last movie ive seen was step brothers in theater,

it was funny

Well he wasn't exactly a part of the mainstream scene.

He's the most successful and widely known Russian director since Eisenstein. He was about as famous as Soviet directors could get, and Solyaris was one of the most widely released Russian films of all time. Calling him a "cult" director comparable to Cronenberg or Ed Wood is an insult.

yes...but we dont live in russia now do we?

Sorry, I meant cult in the sense that it's praised by a small (usually highly pretentious) group of people. But ok, it may not have been an apt word in this case.

Mindblowing post there. Clearly you're an intelligent dude.

I think he's almost universally praised by film buffs. He's certainly acknowledged as one of the greatest film artists of all time by most film scholars and theorists. Tarkovsky invented a new cinematic languagae. His "sculpting in time" theory was revolutionary and has been modified (and/or copied) by dozens of directors, including some of the greatest directors currently working like Bela Tarr, Aleksandr Sokurov, Andrei Zvyagintsev, and even Paul Thomas Anderson to an extent. Perhaps you're making the argument that the group of people with enough dedication to be film theorists/scholars is small, but within the group there is virtually no dissent. And from an objective standpoint there is no doubt that he is the most commericially successful Russian director since Eisenstein.

So you are saying that Cronenberg is a Cult director?

Cronenbergs early films were certainly "cult" films. Scanners and Videodrome are basically listed under "cult film" in the dictionary. With his last two films he has proven to be more accessible and appealing to a larger audience, but for the initial 20 years of his career he pretty clearly falls under the category of "cult director."

Hmm, he certainly is the most renowned Russian director but I'm not so sure that any of his films actually made any money, all being art films with a specific (and by no means numerous) target audience. I don't have any hard data to back this up, but I'm pretty sure Bekmambetov's vampire thrilogy and Bodrov's Mongol have made a substantial amount of money, far out of reach of an art house film.

He went mainstream in 1986 with The Fly and every film since has been financed (wholly or partially) by a major studio. His first few films were revered amongst the Horror fraternity. So while those films were cult, he is certainly not a cult director.

Tarkovsky is revered as you say by scholars and film aficionados alike but to mainstream fans he is very much an unknown quantity so it that sense his name suggests a cult following.