Well, I've got over two months on you, but I agree with Mattrick. No one can know what everyone else is thinking, but my money is on Tarantino having the "coolness" advantage. I do concede your point about Pulp Fiction, but, despite my age, I am not so swayed.
I didn't play the age card to be patronising, I just think if you saw a certain film like Pulp, or maybe Star Wars for another example, at the cinema when it came out the whole experience of it can affect your enjoyment and make it stick out in your mind. So much so that in comparison when you have the same experience years later, it may lack the impact.
To me the coolness factor is something transient, in all things. I think cool is relative to each generation, or even each 10 year age gap say.
I don't think it's a case of who's cooler - I have probably have ten years plus on you age wise, so to me Nolan is the cooler or more hipster choice. I just have the benefit of experiencing Tarantino at his debut into the directing world because of my age and that's what sways me.
I watched Pulp Fiction when it was first released on tape. I was what...9 at the time. If anything the coolness effect would be more impactful on my youthful mind
My point mostly was that Tarantino has been to me, in terms of directing, style over substance. His movies are fun, enjoyable and entertaining. If it wasn't for Nolan taking over The Batman franchise...hardly anyone would know his name because he was never mainstream until then. IMO Taraninto has somewhat relied on a combination of his dialogue and brutal violence to get over with fans. Nolan has always put original ideas on screen and even made Batman original. I usually give more credit to writer/directors but Tarantino isn't talented enough behind the camera but his prowress on a typewriter overshadows his flaws as director imo.
I don't think it's a case of who's cooler - I have probably have ten years plus on you age wise, so to me Nolan is the cooler or more hipster choice. I just have the benefit of experiencing Tarantino at his debut into the directing world because of my age and that's what sways me.
I watched Pulp Fiction when it was first released on tape. I was what...9 at the time. If anything the coolness effect would be more impactful on my youthful mind
My point mostly was that Tarantino has been to me, in terms of directing, style over substance. His movies are fun, enjoyable and entertaining. If it wasn't for Nolan taking over The Batman franchise...hardly anyone would know his name because he was never mainstream until then. IMO Taraninto has somewhat relied on a combination of his dialogue and brutal violence to get over with fans. Nolan has always put original ideas on screen and even made Batman original. I usually give more credit to writer/directors but Tarantino isn't talented enough behind the camera but his prowress on a typewriter overshadows his flaws as director imo.
Saying Tarantino isn't talented enough behind the camera is downright silly. I'm sorry, it just is. Go watch Basterds again and tell me he doesn't know what he's doing. Some of those scenes are dripping with tension. It's not all about dialogue.
Please tell me that you watched Pulp Fiction again since you were 9, because if you haven't, I'm not totally sure you are fully qualified to critic QT. There is so much in that film that a 9 year old just can't grasp.
I know a lot of people don't like Tarantino just because of his personality, but he is a very good director. Nolan is also great and I love some of his movies, but to say QT doesn't even comes close is way off.
You mean to tell me you can watch the Kill Bill films and honestly tell me Tarantino isn't a good director? Give me a break.
I've been trying to lay low on these threads lately, but you freakin' people just draw me in.
"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in."
Inglorious Basterds is the only movie I truly give him a lot of credit for his directing.
End quote.
You mean to tell me you can watch the Kill Bill films and honestly tell me Tarantino isn't a good director? Give me a break.
He borrowed incredibly well. Part II had a simply phenomenal script. Great film. For me Tarantinos laurels will always rest on his amazinhg scripts and the performances it gives light too. He's obviously got a good repore with his actors. But compared to PT Anderson, The Coens and to a lesser extent Nolan, doesn't compare to ability with a camera. Inglorious Basterds was without a doubt Tarantinos best directed movie, his best written too. He also did it without his usual big name cast. Gives me promise maybe Kill Bill Vol 3 (thus officially make Kill Bill 2 separate moies) will be better than Vol. 2.
I saw that you gave QT credit for Basterds, that's why I was surprised when you said he doesn't have enough talent behind the camera.
Yes, he borrowed aspects of many Kung-Fu films for Kill Bill. Films that are considered cheesy. He took B style films and made two very good movies.
In the hands of another director, that could have been disaster. Also, some of the cinematography in Kill Bill is downright breathtaking.
I didn't see you mention Pulp Fiction. I'm interested if you've seen it as an adult. If you haven't, you really should give it another shot. I think you will have new found appreciation for it.
I've seen Pulp Fiction about a dozen times. I remember the dialogue mostly, not images. I remember "It's the one that says Bad Mother Fucker on it" and "Foot massages mean something" and "I held that uncomfortable hunk of metal in my ass for two years" and, of course, Royale with Cheese and dutch people loading up fries with Mayo.
In terms of visuals his films only have a handful of images burned in my head. One is Michael Madsen dancing and cutting that guy up. Travolta walking out and getting
Spoiler:
told and shot of his body.
. Kill Bill had a lot of stunning visuals but stunning visuals don't make a shot for me. Inglorious Basterds however was chalked full of amazing shots that I won't forget. Besides Basterds, I think Punch Drunk Love has more quality shots than all of Tarantinos films combined. Tarantino can also be, at times, overindulgant.
I love his movies. I own them all except Basterds and Death Proof. But I feel in terms of a director, there are dozens of better directors working today, considering it took him 20 years to make a movie I thought was excellently directed, not just exellent entertainment.
Also by talent behind the camera, I was referring to their current position and quality of movies made. I even think Nolan made it too far. I think PT Anderson is better than both of them. But this contest is really as much of a popularity poll as it is skill-based poll.
Kill Bill had a lot of stunning visuals but stunning visuals don't make a shot for me.
This.
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm surprised to hear you guys say you don't think he's good behind the camera. For me personally I think he's amazing there. The shots he sets up, the cinematography are all beautiful to me. Add to that the performances he's able to draw out of his actors, to the music he adds to his films, to the way he tells his story, etc... It all just fits perfectly together. I definitely think he deserves to still be in this competition.
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tarantino can also be, at times, overindulgent ...
This is my biggest quarrel with Tarantino. He's so eager to prove his deftness at screen writing that he saturates his films with pointless dialogue that ultimately serves little to no purpose in the grand scheme of things.
Tarantino can also be, at times, overindulgent ...
This is my biggest quarrel with Tarantino. He's so eager to prove his deftness at screen writing that he saturates his films with pointless dialogue that ultimately serves little to no purpose in the grand scheme of things.
Death Proof is definitely the best example of this: he made another Tarantino movie that was almost a parody of his own work - long exchanges of dialogue, discussions over how awesome Vanishing Point is, plus a tiny bit of nasty violence - that not only failed to match up to his previous work in the slightest, but also completely failed at what it set out to do in the first place: to make a good tribute to the grindhouse genre. Now after Planet Terror, Death Proof just seemed to be a failure in my eyes. Planet Terror was sheer over the top, ultra violent, mega stupid fun, nothing less. It certainly didn't aim to be anything more. Death Proof, for all the intentional dumb mistakes, still tried to be something more, another Tarantino film, and it just didn't work.
Although gotta give him credit for having Hold Tight by Dave Dee Dozy Beaky Mick & Tich in the soundtrack. That one's a classic!
Never be cruel and never be cowardly. And if you ever are, always make amends.
You are a walking talking Doctor Who encyclopedia to me. - Melike
Both directors are well represented in my all time favorites list, but while Tarantino's films seldom go beyond a fun time at the movies, Nolan's films tickle my fancy on an intellectual level.
And you didn't see that as being true of any of the directors Tarantino ran against in earlier rounds?
Tarantino beat Coens and PT Anderson...right? A low down dirty shame...both are better directors.
Exactly what I think. And Tarantino, as I've often said, is a clever man who makes clever movies. These other guys are powerhouses.
Big town's got its losers, small town's got its vices...
Both directors are well represented in my all time favorites list, but while Tarantino's films seldom go beyond a fun time at the movies, Nolan's films tickle my fancy on an intellectual level.
And you didn't see that as being true of any of the directors Tarantino ran against in earlier rounds?
Tarantino beat Coens and PT Anderson...right? A low down dirty shame...both are better directors.
Exactly what I think. And Tarantino, as I've often said, is a clever man who makes clever movies. These other guys are powerhouses.
Also, speaking of powerhouse directors and intellectual fancies, QT beat the crap out of Woody Allen in Round 1.
Originally Posted by Darkthoughts
To me the coolness factor is something transient, in all things. I think cool is relative to each generation, or even each 10 year age gap say.
Exactly the point making these poll results so pitiful.
Originally Posted by Still Servant
...Go watch Basterds again and tell me he doesn't know what he's doing. Some of those scenes are dripping with tension. It's not all about dialogue.
...
Nonetheless --
Originally Posted by Mattrick
My point mostly was that Tarantino has been to me, in terms of directing, style over substance.
Originally Posted by Still Servant
I know a lot of people don't like Tarantino just because of his personality, but he is a very good director.
Can we separate the art and science without resorting to personal prejudice? I believe we can.
Also, speaking of powerhouse directors and intellectual fancies, QT beat the crap out of Woody Allen in Round 1.
now, did you have to rub it in?...
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, I guess I will just have to agree to disagree on a lot of the Tarantino arguments.
I will say this. A lot of you guys have been poking holes in some of QT's lesser works, but nobody has said anything about Nolan's. Yes, believe it or not, they are out there.
Insomnia is a wildly mediocre film. It almost is out of place among the other films he's made.
Although, I liked The Prestige, it's hardly the masterpiece many of you guys make it out to be.
I'm surprised to hear you guys say you don't think he's good behind the camera. For me personally I think he's amazing there. The shots he sets up, the cinematography are all beautiful to me. Add to that the performances he's able to draw out of his actors, to the music he adds to his films, to the way he tells his story, etc... It all just fits perfectly together. I definitely think he deserves to still be in this competition.
Cinematography goes to the cinematographer, no? While I love music, Tarantinos use of hip music makes his films feel even more hip. A problem I have. Reservoir Dogs is still his best use of commercial music.
Still Servant: I never once alluded to Nolan as being a god or anything. But he is good and one of the most visually stunning directors of the past 20 years. He's good but he's not as good as he's made out to be....at least not yet. He's got the potential to be as good as he's made out to be.
Insomnia is a wildly mediocre film. It almost is out of place among the other films he's made.
Although, I liked The Prestige, it's hardly the masterpiece many of you guys make it out to be.
I agree with the comments here about Nolan. Oh, but of course, I thought the Prestige was utterly forgettable, so wouldn't even say "I liked" it. :shrugs:
And yeah, I'm going to go here ( Feev please forgive me ) - I found so much of The Dark Knight to be overindulgent. I have always said if Nolan showed even a little restraint, and edited better, The Dark Knight would be a much better film.
Okay.... ( Fantastic Four quote coming .... )Flame On!!!
The Man In Black Fled Across The Desert...
...And The Gunslinger Followed.
“I’m always on the Batman rule, sir.” - Kate Kane / Detective Comics 857
"It is the story, not he who tells it." Except to us collectors who have to put limits somewhere. - jhanic
Remember, Remember, The Fifth of November, The Gunpowder, Treason, and Plot.