What's new

Tarantino or Nolan?

so who is it

  • tarantino?

    Votes: 17 45.9%
  • Nolan.

    Votes: 15 40.5%
  • M night shamamamamalayanan

    Votes: 5 13.5%

  • Total voters
    37
In related news:

college_freshman_t_shirt-p235573733066479748cpu4_400.jpg
I appreciate it.
 
Hitchcock. 'Nuff said. I don't think he ever missed a beat.

Hitchcock has a solid case in the "best directors of all time argument." Absurdly he never won a Best Director Oscar and had only one Best Picture win: for Rebecca which I don't think is usually short-listed as among his best films.

The IMDB 250 voters, in their wisdom, have rated his top two movies on the rankings (Rear Window and Psycho) below at least two movies by the following directors: Francis Ford Coppola, Christopher Nolan, George Lucas, Peter Jackson, Steven Spielberg.

But hey, popularity=quality I've heard.
 
So Kubrick wasn't on this IMDB 250 list in the same grouping as FFC, Nolan, lucas, Jackson (yea right), Spielberg, and Hitch? That's absurd. He might not have had the quantity that the others had (he did only one movie a decade or so) but his movies are widely regarded as being pretty high up there on the quality meter.
 
Let's just say that out of that grouping of 6, Nolan is closer to Lucas and Jackson than he is to Coppola and Hitchcock.
 
Hitchcock has a solid case in the "best directors of all time argument." Absurdly he never won a Best Director Oscar and had only one Best Picture win: for Rebecca which I don't think is usually short-listed as among his best films.

The IMDB 250 voters, in their wisdom, have rated his top two movies on the rankings (Rear Window and Psycho) below at least two movies by the following directors: Francis Ford Coppola, Christopher Nolan, George Lucas, Peter Jackson, Steven Spielberg.

But hey, popularity=quality I've heard.

popularity= quality, but quality can be popular or unpopular. The general "average joe" agreement is that popularity= quality.
 
I see what you're saying, Joker, but as with any argument, there are exceptions. Britney Spears has sold millions of albums, but I would be hard pressed to say that her music has the same quality as Beethoven's. That's why I don't like the "average joe" equation that popularity = quality. Art is just too subjective for that imho.
 
The Joker, for the record, has now equated "the inner city person" to someone of low-class tastes.

I'll leave the racial implications of this statement to other posters.
 
What I was saying before i started spreading racist idealism is we all determine a specific value for an artist or a movie. Some people won't appreicate one artist or movie, others will. It's essentially target audiences. You've been targeted... everything around you has been fit to you... you like something because you're supposed to like something... and you don't like something because you're not the intended audience. The most popular things reach the widest audience... and most often the least popular things don't appeal to the smallest audience. Movies don't hold to those "target audience" bands as much, because all people can appreciate all good movies.

God this is so much more fun when I can bring race into it... but I've got the PC police on my ***. Boy aren't lawyers just the utmost moral charchters, f'n hacks
 
nolan wont be wrting or directing superman just producing.

everyon has their own rating system jsut like joker syas for me it works best.
im not a fanboy. i hate twilight, twilight has a huge fangirl following yet it is not on the imdb top 250. or the other 3 star wars movies. . the imdb top 250 works best for me.ith the exception of the grace period.
 
Back
Top