The Nobel Prize is an award bestowed to people who distinguished themselves in Literature, Chemistry, Physics, Physiology or Medicine, and Peace. Based on nominations by the IMDb Poll Board, which of these living directors would you give a Nobel Prize for Film?
List: https://www.imdb.com/list/ls042274155/
Poll: https://www.imdb.com/poll/W96o1Vf1Ols/
List: https://www.imdb.com/list/ls042274155/
Poll: https://www.imdb.com/poll/W96o1Vf1Ols/
Posted 1 year ago
Peter, Champion
Is that Steven Spielberg?
Jessica, Champion
I didn't recognize him at first either. :)
I figured that would get some of you speculating.
I saw that pic and could not resist.
He almost looks like Norman Bates! LOL
But yes it is Steven Spielberg
About a quarter of his works combined remind us that "Peace" Is a Far Better Choice than War!
I saw that pic and could not resist.
He almost looks like Norman Bates! LOL
But yes it is Steven Spielberg
About a quarter of his works combined remind us that "Peace" Is a Far Better Choice than War!
Norman Bates, yeah. I also thought of Stanley Kubrick
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000040/mediaviewer/rm742955008
but actually, he looks like Luis Buñuel.
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000320/mediaviewer/rm385677312
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000040/mediaviewer/rm742955008
but actually, he looks like Luis Buñuel.
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000320/mediaviewer/rm385677312
rubyfruit76, Champion
Cool photo.
No matter what angle you look at him from he is looking at you.
The Steva Lisa
The Steva Lisa
My dark horse candidate,Brian De Palma.
I really like his style and technique that give his films a unique look and feel.
2000 Mission to Mars
1998 Snake Eyes
1996 Mission: Impossible
1993 Carlito's Way
1989 Casualties of War (as Brian DePalma)
1987 The Untouchables
1981 Blow Out
1976 Carrie
I really like his style and technique that give his films a unique look and feel.
2000 Mission to Mars
1998 Snake Eyes
1996 Mission: Impossible
1993 Carlito's Way
1989 Casualties of War (as Brian DePalma)
1987 The Untouchables
1981 Blow Out
1976 Carrie
Thanks guys. A technical question: do links to user profiles require a different format, like those to people?
Yes. Use the same format as the link back to the get sat page in a poll.
Suggested by Ed Jones (XLIX), [link=https://www.imdb.com/user/ur28003732/?ref_=nb_usr_prof_0]
please visit his profile page here[/link]
(Edited)
Thank you!
OK :)
Jessica, Champion
Will think about my nomination.
P.S. Now I'm making GIFS and I can't get enough! (Yes, I made this one)
P.S. Now I'm making GIFS and I can't get enough! (Yes, I made this one)
(Edited)
I nominate Andrew Adamson; his work on Narnia alone is beyond compare. ;)
NIA You're missing the point. "The Nobel Prize"!!!!!!!!!! Not a Golden Globe.
The film of a living director should inspire people on an epic scale worldwide to ponder a thought on Peace or Literature, Chemistry, Physics, Physiology and Medicine.
The film of a living director should inspire people on an epic scale worldwide to ponder a thought on Peace or Literature, Chemistry, Physics, Physiology and Medicine.
John McTiernan is an example you would go for.
He made 'Medicine Man'.
His examples of fun films:
'Last Action Hero'.... 'Die Hard'.......'Predator'
But his best one is the often ignored 'Medicine Man'.
That is a good example of an inspiring film.
He made 'Medicine Man'.
His examples of fun films:
'Last Action Hero'.... 'Die Hard'.......'Predator'
But his best one is the often ignored 'Medicine Man'.
That is a good example of an inspiring film.
(Edited)
Yes, I know - to me, Narnia is peace, literature, and inspiring. :)
But John McTiernan is good, too. :)
But John McTiernan is good, too. :)
Each choice will be respected here :). Andrew Adamson added.
Ed, I see where you're coming from but don't underestimate fun genre movies. Buster Keaton used to be a funny slapstick comedian for the masses, and now he's also a cultural heritage :).
Ed, I see where you're coming from but don't underestimate fun genre movies. Buster Keaton used to be a funny slapstick comedian for the masses, and now he's also a cultural heritage :).
As is Charlie Chaplin. They both would get my vote for a Nobel.
Thanks, albstein. :)
rubyfruit76, Champion
Good idea, You can consider Béla Tarr and Martín scorsese
Thank you. As all the choices come from IMDb users (one suggestion) each, you may nominate one :)
I understand, so I nominate only Bela Tarr
Added :)
There are many great directors whom I want to include in this list and it is a tough choice to think about only one them but I will nominate Anurag Kashyap.
(Someone who is trying to put quality content infront of Indian Audience)
(Someone who is trying to put quality content infront of Indian Audience)
(Edited)
Gangs of Wasseypur is cool :)
FYC, just a thought. How about two-three sentences about why you are making this proposition and why there should be a Nobel prize for film. I can only assume your reasoning. But, if it were me, I would make these points.
1) Nobel concerned over his legacy, provided in his will four five prizes in world changing endeavors:Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Literature, and Peace.
2) Movies have displaced Literature, in influence and popularity since Nobel deaths in1896.
3) Therefore his award for a literary work "in an ideal direction" should be theoretically expanded to include living director's "bodies of work" that have changed the world.
If the award existed prior to today, someone like Stanley Kramer would have gotten it for his "message film" contributions that tackled a number of social problem through film.
Wikepedia notes
The first three of these prizes are awarded for eminence in physical science, in chemistry and in medical science or physiology; the fourth is for literary work "in an ideal direction" and the fifth prize is to be given to the person or society that renders the greatest service to the cause of international fraternity, in the suppression or reduction of standing armies, or in the establishment or furtherance of peace congresses.[14]
The formulation for the literary prize being given for a work "in an ideal direction" (i idealisk riktning in Swedish), is cryptic and has caused much confusion. For many years, the Swedish Academy interpreted "ideal" as "idealistic" (idealistisk) and used it as a reason not to give the prize to important but less romantic authors, such as Henrik Ibsen and Leo Tolstoy. This interpretation has since been revised, and the prize has been awarded to, for example, Dario Fo and José Saramago, who do not belong to the camp of literary idealism.
Director Steven Spielberg described Stanley Kramer as an "incredibly talented visionary", and "one of our great filmmakers, not just for the art and passion he put on screen, but for the impact he has made on the conscience of the world.
1) Nobel concerned over his legacy, provided in his will four five prizes in world changing endeavors:Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Literature, and Peace.
2) Movies have displaced Literature, in influence and popularity since Nobel deaths in1896.
3) Therefore his award for a literary work "in an ideal direction" should be theoretically expanded to include living director's "bodies of work" that have changed the world.
If the award existed prior to today, someone like Stanley Kramer would have gotten it for his "message film" contributions that tackled a number of social problem through film.
Wikepedia notes
The first three of these prizes are awarded for eminence in physical science, in chemistry and in medical science or physiology; the fourth is for literary work "in an ideal direction" and the fifth prize is to be given to the person or society that renders the greatest service to the cause of international fraternity, in the suppression or reduction of standing armies, or in the establishment or furtherance of peace congresses.[14]
The formulation for the literary prize being given for a work "in an ideal direction" (i idealisk riktning in Swedish), is cryptic and has caused much confusion. For many years, the Swedish Academy interpreted "ideal" as "idealistic" (idealistisk) and used it as a reason not to give the prize to important but less romantic authors, such as Henrik Ibsen and Leo Tolstoy. This interpretation has since been revised, and the prize has been awarded to, for example, Dario Fo and José Saramago, who do not belong to the camp of literary idealism.
Director Steven Spielberg described Stanley Kramer as an "incredibly talented visionary", and "one of our great filmmakers, not just for the art and passion he put on screen, but for the impact he has made on the conscience of the world.
Thank you for your input, although after some consideration I prefer to leave the poll as it is. The original idealism does not seem to matter anymore (in fact, many of the literature laureates that come to mind were probably not idealists) and has apparently not been succeeded by another direction, and just as you say we do not know what Nobel meant by "ideal". I would like users to go by their own interpretation of what is "Nobel worthy".
Thanks, I can understand the rationale. I would think that the Nobel committee could justify a literature prize to a screenwriter if they wanted to.
I'm 100% with you on that one, urbane. And you're right about Stanley Kramer who was the first to handle very hot topics for the time and made movies that were not qualitative but also relevant: The Defiant Ones, Inherit the Wind, Guess Who's Coming for Dinner, Judgment at Nuremberg, even his zany Mad, Mad, Mad World was a satirical comment on people's greed.
Even without a text, that's how I interpreted the idea of Nobel Prize for a director, a prize to be given by virtue of an accomplishment that goes beyond the limits of the cinematic excellence he or she reached. Miyazaki isn't in my Top 10 favorite directors but what he's done to raise awareness about environmental issues hasn't been equaled even by the most passionate ecologists, his Nausicaa alone should earn him that Nobel Prize if it existed. One director should also be rewarded if he or she inspired or influenced many film-makers or found new ways for film-making but even then, I think there should be enough consistency in his/her work to justify the nomination for a Nobel Prize, the director shouldn't just be a model.
For instance, I could nominate Spike Lee because he did a lot to raise the African-American voice seldom heard in movies, but I wouldn't nominate him just because he was one of the first major African-American directors to make a name for himself. Symbols are good, but it's the body of work that should be considered.
Even without a text, that's how I interpreted the idea of Nobel Prize for a director, a prize to be given by virtue of an accomplishment that goes beyond the limits of the cinematic excellence he or she reached. Miyazaki isn't in my Top 10 favorite directors but what he's done to raise awareness about environmental issues hasn't been equaled even by the most passionate ecologists, his Nausicaa alone should earn him that Nobel Prize if it existed. One director should also be rewarded if he or she inspired or influenced many film-makers or found new ways for film-making but even then, I think there should be enough consistency in his/her work to justify the nomination for a Nobel Prize, the director shouldn't just be a model.
For instance, I could nominate Spike Lee because he did a lot to raise the African-American voice seldom heard in movies, but I wouldn't nominate him just because he was one of the first major African-American directors to make a name for himself. Symbols are good, but it's the body of work that should be considered.
Like novels, it is easy to use the medium for dual purposes: to entertain, as well as, for social change. More on topic, I would rather see Spike Lee get a Nobel for his films, contributions to the craft and use of film for social commentary than I would for George Lucas to get a Nobel for his films, contributions to the craft and technological advancements created by Lucasfilm subsidiaries. I can see a case for both though.
Well, maybe it all comes down to one simple question: should you award the one who became an inspiration for the craft which means to his peers or an inspiration to the public?
This is a tough nut to crack.
The nobel prize most similar to Film is Literature, of course. Among those that I'm somewhat familiar with, I'd say that Steinbeck and Hesse might fit the "ideal" kind, i.e. they inspire hope or argue for social change (although Hesse is never explicit in this and is more often pessimistic or mystic-spiritual). Then there's Hauptmann who does depict the plights of the lower classes but in a naturalist way, without a strong idealist appeal.
And then there are writers who are more of the opposite, they are bleak, cynical, pessimistic, inconclusive, or absurdist: Mann, Golding, Camus, Beckett, Grass, Jelinek.
And if we look at the reasons given by the committee, you will find ones like "master of the contemporary short story", "gives us fresh access to reality", and "that epicist of the female experience, who with scepticism, fire and visionary power has subjected a divided civilisation to scrutiny".
So again, I mighty appreciate the input from both of you, and what you said can serve as a guidance for others if they read it in the thread. But I find no objective and externally backed way to base the "ideal" criterion on.
The nobel prize most similar to Film is Literature, of course. Among those that I'm somewhat familiar with, I'd say that Steinbeck and Hesse might fit the "ideal" kind, i.e. they inspire hope or argue for social change (although Hesse is never explicit in this and is more often pessimistic or mystic-spiritual). Then there's Hauptmann who does depict the plights of the lower classes but in a naturalist way, without a strong idealist appeal.
And then there are writers who are more of the opposite, they are bleak, cynical, pessimistic, inconclusive, or absurdist: Mann, Golding, Camus, Beckett, Grass, Jelinek.
And if we look at the reasons given by the committee, you will find ones like "master of the contemporary short story", "gives us fresh access to reality", and "that epicist of the female experience, who with scepticism, fire and visionary power has subjected a divided civilisation to scrutiny".
So again, I mighty appreciate the input from both of you, and what you said can serve as a guidance for others if they read it in the thread. But I find no objective and externally backed way to base the "ideal" criterion on.
Well, when I talked about "achievement that goes beyond the limits of cinematic excellence" I didn't necessarily mean something that should be "inspirational" on a philosophical or social level, it can also be a work that set a template for many great artistic achievements, which is still about our human potential as creators. Let's not forget the MGM's slogan Ars Gratia Artis: Art for Art's sake. I guess directors like George Cukor, Vincente Minnelli or even Godard are as deserving as the others.
That makes sense. The way I see it the prize would go to someone who is not just competent on a technical level but who is really the main creative force of his movies.
Lol, I'm pretty sure one can make awful movies by still being the main creative force behind :) this is why the technical level is important but there should be a great artistic value within the the created product or something that can be considered inspiring... well, I just mean it should take more than being just a good director.
That's why I said "not just competent on a technical level", they need both :)
I guess I'm looking for a factor of "undeniability" that doesn't exist...
From that list I'd choose Spielberg, but overall I think some of my top directors aren't on that list so take that into consideration.
Although not necessarily specific to Directing, for film-making in general I'd probably choose Tarantino. (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000233/)
There are so many great artists out there it's hard to choose, but he's definitely at the top of my list. I could probably more easily provide a top 25 than picking just one, but for now, Quentin gets my vote. :)
Although not necessarily specific to Directing, for film-making in general I'd probably choose Tarantino. (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000233/)
There are so many great artists out there it's hard to choose, but he's definitely at the top of my list. I could probably more easily provide a top 25 than picking just one, but for now, Quentin gets my vote. :)
(Edited)
Added Tarantino :)
Do you have an IMDb account I can link to?
Do you have an IMDb account I can link to?
Never mind, found it :)
Thanks. I think this link should work: https://www.imdb.com/user/ur88150264/?ref_=nv_usr_prof_2
I'm relatively new around here so if I've formatted that link wrong let me know.
I'm relatively new around here so if I've formatted that link wrong let me know.
Haha, you beat me to it :P
Jessica, Champion
alb, could you please correct the link to my profile page? :)
Sorry! The link has been corrected :)
Almost forgot to include my own nomination!
'The pollmaker shall not forget himself'
-From the Chicken Soup for the IMDb Poll Board Member book. :)
-From the Chicken Soup for the IMDb Poll Board Member book. :)
Jessica, Champion
Dan Dassow, Champion
Added :)
Kathryn Bigelow... of the tea empire? :D
Tea empire?
Oh, maybe you don't have it in Germany... Bigelow is a popular tea company. https://www.bigelowtea.com/
(Edited)
Oh, okay. I actually didn't know about them. Guess our most popular tea companies are either local or British.
The only Bigelow I know of is Deuce :p
BTW, Richard, now that you know what RiffTrax is there's a podcast called 372 Pages We'll Never Get Back, where Mike Nelson and another employee from RiffTrax read through terrible, cheesy books. Whether or not you read along, it's really funny! Just thought you might like to know. :)
rubyfruit76, Champion
FYC:
Spike Lee
('Difficult decision to make between Lee and Claire Denis.)
Spike Lee
('Difficult decision to make between Lee and Claire Denis.)
Added :). I still (badly!) need to see my first Claire Denis movie.
Peter, Champion
I also thought of Denis as perhaps the leading female contender for such an award.
Albie, have you considered allowing an additional suggestion from each user?
Albie, have you considered allowing an additional suggestion from each user?
Good idea. I'll wait a day or two on it because if three other users suggest their favorites, two from each would be beyond the scope.
Nikolay Yeriomin (Mykola Yeromin), Champion
albstein, I've been interested in Claire Denis for way over a year now and I'm still yet to see Beau travail (1999), in which I'm particularly interested. Hope to do that this year.
rubyfruit76, Champion
I'd also suggest '35 Shots of Rum.' : )
Claire Denis added for you :)
rubyfruit76, Champion
Thanks, alb!
ANNOUNCEMENT
All those who suggested a director can now add another nomination.
All those who suggested a director can now add another nomination.
Alfred Hitchcock.
Good choice, but the poll is about living directors.
Oh, pooh, that's right, haha!
Then I go with James Nguyen
Off the wall, I know, but you said The Nobel Prize is an award bestowed to people who distinguished themselves...
James has distinguished himself; among B movie buffs he is well known, and his work is like no other! Honestly my life wouldn't be the same without him!
Then I go with James Nguyen
Off the wall, I know, but you said The Nobel Prize is an award bestowed to people who distinguished themselves...
James has distinguished himself; among B movie buffs he is well known, and his work is like no other! Honestly my life wouldn't be the same without him!
To be honest, I don't know James Nguyen, but since you find him worthy, he's added :)
Paul Thomas Anderson
Paul Thomas Anderson added :)
To be honest, I don't know James Nguyen, but since you find him worthy, he's added :)
Aww, thanks. :)
Aww, thanks. :)
rubyfruit76, Champion
Peter, Champion
Jessica, Champion
