But this is a list for aspiring directors - If I'm currently aspiring to be a better director, then some level of explanation would be beneficial to me

It's a list for aspiring directors who are part of the NYU Graduate Film program http://tisch.nyu.edu/grad-film/courses ... and they get three years of context.

You could ask for context from any university reading list... http://www.kings.cam.ac.uk/study/undergraduate/offerholders/... ...they're of passing interest to people looking to be 'well read', but are provided mainly for the students, and the context is the course.

I think that was my point. As a reader of this list, it is of passing interest. Take the course this list accompanies and I will receive much better context and substantially improve my understanding of their inclusion.

Well, no. You stated it was list of films someone enjoyed.

But that's not what it is. It's a list that one of the top living film directors on the planet thinks that directing students at one of the leading film schools in the world should watch.

That's a different thing entirely.

Each one of these films has things directors can learn from by just watching them. Film being a visual medium and all.

Sure, some lectures can provide context, but the movies themselves are the actual content.

Fair point. I'm sure he did enjoy them as well as their content being of notable worth.

I very much doubt the list, and the act of watching them is the whole lesson Spike is trying to impart. The lecture series would complete the educational message.

Not really. If these movies don't stimulate your directorial imagination, a few words aren't going to help.

You could say that. But the message—arguably—would be much better received with information.

Better received by who? For film students, the films themselves are the information needed.

The interruption of art is deceptive with nuance and esoteric means. Simply reading Shakespeare doesn't provide someone with understand of the proposed wisdom behind the text.