I've been on a small Lean kick lately, as I just picked up Bridge on the River Kwai. Lawrence of Arabia remains one of my favorite films of all time. He is the master of the epic, and despite having 2 of the AFI top 12 of all time, I find him to be unrated in filmmaking annals. He's certainly not the household name Spielberg, Lucas, or as well remembered in the film world as John Ford, Anthony Mann, Sergio Leone or Billy Wilder. Granted he didn't have the volume of films the others had, but the afformentioned and Doctor Chivago are some pretty powerful specatcles.

But his credit is not the issue. I was struck watching Kwai as to how this piece would have been handled today? Do you think Lean would have relied on the digitial and after effects world to get his images across? Or would have maintained his remarkable gift for capturing spectacle with nothing more than a camera, lenses and few filters? On the one hand, that pallet wasn't availble to Lean, but at the same time, he seemed to really value the art of capturing images(he never really seemed to delve into matte photography). Would he have embraced technology or would he have kept with the old school?

And is anything near the level of Lawrence of Arabia possible today for that matter? I think they say on the documentary on the disc that it would have been a 300 million dollar budget to get that made.

CGI separates the good directors from the great directors. If he had lived today I like to think he would still make the film look realistic like the way it was.

The docs on the LOA disc and the BOTRK discs are awesome. Lean could not get a movie made in the current climate. No teen starlet? Literary source material? No hip-hop soundtrack? No Burger King tie-ins? You get the idea.

I would like to think that if he had access to CGI he would not have used it. I mean,

I agree with you on your first points, but that was the very shot that prompted this post. I mean, issue A is, there was no other way to really do that shot. And as we saw in the Wild Bunch there was no way to convincing replicate those stunts then. Would SAG even allow such mayhem now? But Issue B, do directors today LIKE CGI, or use it as a cost cutting measure. You'd think Star Wars would have an unlimted budget, but Lucas chooses to shoot it to look like a video game and it looks terrible. But I only come here with questions and no answers. Intresting to think how he'd work. But I do agree with on the teen starlet angle. You just know romance would have been shoe-horned into Kwai and LOA.

David Lean is lesser known than Anthony Mann? Umm....

If you're in film school, maybe.

If you're living in 1955, maybe.

Otherwise, I think you're gonna get a lot more correct responses to "Who directed Lawrence of Arabia, Dr. Zhivago, and Bridge on the River Kwai?" than to "Who directed Winchester 73, the Naked Spur, and El Cid?"

You may have a point, I did base my experience on film school actually. But I don't think Lean's anywhere near as well known as he should be.

One of my favorite scenes in cecil b. demented is a character shooting a book about david lean's films.

Not that I hate his films, mind you. I just thought that was funny.
I just prefer smaller films. Especially ones that can fit in my back pocket as the girl I love and I lean in for a kiss before she boards a train, never to see her again as our love is forbidden.

I love David Lean, and I still thought that was funny too, lol. On the commentary John Waters says he DOES hate David Lean films and that's why he did that joke, obviously.

You could say that about a lot of people. Relatively speaking, David Lean is pretty well known. Now, should as many people know about him as Wes Anderson, Steven Spielberg,, or David Fincher? Sure. But the world's an unfair place. I think Lean's place in the pantheon is fairly secure.

I love David Lean. If he was alive today, I don't know what he'll do. He probably wouldn't be given the same powers or freedom as he was allowed to do. Or maybe he would. I dunno. I just think his movies rock! And I wish he made more! I've only seen Lawrence, Kwai and A Passage to India though.

and it's hard to do large crowd scenes nowadays.

Great post/question! I was wondering this the other day myself.

I think you answered the question when you said "it would be 300 mil today." Unfortunately, I think he would be forced to use CGI to stay in budget.

But that brings up another question...a "fresh out of school" Lean alive today, or the actual Lean, somehow able to make films today AFTER doing LOA, Dr. Z, and Bridge? I think the unknown Lean uses CGI. The experienced Lean may just be able to get a film approved. Although, if he remains to his 'style' of films, he may not reach Titanic/Spiderman box office.

Hmm...this one'll be stuck in my head for a while.. I really don't know.

I would also like to chime in and say that most people would probably know who David Lean is over some of his contemporaries. If you were to ask someone, "Who directed Lawrence of Arabia and who directed Patton," they would have a better chance of naming David Lean than Franklin J. Schaffner.

And that may be why I love him so much. It makes today's blockbusters seem pretty lame, imo.