Filmmaking / Directing : Your Favorite Director by Geoffroy Faugerolas

Darren Aronofsky — his films are heavy and instructive.

Geoffroy Faugerolas for the longest time, it was Spielberg, Kevin Smith, and Christopher Columbus for me. More recently, I’ve really been drawn to filmmakers like Shawn Levy, Greta Gerwig, Lord and Miller, and the Russo brothers.

Looking at that mix, I think what I connect with most is storytelling that balances heart, humor, and accessibility, but still has a strong point of view. There’s something about directors who can make something feel both entertaining and emotionally grounded that really sticks with me.

I don't know about western directors, but I love everything Satoshi Kon made. His style speaks to me on a visceral level; the surrealism is effortless and the subtlety incredibly satisfying. He didn't give you all the answers and as such kept you coming back to find things you missed.

And of course I love Kunihiko Ikuhara for much of the same reasons. I guess I have to watch David Lynch's stuff because both of them were/are considered Japanese equivalents lol

Guillermo del Toro is definitely top of my list, as is Seijun Suzuki and Segio Leone, and Takeshi Kitano.

Guess I have a thing for a certain aesthetic, with long shots and a slower pace?

Ryan coogler is a great example of a director.

WOW, Geoffroy Faugerolas , what an impossible task to narrow it down to a reasonable list of say three for Comedy and three for Others because that leaves off some HEAVYWEIGHTS in each category but I would say in no particular order Comedy:

Todd Phillips / Apatow / Coen brothers and Others: Scorsese / Tarrantino / Fincher

I’m less interested in style and more in how directors create a feeling that something is off without explaining it. The kind of storytelling where small details and decisions slowly build tension.

That’s something I’m trying to explore in my own work.”

Can't say I have one favorite. Chris Nolan, Danny Boyle, Darren Arnofsky, Terrence Malick, Kubrick, to name some. Don Siegel, Sergio Leone and Clint Eastwood have to be on there too.

I like filmmakers who explore identity, time, and meaning through controlled systems that eventually break down.

I was surprised that Steven Spielberg's name didn't come to mind first, because I've loved his work since The Sugarland Express and Duel. He gets real performances out of actors, he can handle any type of material and do it better than almost anyone, and he understands film--what works on-screen and what doesn't. But when I saw the topic, John Schlesinger came to mind first.

Some of the younger folks here might not even know his name, but anyone whose directing credits in a brilliant streak from 1967-1976 include Far From the Madding Crowd, Midnight Cowboy, Sunday Bloody Sunday, The Day of the Locust, and Marathon Man deserves to be studied by anyone interested in film or storytelling.

Other greats, to me? Scorcese, Coppola, Michael Mann...

I really enjoy Christopher Nolan.

I don't think I have a fauvorite director, I liked Tim Burton when I was young. Now I still don't have a fauvorite director, I rather explore how I would tell some stories. I did an interesting exercise, to redo some movies in my head, but the way I would have directed them.

For me I always come back to Hal Ashby. His master use of satirical comedy to tackle the socio, political and race issues of the time. Being There is a perfect film for me. And I hear his actors loved him.

Wow Geoffroy Faugerolas - interesting discussion! Years ago, it was Spielberg. Now, Christopher Nolan and Zack Snyder. A perfect combo (for me) would be Nolan's writing and Snyder's cinematography.

Stanley Kubrick, David Lean, Richard Brooks and Sergio Leone would make up my top four. Kubrick made the best anti-hero film ever with "Clockwork Orange". Lean made the best film ever with "Lawrence of Arabia", Brooks made the best quasi-doc feature with "In Cold Blood." Leone remade the entire western genre with "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly."

There are quite a few directing greats out there -- ones who have achieved legendary status. Scorcese, Spielberg, Nolan...we could spend hours creating a list, and probably just scratch the surface.

However, if I were to choose one director, I would go with Rob Reiner. The variety of his movies is impeccable, and quite a number of them are worthy of study: WHEN HARRY MET SALLY, THE PRINCESS BRIDE, A FEW GOOD MEN, THIS IS SPINAL TAP, to name but a few.

A close second to me is Mel Brooks, who has had a profound influence on my comedy dating all the way back to when I first heard THE TWO THOUSAND YEAR-OLD MAN as a kid.

I love Francis Ford Coppola because that guy knows how to move the camera and block actors. His fundamental skill sets is unsurpassed.

Definitely The Coen Bros, Hitchcock, Scorsese, Spielberg. Four different styles, each with a powerful and precise vision each. Their work is unmistakable.

My all-time favorite directors are Christopher Nolan (bc of Interstellar), Paul King (bc of Paddington 2) and Steven Spielberg because of everything!

Greta Gerwig is a great example of such an important ism: feminism. Francis and Sophia Coppoloa I'd lean existentialism; Snyder's work certainly focus on heroism. Burton such an interesting filmmaker...so different...

Paolo Ippedico I feel like The Coen Brothers' absurdism doesn't work for everyone but once you get it...you get it.

@darrell we need an Apatow come back.

Stanley Kubrick and Billy Wilder are my favorite all time directors. Both of them could direct anything. Kubrick made a top all-time comedy (Dr. Strangelove), Science fiction (2001 and A Clockwork Orange), horror (The Shining), and a couple of amazing war movies (Paths of Glory, Full Metal Jacket). He showed the frailty of humanity by dehumanizing his characters, but also showed the pain they went through in those transformations. See Private Pyle in FMJ and Alex in Clockwork. Billy Wilder also made a couple of all-time great comedies (Some Like it Hot, The Apartment, The Seven Year Itch) and also two of the top-5 Film Noir (Double Indemnity, Sunset Boulevard) as well as memorable war movies (Stalag 17), courtroom dramas (Witness for the Prosecution), and RomComs (Sabrina). Pound for pound, these are also two of the greatest storytellers in cinema history.

I am most partial to Ron Howard films. I think they allow the actor to expose their inner dialogue without hitting the audience over the head with the emotional content. Rob Reiner was also exceptional for the same reason.

Hands down: Steven Spielberg, Orson Welles and Alfred Hitchcock. They understand visual storytelling need minimal dialogue while they take an audience’s perception on a cinematic adventure.

Great discussion Geoffroy Faugerolas

My favorite director is Christopher Nolan, especially because of his deep interest in building sci-fi worlds that remain connected to real science. It is not only the worldbuilding we admire or the emotions we experience through his characters, but also the scientific plausibility behind it all. In Interstellar, for example, he worked with a physicist to shape the black hole and fourth-dimension scenes.

That is something I try to do as well when developing my own sci-fi worlds: to make them as plausible as possible.

This is really tough to answer. I personally believe that my favorite directors are ones who take huge swings -- and that either ends in a strike out or a grand slam. Plus, I have this theory that each director only has a limited amount of "magic pixie dust" (the ability to create classics). Some like Rob Reiner used up all their magic pixie dust in the first decade of his career with an amazing run of movies that might never be rivaled. Others like Darren Aronofsky are more hit and miss. For every "Black Swan" and "Requiem for a Dream" he puts out, there's also "Mother!" and "Noah." In addition, I don't want to say Kubrick. It's like when you ask someone what their favorite movies are and they start with The Godfathers. You're like, "yeah, obviously but what else?" I feel the same about Kubrick. He might be the goat. He's such a craftsman. The man shit out classics. But have I ever teared up at one of his movies? No, they're so cold and calculating that they're museum pieces. This is a long-winded way of saying that these are my favorite directors: Robert Zemeckis (before 2001), Alan Parker, Curtis Hanson, Oliver Stone (before 1994), and I'll watch anything P.T. Anderson does mostly because he has one of the greatest cinematic one-two punches in history with "Boogie nights" and "Magnolia."

Mr. Scorsese...

David Lean

For me, two directors that really stand out are Boots Riley and Ava DuVernay.

Boots Riley hits that space I love where storytelling gets bold, surreal, and unapologetically political. He’s not afraid to say something real about the world, but he does it in a way that’s creative, unexpected, and entertaining at the same time. That balance of message and imagination is something I’m always chasing in my own work.

Ava DuVernay, on the other hand, brings a level of emotional truth and grounded power that really resonates with me. Her work feels purposeful, like every frame is saying something about identity, history, and humanity, but it still connects on a deeply personal level.

Both of them, in different ways, create stories that matter. Not just entertaining, but impactful, thought-provoking, and rooted in perspective. That’s the kind of work I want to be known for as well.

I would say Guillermor del Torro. Sometimes, horror genre is more focus on jumpscare but not the story. Unlike Guillermo, his horror is really different. Instead of ghosts, he uses fantasy.

George Lucas for Star Wars movies. Before he did that, he directed "American Graffiti" featuring Ron Howard who turns out to be a great director who directed films like an underrated fantasy movie "Willow" and he also directed a documentary two years ago on the biography of one of entertainment greats Jim Henson in the documentary called "Idea Man" which you can find on Disney Plus. Steven Spielsberg for obvious things like Indiana Jones movies, E.T., and Jurassic Park. Lastly, James Cameron for a plethora of science fiction movies he pulled off like "The Abyss", Terminator movies and T2: Judgment Day and one of the Alien sequels, lastly his biggest success came from "Avatar" and two more sequels "The Way of Water" and "Fire and Ash" that reach box office records. Kudos for Cameron by doing one of the most tragic events in world history and turning it into a romantic love story before Titanic crashed into the iceberg.

In summary, my favorite directors are: George Lucas, Ron Howard, Steven Spielsberg, and James Cameron.

How could I possibly pick one?!

I"ve always said I learned more about directing from watching Blade Runner over and over again than I did in four years of film school, so that would indicate I should pick Sir Ridley Scott. And indeed, I think he's the most reliable director-for-hire in the business (though he sometimes can't get out of his own way when he's too involved in the development phase).

But then, as I started out, Spielberg was certainly the role model I wanted to emulate. As far as I'm concerned, Raiders Of The Lost Ark is the world's only perfect movie (with the possible exception of Casablanca, I guess).

George Lucas? Well, not so much as a director, but the world he created brought me such joy that it made teenage me want to become a filmmaker.

But as my career progressed, I realized my own style was probably a bit closer to James Cameron. Not to compare myself to him, but simply a more similar stylistic approach. And he's the only filmmaker I can think of who's never had a flop or made a bad film (at least after Piranha 2, which shouldn't count) .

George Miller is maybe the greatest action director ever, but that's not enough.

I could say I've liked ALMOST everything Christopher Nolan's directed, if not for his strange ideas about sound mixing...

Rob Reiner? Perhaps for the sheer variety of work, across so many different genres and styles. I love that he didn't really have one style, but rather adapted to suit his material. But while they were all brilliant, only one makes my top ten list.

I've enjoyed virtually all of Robert Zemeckis' work, but somehow none of it has ever truly inspired me.

What Peter Jackson did with Lord Of The Rings is nothing short of miraculous, but I haven't been impressed with any of this other stuff.

In 2017, after seeing Wind River, I would have said Taylor Sheridan was going to be our next great American director, but some of his TV work has been truly off-putting (though that's more in the writing and politics than his actual direction).

John McTiernan burned searingly bright, but then flamed out.

Kathryn Bigelow has really impressed me since she seemingly reinvented herself on Hurt Locker.

Kubrick and Coppola can be hit or miss for me.

I'd love to pick myself, but I've never really had the time and budget needed to fully realize my vision on any of the films I've made (though there's one brief action sequence in my student film that I would defy anyone to improve upon! LOL).

No, this is an unanswerable question. But if you put a gun to my head and forced me to hire a director for a film, without knowing what the script was, I'd have to go with Spielberg, Scott, Cameron, in that order.

Or maybe I'd just beg W.D. Richter to get back in the center seat...

I’m old school. My favorite director is Alfred Hitchcock. He has been since I first saw Psycho first run (yeas, very old school). Studied his techniques, the way he built suspense.

Martin Scorsese and Clint Eastwood

Thunder Levin Blade Runner is definitely in my top 3. If only Cameron had better scripts...

There's several I could name, but I guess if I had to pick just one who's had the greatest influence on me, it would be George Lucas. His six-episode Star Wars Saga was very important to my developing imagination and are some of the films I return to the most both for enjoyment and inspiration.

Honestly, I feel Lucas never gets his due as a visual director. I think his main strength as a director is how effortlessly he can create a completely foreign environment and cause you to buy into it immediately without question, and maintain that world through the rest of the film. In Star Wars, obviously, it's a galaxy far, far away, and you can see even in the original film how committed the picture is to silently building and maintaining the fantastic world it presents us with.

His first film, "THX 1138", manages to turn empty hallways and tunnels into a unique sci-fi world, despite having next to no effects or money to back it up. But it works, effortlessly. "American Graffiti" actually performs the opposite of what the other films do. Instead of taking a fantastic world and grounding it so well the audience never questions it, it takes a world which had existed, 1962 Modesto, California, and presents it through a nostalgic haze where it becomes another world. It's like a snapshot of a memory in the same way the songs running through it capture the spirit of their era and artists.

I honestly wish he had directed more non Star Wars films. He was originally going to do "Apocalypse Now" before he decided to make Star Wars.

Geoffroy Faugerolas, I love the way you framed this. It really does reveal something about how we see story and the world. I have several directors I admire, but the two who resonate with me the most are James Cameron and Emerald Fennell. I love their director signatures.

Cameron’s work is this fusion of emotional stakes, world‑building, and technical ambition. He creates universes that feel both epic and deeply human. His storytelling always carries a sense of awe and purpose.

Emerald Fennell, on the other hand, brings a bold, provocative voice with sharp psychological insight. Her tone, her visual confidence, and the way she plays with genre and subtext feel fearless and incredibly precise.

Very different energies, but both speak to me in powerful ways. As a director, my dream is to one day cross both their worlds in a single film with my signature:))

There are many I admire, but I would have to put Francis Ford Coppola at the top of my list. His ability to convey a story through film is masterful and I always come away satisfied with the end result.

That’s a great question.

I’d say Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, Denis Villeneuve, and Christopher Nolan have all had a strong influence on me. What I find compelling is how each of them approaches storytelling from a different angle while still maintaining a clear artistic identity.

Scorsese brings psychological intensity and moral complexity, Spielberg creates emotional connection and accessibility, Villeneuve builds atmosphere and tension through visual storytelling, and Nolan explores structure, time, and perception.

In my own work, I try to bring these elements together — focusing on character-driven narratives while also paying close attention to atmosphere, visual language, and structural design.

I’m currently developing a project that leans heavily into psychological tension, moral conflict, and a strong visual identity, aiming to create an experience that resonates both emotionally and conceptually.

For me the directors that have an influence on me I'd say are the Scott brothers and Steven Spielberg, maybe even Michael Bay. But the thing is I like them for some of their works which I really like. I their works like Minority Report, Deja Vu, The Island, Blade runner, etc. These works somehow all have something that I like and things that I think are useful on my projects.

Like I used the camera aesthetic of Tony Scott on one of the music videos that I directed.

Tough to pick one, hell, tough to pick ten, but Noah Baumbach is up there as a director and a writer. Drama/comedy, unafraid to annoy/antagonize, or focus on the ugly/awkward moments. Yet, he finds a humanity in those spots as well.

Having said that, I love Richard linklater for many of the same reasons and he has a more varied resume…

Some pretty big names on the list so far, but my current fav is Kevin Willmott. He wrote Blackkklansman, and directed The 24th, Chi-Raq, and several other social justice films. This guy lives in Kansas, not Hollywood, not New York. He's smart, really grounded (obvously, living in Kansas), well-liked and uber creative. He's a hands-on guy, which I really like, partly because he doesn't work with Scorsese or Spielberg budgets, but mostly because he likes to get his hands dirty. Last thing, he likes to have fun when he directs - it's part of his way of keeping the set low stress, more productive. I had the pleasure of listening to him speak just last week in Kansas City, then asking him to direct the project I've been working on for three years. So am I high on Kevin Willmott? Yeah, he ticks all the boxes for directing a $7M social justice feature.

Wow, these are such amazing answers! Because I am so terrible with names - I don't have a list of directors of movies I love per se. So many of these movies you all have mentioned are so great. But those I've had the opportunity to work with, I do have favorites - in the ways they worked, created a community and have a solid body of work - Like Walter Hill - I worked with him on Red Heat, Johnny Handsome, Another 48Hrs and Geronimo - to know what went into getting those made and being on the set, quite a learning experience. In recent years, I got to work with Michael Schultz on All American but he directing some groundbreaking shows in his beginning, who at 87 is still directing!! Besides those two - I did get to see Christopher Nolan speak when he got elected at the DGA and he was quite funny with the kind of humor I really like.

It’s a very good question Geoffrey asked.

We’re often asked to choose a “favorite director” as if it were picking a car brand.

But in reality, it’s not about the name — it’s about the film they created.

That one film you can watch over and over again,

even though you already know it by heart.

Those are the films that become truly iconic.

For me, it’s:

Apocalypto — Mel Gibson

The Terminator — James Cameron

Films by Quentin Tarantino

Taxi, The Fifth Element, Léon — Luc Besson

What they have in common is that they were directly involved in writing their scripts.

There are also cases where a director truly stands out in a specific film:

Zeffirelli with Shakespeare, Eli Roth with Death Wish, Robert Rodriguez with The Faculty.

Everyone will have a slightly different list — because people are different.

But the idea is simple:

you don’t really love a “director” — you love what they created.

And their next film can turn out completely different.

A great memory jog of a post, I think I thought back to most of the directors I know (or can recall as of this post). For me, I would say (1) James Cameron and (2) Christopher Nolan for the breadth of the visions with the worlds they create with each film while making those films fast paced.

And I have an unusual number (3), Renny Harlin. His career hasn't fully recovered after '90s when he had three flops in a row The Long Kiss Goodnight, Cutthroat Island, and Deep Blue Sea. However, I loved all 3 of those movies and Cutthroat kinda made me a party pooper since I was absolutely dazzled by Harlin's slow motion use and practical effects that the post-2000 hyper-fast editting trend left me... well, insert party pooper face here.

Also, Harlin's Die Hard 2 was an early R-rated movie that I watched without my parents' permission, so I kind of just really like it. Harlin got me into R-rated action movies in that way.

Steven Spielberg, Ava DuVernay, Jordan Peele, Martin Scorsese, Akira Kurosawa, Spike Lee, Quentin Tarantino, and Wes Craven.

There are so many phenomenal films with phenomenal directors in the chair. I have, worked with a quite a few. Each one has had different excellent qualities. There has only been one, nameless of course, who was a real twit. But the one I have always remembered fondly is the Director of the first feature film I made many years ago - Ava DuVernay. I am sure she does not remember me since my role was a relatively small one. But what impressed me about her, was her manner. Each time she gave personal direction to one of the actors, she would come to you and quietly and privately tell you what she wanted from you. No yelling from behind the camera or from the sidelines. Just she left her seat and came over to speak alone with the actor. It was a master-class in people management.

I admire the work of Guillermo del Toro immensely due to his sophisticated blend of horror, fantasy and allegory. His attention to detail in set design, colour scheme and music all play into the power of his stories. I remember stumbling from a screening of "Pan's Labyrinth" feeling as if I'd been hit in the head with a brick!

del Toro creates such atmosphere in his story telling, the only other director who comes close, in my opinion, is Ridley Scott. I can always tell when I'm watching a Ridley Scott film. Blade Runner, the Director's cut, is one of my all-time favourites.

The third director I admire is Australian Michael Gracey, who directed The Greatest Showman and Better Man. Both films fuse music and dance with powerful storytelling and Gracey knows how to direct it to best effect. The stories incorporate joy, light and hope for the human spirit in an entertaining way and are films I'd watch again.

One director who really stands out to me is Christopher Nolan. His ability to blend psychological depth with large-scale storytelling is something I find very inspiring. What resonates with me is how his stories are not just about spectacle, but about complex human emotions, time, and perception. As someone who is drawn to crime and psychological thriller concepts, I find that balance between character and high-concept storytelling very powerful.

Still Kubrick; follow-up is Tarantino.

Great choices — Stanley Kubrick’s precision and psychological depth is unmatched, and Quentin Tarantino’s dialogue-driven storytelling really stands out. I think both approach tension in very different but powerful ways. I’m especially drawn to that psychological layering in storytelling.

Man...I wish it was that easy. There's so many different pieces of movies that I watch and rewatch because the directing and timing is just superb! For instance: Crash directed by Paul Haggis, I love, LOVED how he made that entire circle of characters intertwine with one another. I don't think I ever saw that style until that movie. I've watched that movie more than 10 times, its now my "feel good" movie. Then we have the movie "65" by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods - I mean...the story of discovering Earth during the Dinosaur era...WHAT?!!! I loved the movement, the capture of the dinosaurs simply trying to kill the humans because "why wouldn't they?" They've just been invaded, rudely interrupted by these weird looking beings. Fantastic movie! Then we have Godzilla vs. Kong, now I'm not going to lie, I watched all of them, but by far this is my favorite simply because of the sounds. Yes, the sounds. When Godzilla is waking up or approaching or furious, the sound that comes from the tail, then travels before it becomes a roar? Magnificent! I can listen to that all day long and feel the power of those lungs! I'm also a massive fan of Korean action movies, specifically how simple the fighting scenes are. The set up of the action with or without guns, even just punching is fast paced, almost too fast. Not all the characters are professional fighters (which is great and on purpose) which is such a great touch. Their wide swings or short jabs that still have effects because of course when you get punched, you feel it, no matter how light it might be! One of my favorite Korean action movie is The Killer, directed by Choi Jaehoon, smooth, really smooth, the movement of the main actor is very fluid, and the action portions as super fast, deliberate, and dangerous. Lovely. Last but not least, my ultimate sitcom of all times, director Terry Hughes for Golden Girls. The timing on those quips are just fantastic and the casting, phenomenal! I have them on everyday, simply because I am inspired, I still laugh out loud even after 20 plus years of watching them. That just shows how good the series was, the writing, the directing, the acting, all of it. I don't have a favorite perse, because truthfully, I am forever a fan of anyone and everyone that is able to take their story from paper to screen. RESPECT!

That’s a great breakdown — especially the way you highlighted different aspects like sound, movement, and character interplay. I agree about Crash, the interconnected storytelling was really powerful. And your point about Korean action films is interesting too — that raw, imperfect fighting style makes it feel much more real and intense. I think those details really shape how an audience experiences the story.

Akira Kurosawa for the genius in storytelling, Kathryn Bigelow for action movies and tension building, Alfred Hitchcock for suspense, Ryan Coogler for turning complex story into incredible visuals, and Spielberg for always telling story that gets right to the heart of the audience.

Akira Kurosawa's continuous influence on storytelling truly amazes me but it's not surprising. He was ahead of his time.

Eleanor and Sofia Coppola :)

Absolutely — Akira Kurosawa’s influence is incredible. The way he approached character, moral conflict, and visual storytelling still feels modern even today. It’s fascinating how many contemporary filmmakers are still building on the foundations he created.

That’s a great mix — Akira Kurosawa and Alfred Hitchcock really defined storytelling and suspense at a fundamental level. And I agree about Kathryn Bigelow and Ryan Coogler — they bring intensity and scale in very different but effective ways. It’s interesting how all of them approach tension and emotion so uniquely.

Spielberg has always been one of my fave directors. I love E.T., Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, AI, The Fabelmans. I love his sci fi movies the best because I always love how he made the extra terrestrials likable and he shows the inhumanity and evil of humans, especially when the scientists come into Elliot's home and they look really eerie in their spacesuits and you start to feel sorry for E.T. Brad Silberling is another of my fave directors. I love City Of Angels, Moonlight Mile, Lemony Snicket's A Series Of Unfortunate Events. I really love the dark humor in the movies. I think of the scene in City Of Angels where Nicholas Cage's character and Meg Ryan's character are in the kitchen cutting vegetables and the knife goes right through him and when she realizes he's not bleeding from the knife, she freaks out, which would probably be a normal response as seeing a knife go through someone without any blood would be weird. The paranormal nerd that I am would have loved to see the scene play out in a different way, as a sense of awe and wonder, like, Wow! How did you do that?

Great picks — Sofia Coppola especially has a very distinct style when it comes to mood and character-driven storytelling. There’s something very subtle yet powerful in how those stories unfold.

That’s a great observation — Steven Spielberg really has a unique way of making the unknown feel emotional and human at the same time. That contrast between wonder and fear is what makes films like E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial so memorable. And that City of Angels scene you mentioned is a perfect example of how a simple moment can feel surreal and unsettling.

“I don’t have one fixed favorite director yet, but I’m drawn to filmmakers like Nolan, Fincher, and Kubrick because I like intense and meaningful storytelling.”

That’s a strong mix — Christopher Nolan, David Fincher, and Stanley Kubrick all bring intensity in very different ways. I think that balance between psychological depth and visual storytelling is what really makes their work stand out.

Ruben Östlund!

I am so surprised my favorite did not turn up again and again. Frank Capra! If it wasn't for the fact that the director of my most recent film, felt that my script was Capraesque, it probably would not have got made.

Great choice — Ruben Östlund has a really sharp way of exploring human behavior and social dynamics. His storytelling feels uncomfortable in a very intentional and thought-provoking way.

That’s really interesting — Frank Capra’s influence on character-driven, emotionally grounded storytelling is still powerful even today. “Capraesque” is such a strong compliment, especially when it leads to a project actually getting made.

I am image-driven, so Fellini and Visconti still live in my head, alongside more recent additions like Christos Massalas.

Geoffroy Faugerolas Interesting perspectiveI agree that favorite directors often reflect how we see storytelling.

For me, I really connect with Celine Song. Her work feels very intimate and emotionally precise, and I’m drawn to how she explores relationships and human connection in such a subtle, honest way.

I think it says a lot about the kind of stories I want to tell more grounded, character-driven, and emotionally real.

I’m drawn to directors who explore power, crime, and human psychology. Filmmakers like Martin Scorsese and Anurag Kashyap have strongly influenced my storytelling style, especially in portraying morally complex characters and underworld narratives.

Interesting perspective. I’m more drawn to directors who explore crime, power, and human psychology. Filmmakers like Martin Scorsese and Anurag Kashyap have influenced me a lot in portraying morally complex characters and underworld narratives. I’m especially interested in how characters evolve under pressure and extreme situations.

If I have to pick one I'm going Spielberg. As a child of the 80s the magic, the escapism, hit me hard. I think Indiana Jones probably influenced me studying archaeology(!), Jaws is amazing as a film in it's own right, not just a shark movie, and I still cry every time I watch E.T. His films were formative for me and inspired a love of storytelling and world building. I think when someone's work is at the core of why you love films it's quite hard to top - and if that makes me a dreamer then I'm down with that!

That makes complete sense — Steven Spielberg has that rare ability to create stories that stay with you for life. Films like E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial and Jaws aren’t just entertainment, they really shape how we see storytelling and emotion. That kind of impact is hard to top.

I'd have to go with Scorsese, Kurosawa, Wilder, and Lumet. All incredibly versatile filmmakers who navigate dynamic settings, volatile character relationships, stinging (yet often hilarious) dialogue, and intentional tonal/narrative whiplash with such effortlessness that their talent for directing feels like a direct extension of who they are--not only as storytellers, but as perceptive human beings whose singular points of view have cemented their legacies as our most introspective examiners of the human condition.

Being a James Bond fan, I say John Glen. They were never boring and always great to watch again!

That’s a great pick — John Glen really kept the James Bond films engaging and consistent. There’s something about that classic blend of action, style, and pacing that still holds up even today.

That’s a powerful lineup — Martin Scorsese, Akira Kurosawa, Billy Wilder, and Sidney Lumet all share that deep understanding of human behavior. I really connect with how they balance character depth with strong narrative tension — it’s something I try to bring into my own storytelling as well.

Geoffroy Faugerolas I’d say Steven Spielberg has had a huge influence on my journey. Jordan Peele feels like he’s just getting started, and Tarantino’s action is always a fun ride. For my own style, I’ve been leaning more toward Guillermo del Toro since his dark fantasy sensibilities line up closely with what I’m drawn to.

Geoffroy Faugerolas Interesting take I agree that the directors we connect with often reflect something deeper in how we see stories.

For me, it’s Celine Song. I’m really drawn to how she handles emotion in such a subtle and honest way, especially around relationships and timing. It feels very real and personal without being overly dramatic.

I think it says a lot about the kind of stories I’m naturally drawn to more introspective and character-driven.

That’s a great blend — Steven Spielberg for emotion, Jordan Peele for layered storytelling, and Quentin Tarantino for style and energy. Guillermo del Toro’s dark fantasy really stands out — that mix of beauty and darkness creates something very unique.

Interesting perspective. I tend to connect more with filmmakers who explore crime, power dynamics, and human psychology. Directors like Martin Scorsese and Anurag Kashyap have influenced me for their ability to portray morally complex characters and grounded, intense storytelling. I’m especially drawn to stories where characters evolve under pressure and extreme circumstances.

Tarentino, Paolo Sorrentino, Cedric Klapisch, Alex de la Iglesia, Rodrigo Sorogoyen…

For me, my top choices would be Andrei Tarkovsky, David Lynch, and Michelangelo Antonioni - individuals who created works that could only have been made cinematically and no other way.

Tarkovsky never made a bad movie in his entire life, Lynch used dream logic to such heightened extents, and Antonioni knew how to use silence and space to create evocative mood and atmosphere in a very subtle, enigmatic way. Each one was moving to me in their own way.

Additional choices would be Roy Andersson with his Living trilogy, Orson Welles of course, early Alain Resnais and Fellini, Hayao Miyazaki, Yuri Norstein, and the Quay Brothers.

That’s a powerful list — Andrei Tarkovsky, David Lynch, and Michelangelo Antonioni all approach storytelling in such a cinematic and philosophical way. I really appreciate how they use silence, atmosphere, and visual language to convey meaning beyond dialogue — it creates a completely immersive experience.

Sachin Yadav. At this point, I am starting to think you never sleep. your activity is impressive.

Tobe Hooper and John Landis, very underrated but helped produce the cinema empire

@Geoffroy Faugerolas My favorite directors are Stan Lee for his ability to create engaging universes, Steven Spielberg for his sense of wonder and character focus, and the Duffer Brothers for their unique way of intertwining mystery and group dynamics, as seen in Stranger Things.

Haha, I try to stay active — storytelling never really switches off. Appreciate you noticing!

Grace, that’s a great mix of influences — Stan Lee for world-building, Steven Spielberg for emotional storytelling, and Duffer Brothers for ensemble dynamics. It’s interesting how these different strengths come together to shape engaging narratives.

Geoffroy Faugerolas I’m enthralled by M. Night Shyamalan’s mastery of mood over noise. His atmosphere, deliberate pace, haunting stillness, subtle eeriness, and ability to hold mystery until every moment feels charged. Goosebumps.

Amy, that’s a great way to describe M. Night Shyamalan — his control over mood and silence really makes every scene feel intentional. The way he builds tension without relying on noise is something that still stands out in storytelling today.

If I have to pick just one, I would pick Mel Brooks.

Thanks, Geoffroy Faugerolas. Being from Oakland, I'd have to say, Ryan Coogler. Viewing his work I feel we have similar insights, motivations and goals.

Nolan for me. I’m drawn to high-concept stories, layered structure, and themes around time, memory, and identity.

Shaurya, same here — that mix of high-concept ideas with emotional and philosophical depth is what makes those stories stand out.

Themes like time, memory, and identity really stay with the audience when they’re layered into the narrative structure. It’s always interesting to see how those concepts are translated into character journeys.

Scorsese :) Defined the gangster genre, gave us so many gritty, iconic films, and is the king of visuals and atmosphere. Or tarantino. Kill bill is my favorite, sooo iconic. loveee

John Snell Coogler doesn't get mentioned enough but wait 10-15 years, especially after the X-files reboot, and he'll be in the hall of fame. He should have won this year, frankly. One of the rare commercial and auteur-driven writer/directors I'm excited about these days.

Absolutely agree—Ryan Coogler strikes a rare balance between commercial appeal and strong authorial voice. Directors who can operate at both levels tend to have lasting impact. It’ll be interesting to see how his work evolves over the next decade.

I have two favorite directors: Christopher Nolan and Bong Joon-ho. They represent two different but complementary instincts in my approach to storytelling.

Nolan, especially in Inception, inspires me through structure and conceptual depth. I’m drawn to how he builds complex narrative systems around ideas like time, perception, and reality, while still grounding everything in emotional stakes. I actually wrote my university research paper on Inception, which deepened my interest in how precise narrative architecture can still feel human and emotionally driven.

Bong Joon-ho, particularly in Parasite, inspires me in a different way. His work is more instinctive, socially sharp, and emotionally fluid. I admire how he moves between tones dark humor, tension, tragedy while exposing class dynamics and human behavior without ever feeling forced or didactic.

For me, these two directors reflect a balance I’m constantly interested in: control and chaos, concept and instinct, structure and lived truth.

My favorites are Bennett Miller and Derek Cianfrance. I love their style of dramatic, character-driven cinema and subtle neo-noir elements. In particular, Foxcatcher by Miller is one of my all time favorites. I’m also a big fan of I Know This Much is True by Cianfrance, but his most notable hits spread across a multitude of lanes and subgenres. The combination of intense, subtly dark subject matter and complex characters always draws me in. Even Cianfrance’s recent and more light-hearted hit Roofman resonated with me for its heartfelt depiction of a sympathetic yet morally compromised character. These are the stories that continue to inspire me in my everyday life and career.

Roxane Yoman Glad you mentioned Bong Joon-ho. So cinematic. So symbolic. His work is truly universal because it touches on themes that are tied to the human experience.

Geoffroy Faugerola

C. Nolan, D. Fincher, and Osgood Perkins.

It was incredibly hard to narrow it down to those three, because different directors hit different parts of my brain for different reasons. But those three say the most about how I think and how I write.

Nolan speaks to the part of me that needs structure, architecture, and emotional logic.

Fincher speaks to the part of me that obsesses over precision, psychology, and control.

Perkins speaks to the part of me that loves quiet dread, negative space, and the horror of implication.

If the idea is that our favorite directors reflect something about our inner wiring, then those three probably map my creative DNA better than anyone else.

That’s a really insightful way to look at filmmaking. I think it’s interesting how different directors shape the way we think and write. It shows how deeply cinema can influence storytelling style.

Absolutely — I think what’s fascinating is how certain directors don’t just influence style, but the way we perceive character psychology and structure. That impact stays with you as a writer.”

Luc Besson (his earlier stuff at least), Kurosawa (forever), Michael Mann (forever), Emerald Fennell (current work)...

Interesting mix — especially Kurosawa and Michael Mann.

Both have a very strong sense of atmosphere and character psychology, but express it in completely different ways. Mann’s precision and realism, compared to Kurosawa’s more philosophical and visual storytelling, create a fascinating contrast.

That balance between control and emotional depth is something I find very compelling in storytelling.

Paul Greengrass....Geroge Roy Hill

Nice choices — especially Paul Greengrass.

I like how his films carry a sense of realism and urgency, almost like you’re inside the moment with the characters. It adds a strong immersive quality to the storytelling.

Hmmn, no, you contact the director that fits the project, that's all.

That’s a very grounded way to look at it.

Matching the director to the project definitely shapes how the story translates on screen. At the same time, it’s interesting how certain directors bring a distinct perspective that can elevate material in unexpected ways.

That balance between the right fit and creative interpretation is what makes collaboration so important.

I think having a favourite director means you want to either work with them sometimes or even imitate their way of doing work

Sachin, "it’s interesting how certain directors bring a distinct perspective that can elevate material in unexpected ways." I agree, it is risky but if it works, it works!!, if not, probably total disaster! Personally I like to gamble. Always try to combine statistic logic with a gut feeling, if that makes any sence, haha

That makes complete sense — I think that balance between instinct and logic is where most of the real decisions happen.

Too much structure can make things predictable, and too much instinct can make it chaotic. But when those two align, that’s usually where something really compelling comes out.

And yes, when it works, it really works — when it doesn’t… it’s part of the process.

Well said, Sachin!!

Sachin, I have to ask — do you ever read a thread without immediately turning it into your own commentary track?

Geoffroy Faugerolas A hard question when there's an absolute plethora of awesome choices. Scoring the right director that fits the project is key. Love Eastwood, Cohen brothers Scorsese and Polanski,

I think I can say Francis Ford Coppola and Martin Scorsese. I like that they stay on the realistic side of cinema and the strong tone in their films. I like the cinematic language they use while telling their stories. I especially admire Sir Scorsese’s approach to cinema.

I am a huge fan of Akira Kurosawa and of course Martin Scorsese. Paul Greengrass is quite badass as well for action.

Haha, fair point.

I try to engage when something genuinely interests me — sometimes that just happens to be quite often in discussions like this. Always good to see different perspectives though.

Great lineup — especially Eastwood and Scorsese.

I like how both bring a strong sense of character and moral complexity, even in very different styles. And yes, finding the right director for the material really shapes how far a story can go.

That alignment between vision and story is everything.

Great choices — Coppola and Scorsese have such a strong command over tone and realism.

I also like how their films feel grounded, yet the storytelling still carries a powerful cinematic presence. That balance is not easy to achieve.

Great picks — Kurosawa and Scorsese both have such a strong command over character and narrative depth.

And Greengrass really brings a different kind of intensity and realism to action — it almost feels immediate and immersive. That contrast between styles is fascinating.

Sergio Leone. :)

Interesting pick — I like how their work blends strong visual identity with character-driven storytelling.

It creates a style that feels distinct, but still emotionally grounded.

Hi Sachin Yadav! I just googled you and found a Sachin Yadav on IMdB who has directed a few films and TV-series. Such as "Kondan" and "Half Chaddi." Is that you? Or is Sachin Yadav a common name in India? If it's you, which director were you inspired by when directing "Kondan?"

Hi Susanne,

Thanks for taking the time to look that up — I appreciate it.

That’s actually a different Sachin Yadav. It’s quite a common name here, so there are a few of us in the industry. I’m currently focused on developing my own projects, mainly in the crime and psychological storytelling space.

That said, I’m strongly influenced by directors who explore character depth and internal conflict through their work.

Great question though — I can see how that could be confusing.

Hi Sachin! I see. Psychological storytelling is very interesting. Have you watched the old movie "Spellbound" by Alfred Hitchcock with Ingrid Bergman? It's very old but I was very inspired by the short Salvador Dali sequence in the film. Salvador Dali and Alfred Hitchcock! What a great team!

Hi Susanne,

Yes, I’ve seen Spellbound — that dream sequence is incredibly striking. The surreal imagery and symbolic design create such a unique psychological atmosphere.

It’s fascinating how Hitchcock used Dali’s visual language to externalize the inner mind — it makes the psychological tension feel almost tangible rather than just implied.

That kind of approach really stays with you. I’m very interested in exploring similar layers of internal conflict in a more grounded, character-driven way in my own work.

Great reference — it’s a perfect example of how visual storytelling can elevate psychological narratives.

Hi Susanne,

That sounds really intriguing — especially the blend of psychological elements with symbolism and the use of a dream sequence. The idea of visualizing inner conflict through that kind of imagery is very compelling.

I’d definitely be interested in watching Ghostfree — please feel free to share the link.

And no worries at all, I think it actually fits the discussion well, especially when talking about how directors influence our own work.

Looking forward to seeing it.

I taught a class in film production to a group of students all of whom wanted to work in the industry. I kept making references to major figures in film directing, only to receive a lot of blank stares. I finally asked my students: how many had seen a Hitchcock film? Not one. So I changed the lesson plan for one whole three-hour class and played nothing but clips from Hitch films - from the early B&W in England to the lavish later films, pointing out how he managed to so skillfully tell the story with a camera - sometimes just letting it unfold in a wide shot and directing your eye to the action, the way great master painters do. I asked them to watch films by Fred Zinnemann (my fav), David Lean, Sydney Pollack... far from out of date, they are not only deeply engaging, there is a lot to be learned from their skill.

That’s such a great approach — sometimes we forget how much storytelling can be achieved purely through visual language.

What I find fascinating about filmmakers like Alfred Hitchcock is how they create tension and emotion without relying heavily on dialogue — the camera itself becomes the narrator.

I think revisiting directors like David Lean or Sydney Pollack is incredibly valuable, especially today when pacing and spectacle often overshadow subtle storytelling. There’s a lot to learn from how they build atmosphere and guide the audience’s attention so deliberately.

It really reinforces how powerful visual storytelling can be when it’s done

Deborah Dennison That's sad to hear, frankly. But kudos to you for education and empowering the next generation of storytellers and creators.

Geoffroy, I like that perspective — especially the idea that the connection is psychological rather than stylistic.

I tend to gravitate toward directors who create tension through control and restraint rather than excess. Denis Villeneuve and David Fincher are strong examples of that — the way they manage information and pacing builds a kind of quiet pressure that lingers.

That approach resonates with how I’m shaping my own thriller work — focusing less on what’s shown, and more on what’s withheld.

I feel like that resonates. David Fincher is for sure mine, with Seven probably being my all-time favorite. I think it makes sense.

Aaron Blea David Fincher is definitely in my top 3. Greatest camera moves.

I really connect with that — the idea of building tension through what’s withheld can be far more powerful than what’s shown.

Geoffroy Faugerolas Interesting subject. Kubrick works mixes absurdity, realism, and strong philosophical aspect in each movie, i think that what makes his movie stays with audiences. Right now, personally I think Michael Mann is often overlooked in mainstream film discourse, even though his directorial voice is remarkably precise. The way he approach his character and the way he defines individuals through professionalism, discipline, and personal codes instead of moral conflict or backstory. Im currently trying to study his style and his character. I love how Mann’s focus is not on where they come from, but on how they operate, and what happens when their code breaks.

His distinction lies in turning competence into character. In Mann’s films, professionalism isn’t a trait, It's a psychology. Mann characters are simple, a robber, an asassin, a cop, a thief, an LAPD officer or a detective, but in each of everyone of those people we see how they think, how they operate, and what happens if they work underpressure, plus the way he prioritize realism more than anything makes everyhting seems real. That what's distinguish him from other directors.

Great breakdown — especially the idea that competence itself becomes character in Michael Mann’s work.

What I find interesting is how that professionalism creates identity rather than just supporting it. The characters aren’t defined by backstory, but by how precisely they operate in the present moment. And when that system breaks, it reveals everything beneath the surface.

In contrast, Kubrick often places characters in controlled environments where the system exposes their flaws over time. Mann feels more immediate — pressure reveals character in real time.

Really interesting perspective, especially if you’re studying his style.

I love movies by all these directors - I contain multitudes. But curiously, only Nolan makes movies I recognize as great as I'm watching them but never ever feel the need to re-watch them. Ever. (Except the Batman movies.)

Interesting take.

I feel Nolan’s films are so driven by structure and concept that the first watch delivers the full impact — almost like solving a puzzle. But for some viewers, that can make rewatching less about discovery and more about revisiting something already understood.

Whereas other directors lean more on atmosphere or emotion, which tends to pull you back again and again.

Curious how others see that balance.