POLL: Avatar or The Hurt Locker?

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

hemlock wrote:The best perhaps at what he does, Tarantino-esque films aren't exactly all over the place. I'd put him in with a guy like Robert Rodriguez and David Fincher, but overall, he's not even close, in my opinion, to being the best director going. He's shown practically zero range. Spielberg has done practically every genre out there. There's also a guy named Scorsese, who's head and shoulders above QT, and has shown quite a bit more range.

I do love QT though, and would love to see what he could do in a straight up drama.

I would call Jackie Brown a drama and even Inglorious is more drama than anything else. Maybe a thriller? Hard to classify, the thing about him is that he combines elements from comedies, drama, thriller, action. It's quite a blend.

It is. But he's never really stepped out of his comfort zone and done a full blown comedy has he? That's sort of what makes his movies unique in that they cross over genres. I'm not arguing that he isn't a great director, I just don't think he's the best. Even Scorsese did a full blown comedy (albeit a dark comedy), with After Hours (classic film).

His time will come. Tarentino, I have no doubt, can direct anyhting. He's only in his what 6th movie? Scorcese, Spielberg etc can do anything they want, they basically run the production house. When QT will be their age, he will do anything he wants too.

marakh wrote:No offense but putting QT in the same category as Rodriguez, I'd have to strongly disagree. Rodriguez is not a very good director, and most of his movies are blockbuster-ish.
Also, Spielberg and Scorcese are what 30 years older? (ok may be not). They certainly are more experienced but more talented, I don't think.
I love all of QT's movies, I think they are original and daring. Spielberg, yeah he has like 3 or 4 of my all time favourites, but along with 10+ stinkers (War of the worlds, seriously?) Scorcese is one of the best, no quesiton but again, most of them also look the same.
I don't know if you've watched Bonus contents in Tarentino's movies. David Carradine said it best: Tarentino could make a movie all by himself. Producing, Directing, camera guy, soundtrack, editing etc.
Spielberg and Scorsese, as experienced as they are, cannot do an original score for their movies IMO, even in writing I don't think they are good at all, most of their movies are based on books.

If we're talking range, experience and talent, I take Ridley Scott any day over these guys. Alien, Gladiator, Telma and Louise... Future, Past, Present. Can you have more range than that? Lol.

SpezDispenser wrote:

hemlock wrote:
No, he didn't. I guarentee it. Yeah, that's another mind boggling one.

EDIT: http://www.filmsite.org/aa98.html

Benigni won for Life is Beautiful over Tom Hanks (the aformentioned Saving Private Ryan), Ian McKellen, Nick Nolte, and Ed Norton.

OMG, that's sooooooooooooo wrong, I didn't even realize that.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

marakh wrote:No offense but putting QT in the same category as Rodriguez, I'd have to strongly disagree. Rodriguez is not a very good director, and most of his movies are blockbuster-ish.
Also, Spielberg and Scorcese are what 30 years older? (ok may be not). They certainly are more experienced but more talented, I don't think.
I love all of QT's movies, I think they are original and daring. Spielberg, yeah he has like 3 or 4 of my all time favourites, but along with 10+ stinkers (War of the worlds, seriously?) Scorcese is one of the best, no quesiton but again, most of them also look the same.
I don't know if you've watched Bonus contents in Tarentino's movies. David Carradine said it best: Tarentino could make a movie all by himself. Producing, Directing, camera guy, soundtrack, editing etc.
Spielberg and Scorsese, as experienced as they are, cannot do an original score for their movies IMO, even in writing I don't think they are good at all, most of their movies are based on books.

If we're talking range, experience and talent, I take Ridley Scott any day over these guys. Alien, Gladiator, Telma and Louise... Future, Past, Present. Can you have more range than that? Lol.

Tarantino's movies are good ideas held together with elements he steals from Spaghetti Westerns and Blaxploitation movies.

hemlock wrote:

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

hemlock wrote:The best perhaps at what he does, Tarantino-esque films aren't exactly all over the place. I'd put him in with a guy like Robert Rodriguez and David Fincher, but overall, he's not even close, in my opinion, to being the best director going. He's shown practically zero range. Spielberg has done practically every genre out there. There's also a guy named Scorsese, who's head and shoulders above QT, and has shown quite a bit more range.

I do love QT though, and would love to see what he could do in a straight up drama.

I would call Jackie Brown a drama and even Inglorious is more drama than anything else. Maybe a thriller? Hard to classify, the thing about him is that he combines elements from comedies, drama, thriller, action. It's quite a blend.

It is. But he's never really stepped out of his comfort zone and done a full blown comedy has he? That's sort of what makes his movies unique in that they cross over genres. I'm not arguing that he isn't a great director, I just don't think he's the best. Even Scorsese did a full blown comedy (albeit a dark comedy), with After Hours (classic film).

His time will come. Tarentino, I have no doubt, can direct anyhting. He's only in his what 6th movie? Scorcese, Spielberg etc can do anything they want, they basically run the production house. When QT will be their age, he will do anything he wants too.

That's quite possible. However, we are talking about RIGHT NOW. And right now, QT just doesn't measure up to some other guys. That's not a bad thing, or even a fair comparison, but for here and now, there are guys that are just simply better than he is. You mentioned earlier about Spielberg and a bunch of flops. Flops happen too all directors, even QT (have you wasted a couple of hours on Kill Bill 2?). Spielberg will of course have more, just as a byproduct of his sheer volume of work.

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

hemlock wrote:The best perhaps at what he does, Tarantino-esque films aren't exactly all over the place. I'd put him in with a guy like Robert Rodriguez and David Fincher, but overall, he's not even close, in my opinion, to being the best director going. He's shown practically zero range. Spielberg has done practically every genre out there. There's also a guy named Scorsese, who's head and shoulders above QT, and has shown quite a bit more range.

I do love QT though, and would love to see what he could do in a straight up drama.

I would call Jackie Brown a drama and even Inglorious is more drama than anything else. Maybe a thriller? Hard to classify, the thing about him is that he combines elements from comedies, drama, thriller, action. It's quite a blend.

It is. But he's never really stepped out of his comfort zone and done a full blown comedy has he? That's sort of what makes his movies unique in that they cross over genres. I'm not arguing that he isn't a great director, I just don't think he's the best. Even Scorsese did a full blown comedy (albeit a dark comedy), with After Hours (classic film).

His time will come. Tarentino, I have no doubt, can direct anyhting. He's only in his what 6th movie? Scorcese, Spielberg etc can do anything they want, they basically run the production house. When QT will be their age, he will do anything he wants too.

That's quite possible. However, we are talking about RIGHT NOW. And right now, QT just doesn't measure up to some other guys. That's not a bad thing, or even a fair comparison, but for here and now, there are guys that are just simply better than he is. You mentioned earlier about Spielberg and a bunch of flops. Flops happen too all directors, even QT (have you wasted a couple of hours on Kill Bill 2?). Spielberg will of course have more, just as a byproduct of his sheer volume of work.

It's in my top 10 all time favourites

SpezDispenser wrote:I havent' seen it yet, but I HATE that arsehole director.

SpezDispenser wrote:I havent' seen it yet, but I HATE that arsehole director.

hemlock wrote:

SensGirl11 wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:I think Hurt Locker would have won it any time, anywhere.

I do to. The more I think about it, the more I believe it was absolutely the right choice.

I agree. There have been some real head scratchers at the Oscars though (Ed Norton getting beat for Best Actor in American History X by Roberto Benigni comes to mind).

SeawaySensFan wrote:"Epic Movie" is still the worst ever.

PKC wrote:If anyone watched Shutter Island, they'd realize that Martin Scorcese is a movie-directing deity.

The list of amazingly good movies he's made is unsurpassable:

Shutter Island
The Departed
The Aviator
Gangs of New York
Casino
Cape Fear
Goodfellas
Raging Bull
Taxi Driver

Cinematic royalty. His movies are the pinnacle of achievement in film.