Who gets the credit for a quality movie?

[thatpfunk]

In general, who do you feel deserves the most credit when you watch a good movie? I am aware that it differs greatly between films.

However, for the sake of the question, please think of your top 10 or 20 films and answer accordingly. Explanations and examples are encouraged

[private joker]

Films are collaborative efforts and this question just simplifies the issue too much. However, you failed to include Producer, and he's the guy who gets the Oscar for Best Picture. He generally puts the project together, including hiring the director, overseeing the post-production, and helping develop it in prep.

Artistically, a film is generally considered a director's vision, so he's ultimately responsible for what's on screen. But more often than not a good director can't save a crappy script, while a lame director can still come up with a good film if the script is strong.

There's really no satisfactory answer to this -- I'd say Director/Producer/Writer are all equally important, with Cast/Photographer/Editor coming in very close seconds.

And, of course, it really does depend on the film.

[stigmata]

I agree with PJ that obviously it is a collobarative effort and a film is the sum of its parts.

However, how much credit we give to those parts really depends on the film at hand. For example, some visionary directors we really have to give them credit for their classic works (e.g. Kubrick). Other times, the writer is key (Kauffman, for instance), and of course an actor can make or break a film.

Other times it is a combination, for example, Indiana Jones is a really a combination of Speilberg action and the charisma of Harrison Ford.

[Yeti]

15 votes and 0 for actors. Wow. (I voted for Writers).

[Jack of Arcades]

I'm a writer, so writers.

[Zurvan]

I don't think any one of those people/roles can make a good film, no matter how well they do. However, BAD work in any one of them can ruin an otherwise good film. I put other, because they all have to work together & do well.

I'm a frustrated writer but I'd have to go with director here. A bad director can destroy a good script and salvage a weak one. Did you ever see any of the Greenlight Project? They kept raving about how good that girl's script was but the director failed to see her vision. The director is the magician behind it all. If he can't pull it together even with a strong script then the result is garbage. It's got to be tough.

[jakethebake]

I think it's a writer/director combination.

I've seen any number of movies that I've thought were probably a poretty good script that was butchered by the director and/or lack of budget.

I've also seen movies that I've thought were much better than the script justified and the director pulled a great save but who the hell financed that script anyway.

Probably more of the former than the latter.