To hear Quentin Tarantino tell it, filmmaking is a young person’s game; one reason he has said his upcoming feature “The Movie Critic” will be his last is that he doesn’t want to repeat the mistake of directors like Don Siegel and Arthur Penn, whose last movies (“Jinxed” and “Penn and Teller Get Killed,” respectively) represented an artistic nose dive from the work they were doing at their peak.
“Most directors’ last films are fucking lousy,” he told the Pure Cinema podcast on an episode in which he discussed the handful of final films he does like (such as Tony Scott’s “Unstoppable”), and there’s no doubt that many directors of the classical studio era went back to the well one too many times — only the most unapologetic auteurist would try to make the case that Howard Hawks’ “Rio Lobo” is as good as “Rio Bravo,” or that Sam Peckinpah’s “The Osterman Weekend” is worthy of the man who made “The Wild Bunch” and “Straw Dogs.”
Yet for every director who either ran out of creative steam or didn’t know how to navigate a changing cultural landscape, there’s another who did their best work late in life; just looking at 2023, one finds directors like Martin Scorsese (81), Ridley Scott (86), Wim Wenders (78), and Michael Mann (80) making films as lively and passionate as any in their oeuvre.
The best final films tend to sum up a director’s entire life and career while still pointing in bold new directions; Stanley Kubrick’s “Eyes Wide Shut” is probably the ultimate example of this, a movie that has multiple thematic and visual connections to earlier Kubrick works but contains a new (admittedly complicated) sense of optimism that makes the fact that it was Kubrick’s farewell to cinema particularly poignant. At their best, final films like Douglas Sirk’s “Imitation of Life” or Sergio Leone’s “Once Upon a Time in America” contain everything we love about their directors’ work done with more depth of feeling and skill in execution than ever before.
Great final films tend to be more confident and less demonstrative than directors’ earlier works, as filmmakers strip their techniques down to only the most essential tools needed to express their ideas. A surprising number of great final films are extremely limited in their spaces — John Huston’s “The Dead,” Ingmar Bergman’s “Saraband,” John Ford’s “7 Women,” and Otto Preminger’s “The Human Factor” are all among their directors’ most physically constricted movies, shot on just a few locations with a minimum of ornamentation. Yet they’re also some of these filmmakers’ most emotionally and thematically dense works, as the simplicity of form allows the directors to draw a direct line from their obsessions to the audience — movies like Carl Theodor Dreyer’s “Gertrud” or Sidney Lumet’s “Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead” are so void of excess and sentiment that they make most other dramas seem overblown or forced.
Movies like these are representative of literary critic Edward Said’s notion of “late style,” in which an artist is free to find their purest possible form of expression without the pressures — whether external or self-imposed — they might have felt in younger days, “the artist’s mature subjectivity, stripped of hubris and pomposity, unashamed of either its fallibility or of the modest assurance it has gained as a result of age and exile.”
While many great final films were made by directors who didn’t know they were making their last movies — Lynn Shelton is probably the most tragic example — in many cases, these directors had a sense that either health or their changing fortunes in the film industry meant it was likely they would never work again. Thus, there’s a moving sense of closure in many of these films and a last-ditch effort to get out everything the directors ever wanted to say — has there ever been a movie more stuffed with rich ideas than Stanley Kubrick’s “Eyes Wide Shut”?
Even in cases where the directors did not know the films they were working on would be their last, in retrospect, their swan songs take on the quality of epitaphs; perhaps the references to death in the generally lighthearted “Confidentially Yours” wouldn’t land the way that they do if François Truffaut had lived to make more films, but since he didn’t there’s a haunting sense of finality running underneath the escapist surface. What follows is a gallery of some of the greatest final films by great directors, which prove that the wisdom that comes with age sometimes yields the best that cinema has to offer.
-
“An Autumn Afternoon” (1962)
Director Yasujiro Ozu spent the last 30 years or so of his career working over the same ideas and stylistic devices with such singlemindedness that “An Autumn Afternoon” initially doesn’t feel all that different from any number of other Ozu masterpieces. Its tale of a father resigning himself to the aching sense of loss and emptiness that accompanies his daughter’s marriage brings up many of the issues related to family and work that Ozu addressed for decades, and aside from its vibrant use of color there’s little to distinguish it aesthetically from earlier Ozu films like “Late Spring” and “Tokyo Story.” Yet this is undeniably a summation, albeit not an intentional one (Ozu didn’t know it would be his last film and was at work on a new script when he passed away on his 60th birthday). Even for the austere Ozu, this is a remarkable piece of restrained filmmaking; there’s very little overt conflict, even less discernible camera movement, and each scene casually glides into the next without the typical rhythms one expects from drama. Somehow, however, Ozu’s carefully calibrated accumulation of small moments leads to a devastating climax; the emotional power of the film is as powerful as it is unexpected, the end result not only of an impeccably constructed film but a lifetime of honing one’s craft behind the camera.
-
“Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead” (2007)
Sidney Lumet’s final film is his most savage and pitiless, a morality play about a robbery gone wrong that is positively chilling in its willingness to stare into the heart of darkness without blinking. Ethan Hawke and Phillip Seymour Hoffman give career-best performances as brothers who destroy their own lives and the lives of everyone around them by embarking on what they think will be a “simple” heist; along the way, they’re given superb support by Marisa Tomei, Michael Shannon, Albert Finney, and more who comprise one of the best casts Lumet ever had. “Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead” found Lumet not only newly energized by Kelly Masterson’s razor-sharp script but by shooting digitally for the first time. Like Ingmar Bergman with “Saraband,” Lumet was liberated by the new technology, which he felt removed the logistical obstacles between himself and the actors. The result was one of the most harrowing ensemble character studies ever made from one of the best directors of adult dramas who ever lived.
-
“Confidentially Yours” (1983)
François Truffaut’s final film is a love letter to both his beloved Alfred Hitchcock and his beloved Fanny Ardant, his partner in life and work whose solemn image he was determined to reinvent with this dazzling comic thriller. After the portentous historical drama “The Last Metro,” “Confidentially Yours” is positively intoxicating in its liberation from any serious intent; its tale of an intrepid secretary out to clear her falsely accused boss’ name is fast, funny, and as pleasurable in its embrace of cinematic technique as Hitchcock classics like “The 39 Steps” and “North by Northwest.” Truffaut once said that all great films should express either the joy of making cinema or the agony of making cinema, and with his farewell feature he created the most joyous movie of his career, one that more than fulfilled its ambition to show Ardant’s charm and range. Yet for all its superficial lightness, at its core “Confidentially Yours” is a film obsessed with death; by all accounts, Truffaut didn’t know it would be his final movie (he had several projects in the works when he died at the tragically young age of 52), but its constant references to mortality give it an added touch of bittersweet resonance knowing that it would be this master’s final gift to cinema.
-
“The Dead” (1987)
John Huston reportedly directed this 1987 James Joyce adaptation from a wheelchair connected to a portable oxygen generator, so it’s easy to imagine that thoughts of his own mortality were at the forefront of his mind. What’s remarkable about “The Dead,” aside from the sheer beauty of its filmmaking craft (largely courtesy of cinematographer Fred Murphy’s serenely gliding camera and autumnal lighting), is how at peace Huston seems to be with his own impending death; this is a calm, steady contemplation of some of the most difficult challenges life has to offer. As with many of the final films on this list, “The Dead” is astonishing in its seeming casualness combined with a penetrating economy of expression; Huston doesn’t force any of his effects and, as with Ozu’s “An Autumn Afternoon,” he builds to a staggering conclusion that the viewer never sees coming. Few films so exquisitely convey the bittersweet truth of how difficult it is to know the ones we love, or even ourselves; in the end, “The Dead” is about how the mysteries of the human heart will always, on some level, remain unsolved.
-
“Eyes Wide Shut” (1999)
Stanley Kubrick’s final film is of a piece with his others in many ways; it shares the examination of domesticity and its discontents with “The Shining,” its deconstruction of the masculine hero with “Full Metal Jacket,” “Barry Lyndon,” and many others, and its ambivalent depiction of eroticism with “Lolita” and “A Clockwork Orange.” Yet “Eyes Wide Shut” is a more generous and optimistic work than any of those films, a rare Kubrick movie that offers some hope for its hapless hero. Following a narrative structure that leaves out just enough to create new mysteries every time one watches it, “Eyes Wide Shut” is both Kubrick’s most dreamlike film (appropriately, given that it was adapted from Schnitzler’s “Rhapsody: a Dream Novel”) and his most firmly rooted in everyday rituals and mundanities in which Kubrick finds both poetry and terror. Lest one thinks that Stanley went soft in his old age, while there’s optimism in the romance, this movie is as brutally cynical as any previous Kubrick film when it comes to its presentation of class — Kubrick’s vision of a power structure that cannot be reasoned with or touched, and which somehow controls everything, is both heightened and convincing, reaching its apotheosis in the calmly horrifying billiard room scene in which Sydney Pollack’s smiling devil explains everything. Or does he?
-
“Family Plot” (1976)
Alfred Hitchcock reunited with his “North by Northwest” screenwriter Ernest Lehman for this delightful light comedy, and if it lacks the formal perfection and thematic heft of their earlier collaboration it’s nevertheless a sophisticated structural marvel, a superficially lightweight thriller with meticulous craft running underneath the surface. The film adopts a dual structure with shifting points of view that makes it a distant cousin to darker pictures like “Shadow of a Doubt” and “Psycho”; here, the parallel tracks that ultimately intersect follow two couples, one a mildly bumbling psychic (Barbara Harris) and her opportunistic boyfriend (Bruce Dern), the other a pair of brilliant and ruthless jewel thieves and kidnappers (William Devane and Karen Black). Although Devane and Black are the more clearly “evil” of the two, Hitchcock orchestrates a rich tapestry of comparisons and contrasts to tie the couples together and question the moral implications of the viewer’s identification with all four characters. It’s all in good fun though — in his last film, Hitchcock is at his most playful since his 1930s British thrillers, with none of the tortured psychology of “Vertigo” or “Frenzy.” Hitchcock once said he made slices of cake, not slices of life, and “Family Plot” is one of his tastiest.
-
“Gertrud” (1964)
Carl Theodor Dreyer’s 1964 masterpiece is, like many of the last movies on this list, at first glance relatively simple and straightforward, but upon close examination reveals its radical innovations. The story of an aging woman who pushes both her husband and a devoted former lover away in favor of a young man who fails to reciprocate her adoration, “Gertrud” is Dreyer’s most philosophically dense and emotionally affecting meditation on free will and the costs and benefits of a life lived without compromise; brutally unadorned and presented in a series of stripped-down long takes, the film is almost mystical in its ability to depict internal states, as its rhythms reflect the unyielding convictions of its heroine. While the film is anything but showy, it’s also as far from conventional as narrative movies get, told almost exclusively in frontal compositions with no relief and no reaction shots. The avoidance of standard coverage is something Dreyer shares with Otto Preminger and other directors on this list, but he uses the technique to different ends, less as a broad guiding principle than as a deeply personal reflection and restriction of point of view. Preminger avoids reaction shots to avoid privileging any particular perspective; Dreyer avoids them to limit perspective to only the most precise, intimate elements of the story. Nothing exists outside of his title character’s drive to find an all-encompassing love, and the intensity of her striving and of Dreyer’s direction makes the film’s final scenes as moving as any in all of world cinema.
-
“The Human Factor” (1979)
Otto Preminger was always one of the least manipulative of all Hollywood directors, in the sense that his best films — sweeping ensemble narratives like “Anatomy of a Murder,” “Advise and Consent,” and “In Harm’s Way” — eschewed the classical grammar of reaction shots and coverage in favor of long takes that gave both the characters and the audience room to breathe, reflect, and contemplate. Once he discovered the widescreen dimensions of Cinemascope, Preminger virtually forbade close-ups in his work, opting for camera placements that favored groups over individuals, requiring a certain amount of participation from the audience in determining the meaning and point of view in any given scene. Preminger’s final film, “The Human Factor,” is one of only two from the mid-’50s on that he didn’t shoot in ‘Scope, but it represents his detached style taken to a level so extreme it’s a miracle the film works at all. The story, taken from a spy novel by Graham Greene, is at its heart a melodrama, but there’s nothing melodramatic or heated about Preminger’s staging; he drains every moment of any kind of dramatic emphasis or rhythm, presenting each scene at the same stripped-down emotional tenor. By forgoing the widescreen aspect ratio, Preminger pushes his characters together in boxy frames that create a palpable sense of claustrophobia, a feeling exacerbated by the relentless monotony of the spaces; the production design is as plain as can be, a far cry from the ornate, seductive surfaces of Preminger’s 1940s noir pictures like “Laura” and “Fallen Angel.” It’s a spy movie about dreary bureaucracy rather than James Bond-style exoticism, yet somehow the rigor of Preminger’s approach pays off with a devastating finale — the director’s refusal to provide conventional emotional cues throughout the picture means that when the cost of the characters’ secrets is finally revealed in the final scenes, the introduction of honest emotion is almost too much to bear.
-
“Imitation of Life” (1959)
Erudite German émigré Douglas Sirk didn’t entirely care for populist Hollywood melodramas, but he made them better than anyone else; “Written on the Wind,” “All That Heaven Allows,” and “Magnificent Obsession” are all exquisitely crafted barnburners of intense emotions both heated and repressed, their excesses countered and underlined by Sirk’s mathematical approach to mise-en-scène. “Imitation of Life,” which Sirk helmed in 1959 before leaving Hollywood behind for good, is easily his greatest film, a ruthlessly effective tearjerker with its own critical commentary running underneath on a parallel track. Sirk knows how to deliver the goods in this story of an ambitious white actress (Lana Turner), her devoted Black maid (Juanita Moore), and the tragic disintegration of the maid’s relationship with her beloved daughter (Susan Kohner) over the young woman’s attempt to pass for white; by the end of the movie, only the most cynical viewer could possibly avoid being moved. Yet Sirk isn’t really buying what he’s selling, and throughout the film, there are both visual comments (mostly in the form of various reflective surfaces designed to point out the characters’ hypocrisies and self-deceptions) and self-aware lines of dialogue (as when John Gavin tells Lana Turner to “stop acting!”) that draw attention to the fact that Sirk thinks he’s above all this Hollywood silliness. It’s two movies for the price of one, and the miracle of “Imitation of Life” is that while the two movies are diametrically opposed, somehow each only makes the other stronger.
-
“Lola Montès” (1955)
Max Ophuls’ last film was his only movie in color and widescreen, and he made the most of both — this is one of the most pleasurably gorgeous movies ever made. It’s also, like “Once Upon a Time in America,” one of the more troubled releases on this list; in 1955, producers who hoped Ophuls would deliver a conventional vehicle for star Martine Carol were baffled by his baroque stylization, self-aware narration, and flashback-oriented structure, and promptly took the movie out of his hands and cut it to pieces. Thankfully, it has since been restored to its original glory, and in Ophuls’ intended cut, it’s a glorious piece of heightened melodrama that packs every inch of its widescreen frame with sumptuous visual details.
-
“Once Upon a Time in America” (1984)
Like Stanley Kubrick and David Lean, Sergio Leone took a long time getting to his final film; when “Once Upon a Time in America” was released in 1984, it had been 13 years since “Giu la Testa” closed out the remarkable run of Westerns that established him as an international auteur. As with “Eyes Wide Shut,” though, it was worth the wait — “Once Upon a Time in America” is one of the most formally inventive, achingly poetic masterpieces in all of cinema, a nearly four-hour epic that seems to cram everything Leone ever thought about life and cinema into one tantalizingly inscrutable package. Lyrical and romantic in one scene, brutal and juvenile in the next, it seems at times to be cobbled together out of the familiar parts from other gangster movies — with a few riffs on historical figures like Jimmy Hoffa thrown in to give it verisimilitude. Yet just as he appropriated the mythology of the American Western and reconfigured it toward his own deeply personal ends in “Once Upon a Time in the West,” here Leone takes gangster film iconography and breathes new life into it via a structure almost unthinkably audacious for a major studio release. (Indeed, it was unthinkable to Warner Bros., who put the movie in chronological order without Leone’s consent and released it in a poorly received two-and-a-half-hour version before the longer cut supplanted it for good in the public consciousness.) The movie is told by embedding the story in a flashback within a flashback, with aural and visual cues weaving in and out the various time periods that make it difficult to understand exactly what is happening when, or what it means, or how long it’s taking. The effect is to not only force us to reconsider the ideological and psychological implications of gangster stories by looking at the genre through a fresh perspective, but to come the closest any filmmaker ever has to creating a cinematic corollary for the act of remembering. As Robert De Niro’s Noodles looks back on his life with bewilderment, it’s hard not to imagine Leone remembering his own in the same way; the greatness of “Once Upon a Time in America” is that he’s also remembering a whole history of cinematic storytelling and using it to make his memories as archetypal as they are thrillingly idiosyncratic.
-
“A Passage to India” (1984)
David Lean didn’t return to the director’s chair for 14 years after the negative critical response to “Ryan’s Daughter” shook his confidence, but this 1984 gem was worth the wait. It’s not only one of Lean’s best films but one of the great literary adaptations of all time, a mounting of E.M. Forster’s 1924 novel that finds precise visual corollaries for the book’s tantalizing mysteries and ambiguities. It’s a tricky transposition in that the novel is largely about the impossibility of understanding between cultures and leaves key moments to the imagination in an effort to convey mental barriers to the reader. In physicalizing the action and making it concrete, Lean nevertheless retains its power, directing his performers with an understated subtlety that extends to his exquisitely composed frames. The story of an Indian doctor falsely accused of rape by a repressed British traveler, “A Passage to India” takes its time getting to the drama — the incident that propels the narrative doesn’t occur until nearly 90 minutes into the film, and when it does we don’t even see it. Lean’s confident patience pays off enormously in the movie’s second half, however, as he flawlessly orchestrates a dazzling array of ideas and conflicts relating to race, class, and power whose foundations have been carefully laid by his screenplay. In addition to writing the film, Lean served as his own editor, and the purity of his expression is staggering; this is what you get when you apply the lessons learned over 40 years of making logistically and thematically ambitious films — it’s a movie as epic as any Lean ever made, but with no strain and not a wasted image, gesture, or line of dialogue.
-
“Saraband” (2003)
Like Sidney Lumet, Ingmar Bergman was liberated by the advent of digital technology — its advantages meant fewer barriers between him and the emotionally penetrating results he sought from his actors. “Saraband,” a sequel to Bergman’s 1973 masterpiece “Scenes From a Marriage,” represents the director at the peak of his powers; it’s jammed to the hilt with scathing revelations that prove the director of “Through a Glass Darkly,” “Cries and Whispers,” and “Fanny and Alexander” still had plenty of new things to say about men and women, parents and children, and the irreconcilable tension between personal ambition and our responsibilities to others. Bergman’s most unforgiving self-portrait of a self-absorbed monster who nevertheless is all too recognizably human, “Saraband” is as epic in its emotional and thematic scope as it is limited in its use of physical space. The world is closing in on its protagonists, all the better for Bergman to burrow deeper and deeper into their neuroses.
-
“7 Women” (1966)
John Ford’s last film was a critical and commercial fiasco when it was released in 1966, but it’s one of his best, a transposition of the thematic and stylistic preoccupations of his expansive male-oriented Westerns to an interior, female-driven chamber piece set in 1935 China. Although the backdrop is a Mongolian invasion, there’s very little large-scale action here; instead, the drama is limited almost entirely to the living spaces in a missionary outpost where Anne Bancroft’s atheist doctor arrives to shake up the repression and hypocrisy on display. The film recalls Ford’s 1939 classic “Stagecoach” in its humanist critique of conformist values and its elegantly structured series of interlocking relationships that offer a broad array of responses to crisis, and in Bancroft, Ford finds one of his most inspiring and heartbreaking self-sacrificing protagonists. What’s shocking about the movie is that rather than limiting Ford’s vision, the set-bound, play-like environment allows him to deepen and distill it; “7 Women” is perhaps his least sentimental and bleakest film, but it’s also his most forceful, and one of the Ford pictures that lingers in the mind the longest after it’s over.
-
“Sword of Trust” (2019)
When Lynn Shelton died unexpectedly at the age of 54, she was in the process of building a filmography filled with graceful and hilarous comedies as rich in perceptive observations as they were affectionate toward their idiosyncratic characters. Shelton’s final film, “Sword of Trust,” is her best, a witty social satire marked by rich characterizations that transcend any oversimplified generalizations about shifting American values in Trump’s America. “Sword of Trust” is the best kind of political film, a comedy where the politics emerge organically from the relationships and situations — there’s no forced agenda here, just one smart and funny insight after another given added dimension by Shelton’s unerring instincts about where to put her camera and when to cut for maximum impact. While “Sword of Trust” is the best movie Shelton ever made, the fact that she was taken from us mid-career makes it a bittersweet viewing experience; surely she had even greater things in store, leaving “Sword of Trust” feeling less like a summation than an unfulfilled promise.
-
“That Obscure Object of Desire” (1977)
Nearly 50 years after he shocked audiences worldwide with “Un Chien Andalou” (codirected by Salvador Dali), Luis Buñuel proved he still had a playful desire to provoke with this ode to erotic obsession, a movie that develops and crystallizes the director’s ongoing motifs with wit and grace. By this point, Buñuel had left overtly confrontational imagery like the razor slicing across an eyeball of “Un Chien Andalou” long behind, but he was still out to destroy establishment ideas about sex, religion, and politics — and out to play self-conscious games with the audience via the casting of his female lead, who is played at different points in the film by two different actresses (and dubbed by a third). It’s one of the director’s funniest and most pointed treatments of a theme he kept returning to in his later films, that of movement that doesn’t actually go anywhere; in his recurring image of an impotent hero on a train fleeing the title object of desire — who he doesn’t realize is on the train as well, thus making his flight completely pointless — Buñuel finds the purest visual metaphor for an idea he had been exploring since “Robinson Crusoe” in 1952.
-
“Varda by Agnes” (2019)
While many of the films on this list are unofficial summations of their directors’ biographies and careers, “Varda by Agnes” is perhaps the most explicit final word, a guided tour through Agnes Varda’s life and work led by the director herself. The film consists of a series of lectures in which Varda takes the viewer through her movies, photography, and installation works, illustrated with clips and newly shot material that add up to Varda’s final statement on her own artistic life. Yet what makes the film so moving is that it’s less a goodbye than a hello; viewers unfamiliar with Varda’s work get a surprisingly comprehensive crash course, while fans are invited to look at the work in a new way — it’s hard to imagine anyone watching the movie without immediately scrambling to visit or revisit some of the movies under discussion. A love letter to the movies, to the people in her life, and to the audience, “Varda by Agnes” is one of the most generous parting gifts a filmmaker ever gave to her disciples, and an inspiring film history lesson that’s essential viewing for cinephiles searching for a deeper understanding of the context within which Varda’s greatest movies were made.