Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Which director SHOULD have directed the most academy award winning performances


skimpole
 Share

Recommended Posts

This information from Quora tells us about who has actually directed the most academy award winning performances:  http://www.quora.com/What-director-has-directed-the-most-actors-to-Oscar-winning-performances

 

Here are the figures:

 

Directors with Most Acting Nominations

36 - William Wyler, 24 - Elia Kazan, 21 - George Cukor, 20 - Martin Scorsese, 20 - Fred Zinnemann, 18 - Sidney Lumet, 18 - George Stevens, 18 - Mike Nichols, 17 - Billy Wilder, 16 - Stanley Kramer, 18- Woody Allen, 15 - John Huston.

     Directors with Most Acting Awards

14 - William Wyler, 9 - Elia Kazan, 6 - Fred Zinnemann, 7- Woody Allen, 5 - John Ford, 5 - Martin Scorsese, 5 - Clint Eastwood, 5 - George Cukor, 4 - Jonathan Demme, 4 - Victor Fleming, 4 - John Huston, 4 - Sidney Lumet, 4 - Hal Ashby, 4 - James L. Brooks.

 

But who should have actually won the most oscars?  Confining myself to lead performances only, here's my choice:

 

Hitchcock (5)

Bergman, Hawks, Kiarostami, (4)

Donen, Dreyer, Kubrick, Polanski, Satyajit Ray, Rivette, Scorsese, (3)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This information from Quora tells us about who has actually directed the most academy award winning performances:  http://www.quora.com/What-director-has-directed-the-most-actors-to-Oscar-winning-performances

 

Here are the figures:

 

Directors with Most Acting Nominations

 

36 - William Wyler, 24 - Elia Kazan, 21 - George Cukor, 20 - Martin Scorsese, 20 - Fred Zinnemann, 18 - Sidney Lumet, 18 - George Stevens, 18 - Mike Nichols, 17 - Billy Wilder, 16 - Stanley Kramer, 18- Woody Allen, 15 - John Huston.

 

     Directors with Most Acting Awards

 

14 - William Wyler, 9 - Elia Kazan, 6 - Fred Zinnemann, 7- Woody Allen, 5 - John Ford, 5 - Martin Scorsese, 5 - Clint Eastwood, 5 - George Cukor, 4 - Jonathan Demme, 4 - Victor Fleming, 4 - John Huston, 4 - Sidney Lumet, 4 - Hal Ashby, 4 - James L. Brooks.

 

But who should have actually won the most oscars?  Confining myself to lead performances only, here's my choice:

 

Hitchcock (5)

Bergman, Hawks, Kiarostami, (4)

Donen, Dreyer, Kubrick, Polanski, Satyajit Ray, Rivette, Scorsese, (3)

 

Wyler has the most in both categories and his ability as a director as well as how he handled actors were some of the reasons (i.e. it wasn't luck).   

Hitchcock couldn't prod the cattle to the award.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

But who should have actually won the most oscars?  Confining myself to lead performances only, here's my choice:

 

Hitchcock (5)

Bergman, Hawks, Kiarostami, (4)

Donen, Dreyer, Kubrick, Polanski, Satyajit Ray, Rivette, Scorsese, (3)

Again, confining it to just lead performances my chooses are:

 

Charles Chaplin (4)

Martin Scorsese (4)

Stanley Kubrick (3)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wyler has the most in both categories and his ability as a director as well as how he handled actors were some of the reasons (i.e. it wasn't luck).   

Hitchcock couldn't prod the cattle to the award.

 

This strikes me as unfair, since the main reason that Stewart and Novak didn't win for Vertigo was because Hollywood didn't appreciate it, while condescension towards thrillers and preference to middlebrow blockbusters explains why Notorious, Strangers on a Train and North by Northwest didn't win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the type of discussion that could take place here on a Message Board devoted to films and it really could be a dominating type of discussion IF enough people decided to join the conversation.

And we have a great website that really delves into a lot of these types of discussions that occur here at TCM City by actually having a website that has so many different categories, especially about the films, directors and actors/actresses who should have been nominated or who did not win but should have won.

It is these types of discussions this message boards was meant to be engaged with. And the author of the website filmsite.org, Tim Dirks has written a ton of useful information that can be discussed chapter by chapter.

If you go to his website:   http://www.filmsite.org

At the top menu bar you will notice the categories he delves into with the tabs you can select and then a drop down menu comes up showing all of the sections within that category that are covered:

Those tabs at the top include: Greatest Films, The Best, Oscars, Quotes, Genres, Scenes, History, Posters, Director and Stars, Reviews, Video.

Each category is chocked full of useful and very interesting bits of information. The Oscar tab alone has the following sub-categories:

Awards History - By Year
Most Awards Winners
Best Picture
Best Picture - Milestones
Best Picture - Genre Biases
Best Director
Best Actress
Best Supporting Actor
Best Supporting Actress
Best Screenplay/Writer
Mistakes and Omissions
Worst Oscar Awards

Now, these are all of Tim Dirk’s own ideas and opinions, except when he gives information based on actual fact, like the films listed that were never nominated or the actor who never received a nomination. Now these are all facts that are available to the average movie goer. Robert Osborne’s own Oscar books come in handy here as well.  But this website could be a treasure trove of possibly endless conversations about not only the Oscars (which is a sore subject around here for many posters) but also any subject related to almost anything film related.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This strikes me as unfair, since the main reason that Stewart and Novak didn't win for Vertigo was because Hollywood didn't appreciate it, while condescension towards thrillers and preference to middlebrow blockbusters explains why Notorious, Strangers on a Train and North by Northwest didn't win.

 

Well one could say this thread is unfair since it implies that those that did win didn't deserve to win.    Clearly you feel the Academy didn't treat Hitchcock fairly because of the type of movies he made.    I get that but Hitchcock has a solid legacy of films and is often mentioned as one of the top directors of all time.     To me that says more about him than the fact actors didn't win best acting Oscars in his films. 

 

The majority of America didn't appreciate Vertigo when it was released.   It did only OK at the box office.   It took years for Vertigo to be appreciated but today the film is highly ranked by most (but I admit it isn't one of my favorite Hitchcock films).    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wyler has the most in both categories and his ability as a director as well as how he handled actors were some of the reasons (i.e. it wasn't luck).   

Hitchcock couldn't prod the cattle to the award.

Wyler is so far ahead in both wins and nominations that it's hard to question that he bring out great performances like no other director, even though his major skill was selecting the best of a zillion takes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...