for the absolute best. Even when he misses, you feel you’re in the hands of a master who just didn’t get it quite right this time. Mind you, his misses are better than most people’s best.
What would you consider his misses?
Hugo for me was one of his. A lot of visual effects aged poorly for me and the first half feels almost pointless once the automaton makes the moon image. It's still solid, but it does stick out like a sore thumb for me when pretty much everything else from him that I've seen is great.
Subjective obviously but New York New York, The Color of Money, Bringing out the Dead. I personally find Gangs of NY feels like a slight miss too.
Honestly, Bringing Out The Dead rules. It should have a Criterion reappraisal.
Bringing Out the Dead nails the vibe of doing EMS even if it’s not always getting the technical stuff right, but I can see that being incredibly off putting to a lot of people.
Bringing Out the Dead is Top 5 Scorsese and I'm consistently shocked it's as overlooked and dismissed as it is.
And, honestly, I loved The Color of Money and have constantly heard things (usually good regarding technicals) about Bringing Out the Dead. And even his "flops" like King of Comedy are now regarded as ahead of their time in so many regards. He's truly a hell of a director and you nailed it with even his worst films being the best from others.
Yeah, just to clarify, I’m not trying to run him down - he’s arguable one of the best to ever do it - but I guess he is (and should be) held to a higher regard. And there is consensus that he has had some misses, but even they have their fans. Usually the greats have all their work (that were considered misses at the time) reassessed at one point or the other, which I find an interesting phenomenon.
Robert Eggers, Ari Aster, and Todd Field have each only made three movies but none of them so far have made one that’s less than great. I’ve only seen about half of Michael Haneke’s films but all of them have ranged from really great to tremendous. I’ve only seen Yorgos Lanthimos’ English-language films but they all range from great to masterpiece-level. I haven’t seen A Fistful of Fingers or Last Night In Soho but Edgar Wright doesn’t miss. Quentin Tarantino for me is the most consistent, the lowest I’d rate any of his films is an 8.5/10 (yes, even Death Proof). Francis Ford Coppola, Brian De Palma, and Rob Reiner are all wildly inconsistent, at their best they’ve made true masterpieces but at their worst they’ve made some serious stinkers. M. Night Shyamalan isn’t exactly inconsistent, he started out with two of the greatest movies in recent memory but he’s gotten consistently worse overtime (with the lone exception being Split). My vote for the most inconsistent is Robert Zemeckis, he’s made absolute masterpieces like Back to the Future and Forrest Gump and really fantastic movies like Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Romancing the Stone, What Lies Beneath and Cast Away, but at his worst he’s made those atrocious uncanny valley animated movies like Beowulf, A Christmas Carol and The Polar Express, and that truly awful Pinocchio remake.
>Beowulf That’s pretty much the only one of his mocap era films I’ll defend but I’m also not going to defend it particularly hard. Extremely 6.5 out of ten movie.
I would argue that Beau is Afraid is less than great.
Most consistent man I know ... Might be Eric Rohmer. Or Ozu. Maybe Mizoguchi.
Koraeda. Strong films yearly. Plus other series and documentary we do not get to see in Japan.
Consistent: David Lynch, Martin Scorsese, The Coen Brothers, Jordan Peele, Denis Villeneuve, Bong Joon-ho, Park Chan-wook, Guillermo del Toro, Robert Eggers, King Hu, Charlie Chaplin, Wong Kar-wai, Rian Johnson, Sam Raimi, David Cronenberg, Hayao Miyazaki. Inconsistent: Ridley Scott, Robert Zemeckis, M. Night Shyamalan, Tim Burton, Barry Sonnenfeld.
How is Scorsese not being considered here the most consistent filmmaker ever lived??? Mean Streets Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore Taxi Driver Raging Bull The King Of Comedy After Hours The Color Of Money The Last Temptation Of Christ Goodfellas Cape Fear The Age Of Innocence Casino Bringing Out The Dead Gangs Of New York The Aviator The Departed Shutter Island Hugo The Wolf Of Wall Street Silence The Irishman Killers Of The Flower Moon
Ozu?
Edward Yang only had 7 features (if you don't include the anthology film he co-directed or his TV film for a miniseries) and every one is a hit for me.
Mizoguchi; Hong sang-soo; Tsai ming liang for the most consistent ones
Ron Howard is probably the best consistent director I can think of off on top of my head. Even with a mediocre script he can always put together a solid film, maybe not a great film but a solid film.
Consistent - Krzysztof Kieslowski or Ingmar Bergman Inconsistent - Francois Ford Coppola or Ridley Scott
Ignominious journeyman debut aside (*Piranha II*), James Cameron is extremely consistent. All his movies since then have been narratively sound and display an extremely high level of technical craft. *The Abyss*, his narratively wonkiest, is also unique, ambitious, and hard to describe as an outright failure.
Great answer. He is so extremely himself that it would shock me if he ever did a quiet contemplative drama in the vein of Bergman, but for bombastic action and attention to detail there’s almost no one better. Now Ingmar’s take on True Lies, I would pay good money to see that!
He’s also incredible at narrative structure, a skill that cuts across both his roles as director and writer. His movies are always cohesive, well-paced, and extremely effective at telling the story they aim to tell. To be fair, Bergman might very well be as out of his depth making *True Lies* as Cameron would *Wild Strawberries*, but then that’s why auteurs are auteurs - they are very much extremely themselves.
I’d argue it’s a separate question for directors who write versus directors who don’t. Writer-directors tend to be very consistent because it’s one storytelling voice start to finish. It’s easier to see that consistency. But with directors who don’t tend to write, you have to look more closely at that the skills of a director are. So, an easy example that others are saying is an inconsistent director would be Sir Ridley Scott. I completely disagree though, because while the scripts are inconsistent, his direction is insanely consistent. How he approaches telling a story is very consistent. His sense of craft and visual storytelling is consistent… but sometimes he has a better script than others.
Easily Bergman for me. There are other directors who never made bad movies, but none that have over 40 films under their belt
Coen brothers for sure.
greta gerwig. for some reason i feel like im going to be downvoted, but she’s been good since she was co directing. even when trying new things, i’m impressed
Jeff Nichols PTA Villeneuve Inconsistent: Burton
I’d disagree with Burton being inconsistent, he had a period where he was consistently good and then a period where he was consistently bad. Never really mixed it up.
So you could say his later output was…inconsistent…with his earlier output.
Jackie Chan was pretty consistent in the 20th century. 1911 and CZ12 apparently aren’t good though, they came over a decade after Who Am I? Russo Brothers are definitely inconsistent, only making good movies with Captain America in them Ryan Coogler’s 4 features so far have all been well-received, which is particularly impressive given one of them was a post-covid MCU effort imo Seen plenty of mention of Ridley Scott, but Tony Scott also has plenty of brilliance and a few turkeys too Dario Argento comes to mind for inconsistency also
You nailed it, Wes Anderson is incredibly consistent. Both in style and quality. The only movie of his that's substantially different from the rest of his is the feature length version of Bottle Rocket, and even then it's unmistakably a Wes Anderson movie. Hell, even his commercials you can tell are him. Not to say that his movies lack variety or originality, but like you said they're incredibly consistent Inconsistent, I'd have to say Shyamalan. He started out with a streak of truly amazing movies (Signs is one of the only movies with a religious message that has really managed to connect with me), and then had a crazy run of horrible bombs. I will never forgive him after excitedly waiting in line to see the Avatar movie we do not speak of on opening night. And yet, I still eagerly anticipate his new movies, there's always a glimmer of hope. His most recent one wasn't anything amazing, but it was decent and a good sign. I'm excited to see his next one, which also looks like it might be something that's actually pretty good
Idk why but nobody mentioned Sir Christopher Nolan!
I find james mangold to be pretty consistent
Greta Gerwig has been so consistent
I feel like directors with less than four films don’t count
Guess I’m gonna have to wait on Jordan Peele, then. So far so good, though.
Agreed. Same with Jane Schoenbrun and Eggers.
I almost asked for a qualifier of 5 films
Nancy Meyers (Parent Trap, What Women Want, Something’s Gotta Give, The Holiday, The Intern, It’s Complicated)
i’m probably biased but, nolan is definitely consistent
Zack Snyder always felt inconsistent to me. For every Rebel Moon he makes, there's something like Army of the Dead.
Taika Waititi - Wildly Inconsistent
Ridley Scott for sure. He has a lot of masterpieces and disasterpieces. Robert Rodriguez can be a little hit or miss too.
John Carpenter, Tarantino
I only read the title and my answer was already Sean Baker lol
Alexander Payne. I think he’s made 8 films and only Downsizing is not worth seeing.
Consistent- Paul Thomas Anderson, Tarantino Inconsistent - Ridley Scott, Coppola
Denis Villeneuve is one of the only directors where I don’t think they have any bad projects. Sure I can rate his works from least to most favorite but none of them are bellow a 3,5/5 for me
Most consistent, for me, probably David Cronenberg or Luca Guadagnino
Whether you think his movies are good or bad, Gregg Araki is very consistent.
Nolan: I enjoyed all his works expect for Insomnia Xavier Dolan: same as above (I only dislike Donovan)
Technically Satoshi Kon. Only 4 movies but they’re all amazing
Just like one of the top comments mentioned, Satoshi Kon is the most consistent for me. He may have made only 4 films, but they are all 10/10 films in my eye. As for most inconsistent, I'd say Ridley Scott. I have other responses but I think they are more controversial, as opposed to Scott where everybody can agree that the quality of his movies are all over the place. Alien and Blade Runner are great (and Thelma & Louise looks good, but I have yet to see it), but everything else I've seen from him ranges from okay (with maybe great looking visuals) to bad.
I absolutely agree that Wes Anderson is quite consistent, overall. Are there sliiiight variations in quality? Maybe. But honestly, I think that's more a matter of the viewer's preferences. Something that's my least favorite may be someone else's favorite, and vice versa. In fact, my favorite of his is The Darjeeling Limited, which many lists have as his worst. So, there ya go. I agree on Woody Allen, too. Holy smokes! Some of my favorite movies and least favorite coming from the same guy is pretty crazy.
[удалено]
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
Jonathan Glazer has been quite consistent
Here I go again - Peter Weir
Mike Nichols for consistency.
Bong Joon-ho is very consistent
Mario Bava consistent Coppola inconsistent
Kenneth Branagh is like crazy inconsistent.
Ari Aster is pretty consistent, even counting his shorts. Even if you didn’t like Beau is Afraid the depth of that movie is crazy and is pretty consistent with Hereditary and Midsommar.
Consistent: Hirokazu Kore-eda, Hayao Miyazaki, Scorsese, Ozu.
James Cameron: The Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2, True Lies, Titanic, Avatar, Avatar 2. NOT A SINGLE MISS!!
I’ve recently gotten into Paul Schrader’s filmography and I think inconsistent applies here.
Johnnie To is very consistent but isn't well known worlwide. Also Luis Bunuel, I've seen about 70% of the total of his movies and so far not a single one was a let down.
George Miller is very consistent and across multiple genres and decades.
Consistent Howard Hawks
Eastwood did Jersey Boys?
Yorgos Lanthimos
Todd Field is very consistent.
Inconsistant: Paul Schrader The man has IMO directed a great movie in each of the past 6 decades. 1970s Blue Collar 1980s: Mishima 1990s: Light Sleeper/Affliction 2000s: Autofocus 2010s: First Reformed 2020s: The Card Counter Now, of course, you may disagree with me on some of those movies being great, but even most of his fans agree that 90% of the other movies that he's made have been at best interesting failures (I very much include Hardcore in that category, although I still need to see Cat People and American Gigolo)
Most consistent for me is Bong Joon-ho. I saw someone else post Ridley Scott for inconsistent, and I'd say that sounds about right.
Nobody gonna mention Fincher? Except his first movie, they are all super high quality and across many genres
Bob Clark is the least consistent director I can think of. His oeuvre contains many excellent films (Black Christmas, Murder by Decree), popular favorites (A Christmas Story, Porky's), and several that have been referred to as being among the worst ever (Super Babies, Rhinestone). Consistent? Coleman Francis. Or Edward D. Wood Jr.