Michael Mann

All-Time: Stanley Kubrick
Current: Wong Kar-Wai

All-time: Hitchcock
Current: Michael Mann

all time: Ingmar Bergman
current: Claire Denis

I think Steven Spielberg is an unparalleled genius. I own every film of his on DVD and eagerly await THE TWILIGHT ZONE MOVIE's debut so I can get the segment "Kick the Can". Stanley Kubrick runs an insanely close second.

for a while i was just as obsessive about collecting everything Martin Scorsese had done. all his documentaries, shorts, commercials, music videos and even the episode of Amazing Stories he did "mirror, mirror".

David Lynch

I reiterate, how is it easier on anybody to make people constantly read through a lengthy thread seeking out updates, as opposed to just creating a new thread for people to post in? Many threads here get multiple versions ("Post pictures of your collection and home theater: Part 7") because the other ones are either too long or are ever-changing. These types of threads are no different.

In your ideal scenario, Joe Schmoe will go back to the thread from 2001 and update his post on page six, claiming that his favorite director is no longer Quentin Tarantino, but is now instead Frank Rodriguez. Then, anybody who wanted to see that post would have to search through all 11 (or however many) pages, and happen to run across Joe Schmoe's update. Any new person wanting to know who the favorite directors of the current forum members are (and perhaps wanting to stir up some discussion about the topic), would be forced to search through pages of responses from people who don't even post here anymore.

How resurrecting an old thread, as opposed to just starting a new one, promotes community interaction, discussion, or in any way betters the forums is beyond me. Perhaps you can explain it to me? Why is it better for the forum as a whole?

-JP

One of those wacky coen brothers.

Really?

Cool. You know she was an AD for Wings of Desire.

haha well well, you guys have certainly given me a name or two to check out for sure, but i definitely will... i guess im the only gondry fan here, but i'm pretty excited to see his latest film at this year's resfest, among other works... can't wait! anyone been to resfest before?

There are many directors with consistent track records of great films I not only enjoy but make me love cinema as an artform. But, in the interest of time and space, I will list ten in no particular order:

- Steven Spielberg
- Steven Soderbergh
- Stanley Kubrick
- Joel & Ethan Coen
- Alfred Hitchcock
- David Mamet
- Akira Kurasawa
- Francois Truffaut
- Quentin Tarantino
- Howard Hawks

Honorable Mention - Tony Scott
Honorable Mention - Mel Brooks

EDIT: Wow, I had a hard time narrowing that down to 10. I just started listing and before I knew it, I had around 20. When I hit 12, I pretty much hit a wall, hence the honorable mentions.

Mine in no particular order:

Steven Spielberg
Stanley Kubrick
Martin Scorsese
Ridley Scott
Sir Alfred Hitchcock
Orson Welles
John Ford
Howard Hawks
David Lean
Michael Mann
James Cameron
Francis Ford Coppola
Norman Jewison
Billy Wilder
Sam Peckinpah
Brian DePalma
William Friedkin
Robert Zemeckis
Oliver Stone
Sidney Lumet
Sergio Leone

David Lynch

David Cronenberg

Clint Eastwood
Luc Besson
Michael Mann
Quentin Tarantino
Tim Burton

Kubrick and Spielberg

In no paarticular order:

Martin Scorsese
Tony Scott
Tim Burton
Terry Gilliam
Coen Brothers

Luc Besson

No order:

Really big favs:
Martin Scorsese
John Carpenter
David Fincher

Honorable Mention:
Dario Aregnto
Hitchcock
Q Tarantino
Davis Cronenberg

Dislikes:
M. night Shalamyan
Peter Jackson

Been making me mad lately:
Steven Speilberg
Wes Craven
Sam Raimi

Curious to see more from:
Mary Harron
Patty Jenkins
Tod Browning
Takasha Miike

David Lynch - hands down, he should be everyone's favorite!

Joe Shmoe should make a new post. Clicking on the square icon with an arrow in it to the left of thread will take you directly to it. Newcomers (and regulars) can then chose to read through the old thread, if they're interested. Discussion will continue from the new post in any case. No wading through unless you want to. It happens a lot here and I see no problem with it.

Old threads get resurrected here all the time. I have no problem with it and generally think it's a good idea. How does it benefit the forum? Many regulars find it annoying when the same topics come up every few weeks or months. I agree with you, however, that when it's been nearly a year or more it's no big deal to start a new thread. However, I don't make policy here and I think the current one works very well.

Thanks kitkat . . . I was getting tired of typing on this topic.

In the end, one person doing a search and adding to an old thread is better than one person starting a new thread and each person who wants to see what they posted in the old thread having to do their own search to find it.

Plus, kinda like what kitkat said . . . just because you don't like a policy, doesn't mean you don't have to follow it. If you don't like it, take it up with the people in charge, not the people following the policy.

From the "Release Updates, Frequent Topics, Newcomer Help" thread:

Underline added for emphasis, but the bolding was already there.



Edit: Also from that thread . . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimRochester

There are no stupid questions, merely questions asked numerous times.

no love for william wyler of capra...

sticking with Hitch...

enjoy wong kar wai thoroughly

I still haven't seen anybody explain how resurrecting a year-old, opinion-based thread benefits the forum anymore than starting a new one. The closest anybody came was when kitkat noted; "How does it benefit the forum? Many regulars find it annoying when the same topics come up every few weeks or months." Naturally, I'd find that annoying too, but that's not the issue we're discussing. What I'm asking is how does starting a new thread, (as opposed to resurrecting one that's one to two years old), benefit the forum in any way? After all, that is what spurred the discussion in the first place, the fact that the guy started a new discussion instead of resurrecting a year-old thread.

That's all I'm saying. And I actually agree with you, I don't think the current policy is failing, per se...I just don't understand the motivation behind making an issue out of the fact that somebody started a new thread instead of resurrecting a year-old one. The new thread isn't hurting anybody, and what's wrong with revisiting a discussion that's already been had?

-JP

Billy Wilder. Period.