Research in Progress: October 2, 2021
Directors: Careers–Output (Prolific)
In analyzing directorial careers, it’s impossible to conduct a film-by-film evaluation of each director’s output for several reasons.
First, not all films are of equal interest or of equal worth.
Second, if the filmmakers’ output is large, it’s impossible to do each film justice.
My study concentrates on the critical evaluation of the films themselves, rather than on interviews with the directors.
Interviews are useful when one writes a biography, as they shed light attention on the creators of the work, rather than on the creation itself.
Setting priorities
Studies should first focus on the films themselves as art works and commercial products, then their creators (directors and others), then the audience, and finally the film critics, who mediate between the work and its public.
Longevity
Directors with Lengthy Careers and Good Work Up to the End:
Bergman, Ingmar (Fanny and Alexander, 1983; age 65)
Bunuel
Cukor
Ford, John
Hawks, Howard
Hitchcock
Kurosawa
Ophuls, Max
Ophuls made his masterpieces at the end of his career: La Ronde, Le Plaisir, The Earrings of Madame De..
Tarkovsky
Prolific directors of studio era, large bodies of work:
George Cukor
Michael Curtiz
John Ford
Henry Hathaway
Howard Hawks
Alfred Hitchcock
Mervyn LeRoy
King Vidor
Raoul Walsh
William Wellman
Indie Directors
Soderbergh
Foreign Directors (Prolific)
Fassbinder
Godard
Thus, measured in terms of quantity of output, Peckinpah might appear to fall outside the circle of major American directors
Part of what gives Ford and Hawks their measure and status is, in fact, a measure of quantity, a large number of accomplished films.