Funkyduck, that's an interesting proposal but I doubt if that would find better results in naming best director after what you call as "proper" argument. Film makers or film students would probably better come up with a criteria wherein the every aspect in film making is properly or equally weighed down and shared in. I remember in the 60's when film students and critics were ecstatic with the coming of Godard's films and almost everyone regarded him as the greatest film maker of all time. Expectedly, innovation generally takes a great weight in finding the best. I thought so myself when as a young teen, I thought Bertolucci's technical expertise was what made up for a great film. This decade, we have Lars Von Trier, Wong Kar-Wai and possibly Atom Egoyan pumping adrenaline for serious film buffs. But for regular film buffs (where I belong), it is difficult not be personal about a film or a director. For instance, if I were to choose the best director in form and narrative (that would include editing) I would find Resnais hard to beat. For visuals (which should not be confined to surrealism or dazzling qualities), Antonioni is unparalleled and maybe Bertolucci trailing behind. For originality, complexity, Godard comes to mind. For ensemble acting, the neo-realist directors and perhaps Bergman. Fellini for over-all rhythm. In none of these categories does my favorite director Tarkovsky emerge the best and yet he to me is greatest filmmaker of all time. I can't even think what his greatest film is because every one is. His films' form, rhythm, visual and verbal (which is the most visceral aspect in his works) have touched me like no other films ever did. 

For dan-2, I don't mind sharing my personal views. It's fun to find out what others think. If you don't feel like sharing yours, then don't. This message board is for people who want to post their views, personal or otherwise.  