Let's not bullshit. It's like comparing Martin Scorcese to Steven Spielberg. Both have an audience and make entertaining movies. I love Fincher and Tarantino, but for different reasons. Fincher is a visual and I would say complicated genius (his films reflect this). Tarantino is a master of the written word, hes known for his off beat dialogue.
@thecalvinmovies: I wouldn´t say that.I think this whole comprehension is kinda pointless caus of their different styles. But I see it like this: Tarantino has his own way of looking at movies. He is the one modern filmmaker who makes most people get in contact with movies. But I can´t say if u can call it originality, cause of the amount of quotes in his movie. Like Kill Bill--> Basically a remake of the asianmovie Lady Snowblood. Don´t get it wrong, I like his work, but no match to Fincher
Fincher is an ok studio director that has made a few decent films. His visual styles changes a little from film to film, it's nowhere near as distinct as fanboys make it out to be. He is not an auteur. He is just a decent studio director, that's all. he is more of a technician than an artist.
Tarantino used to be good, but he is just wasting his talent now. at least he is distinctive.
@Tyler2004durden@NoDataNoFuture Tarantino has never been really original, since "Reservoir Dogs" is basically a loose remake of Ringo Lam's "City on Fire". But everybody's always been inspired by everybody in movie history. Tarantino's visual, different style makes his films really personal, his own, even if he always 'borrows' a lot.
I disagree, but the spelling on Bastards is BS. The studio forced him to change it. He right on creating something from scratch. Do you know how hard that is to do in any entertainment medium? To make something totally original? It's very hard, man.
I guess most of people here misunderstand what Tarantino is saying here. He's not trying to say that he's better than Fincher because he writes scripts when Fincher doesn't, but that he's playing in a different category. Tarantino even said that Fincher is the most talentful director from their own generation. So I don't know what his 'ego' is doing here. They are both amazing directors.
But the fact is, what Tarantino does is much more difficult and takes much more time.
There's no such thing as a writer-directer job. Tarantino does two jobs whereas Fincher (to use his example) only does one. I think Fincher's a better director than Tarantino. Obviously Tarantino's a better writer, because Fincher isn't a writer at all. Tarantino shouldn't lump the two jobs together, it's unfair. He writes, so compare yourself with writers. He directs, compare it with directors. But they're two separate things. The fact that they're done by the same man doesn't make it one job.
I really like Tarantinos' movies but my only problem with them is (although I love good dialogues) most of the times the dialogues are genuinely amazing and solid but in some occasions they get boring and can slow the pace of the the movie. He knows how to regain that pace with the action sequences but it can be a real issue in the movie as a whole. I can't say much about Fincher becaus I may be the biggest Fincher fanboy on the planet (with good reason because he's a genious).
Tarantino is nowhere near Fincher's league. Fincher is trying to make something unique with every movie -> Tarantino is just living in the past remaking other more talented peoples movies.
@Wezzipooh He hasn't done a regular remake but the "inspiration" from other movies shines heavily through. Be it samurai, blaxploitation, grindhouse, spaghettiwesterns etc. I think these influences are too dominant in his movies and it prevents him from doing something more personal, more unique.
I respect what Tarantino is saying, he does make sense in his statements. Finchers movies as a whole can engage me, with the combination of tone and cinematography etc... Tarantino can grab my attention for scenes at a time, but then some random 80's song will play and i'm quickly taken out of his... inglorious bastards did have some amazing scenes, both of these directors have made it hard for me to enjoy just any old movie
The idea that Tarantino can write is a total joke. Not a single conversation in any film of his is remotely interesting or insightful. This is why he uses cheap comic book tricks and gimmicks. If he didn't have his gimmicks, his films would be unbelievably boring. He is a master of triviality and banality. His films are defined as style over substance. Truly great filmmakers (like Ozu, Tarkovsky, Cassavetes, Dreyer, Rappaport, Bergman etc) don't need gimmicks to be great.
Fincher is an amazing DIRECTOR, Tarantino thinks of himself as a WRITER-DIRECTOR, children. That's what makes them different from one another. So, shut the fuck up.
I think if you have achieved what Tarantino has achieved, you can afford to be a little bigheaded. Far more refreshing than false modesty don't you think?
He's got a point about voice, but I couldn't quite hear him over his ego, lol... I love Tarantino, but man... And as far as Fincher's concerned, his working with scripts that aren't his own hasn't lost him a thing, IMHO. He's got a visual and rhythmic style that a lot of people can spot a mile away.
What? You're comparing Tarantino to Fincher? Yeah, sure Fincher is better but you can't even compare them, it's like the student and the teacher. YouTube is THE place for useless arguments
When you die, I BET you'll be able to name more lines from Tarantino films and his movie titles than David Fincher's . . . because originality is more memorable.
@thecalvinmovies Oh yeah, because originality is clearly synonymous with quoting lines. Not dissing Tarantino, I mean I love Tarantino, and I prefer him over Fincher, but originality can be achieved other ways. "Eraserhead" by David Lynch for example, is an original piece of cinema, that really doesn't have any lines at all.
What did he say wrong about Fincher that's got all of you pissed off? He just said he's a director/writer whereas Fincher is a director, which is true. Tarantino's voice speaks through his movies, specifically because he writes them, and thats why they so cool. he's an artist and a truly gifted filmmaker. Fincher is a great director too, Quentin says that he's one of the most talented filmmakers of his generation. But Fincher never writes: he only adapts (very well) other stories that exist.
@samthebeast00835 I love Fincher's films maybe even a little bit more than Tarantino's but i couldn't get what he said wrong too... he's actually 100% right. it's a lot easier to direct something that's already been writing than start from zero.
@pacmansays No, he's just very into what he does, he talks with a passion about film. In other words his brain speaks faster than his mouth, I'm like that too.
@writerblaster hitchcock wrote for two of his films.he could write a screenplay.but fincher was a music video director.spielberg,scorsese wont strain themselves to write scripts,they just direct now-a-days.kubrick always wrote scripts with others.fact be told.writing is difficult.it needs creativity
@writerblaster hitchcock wrote for two of his films.he could write a screenplay.but fincher was a music video director.spielberg,scorsese wont strain themselves to write scripts,they just direct now-a-days.kubrick always wrote scripts with others
@charan5253 I'm sorry but Hitchcock has not written any major script in his life. Spielberg and Scorsese have both written scripts in the past (Mean Streets, Goodfellas, Casino, Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind, Poltergeist, A.I.) I know writing is difficult. It's the most difficult thing to do. That's the point. That's Tarantino's point. Joe Eszterhas (writer of Basic instinct) said it's more difficult to write a film than to direct it. I definitely agree with that.
@writerblaster That Tarantino in here it is talking like if out of fucking nowhere he create the ideas for his movies, almost all of his movies are reinterpretations of old movies specially Inglorious Basterds
@Benny1642 tarantino happens to be director and writer he has both abilities,finches may not be a writer but he is the best director i have ever seen so far with a dark visual style that drives me crazy i agree with you friend
this isn't Quentin Tarantino on David Fincher, this is Tarantino mentioning Fincher, and bragging about how great he is. i like his movies but this guy is a douche.
Tarantino should stick to directing other people's novels, unless he can come up with another Pulp Fiction. Kill Bill Volumes 1 and 2 and Inglourious Basterds just ain't gonna cut it.
@Exiled86 Dangerous Habits would be too far in the storyline without providing an actual idea of who exactly John Constantine is (but then again, Original Sins didn't provide that much of an image either). I'd consider a better part to start out on would be Son of Man or Haunted.
On an unrelated note, I always find it interesting that Tarantino and Paul Thomas Anderson are such good friends, considering that QT is ridiculously pompous (more so now than ever, I'm afraid) and PTA is ridiculously humble. Opposites attract, I guess.
If Quentin Tarantino had a dick big enough he would fuck himself. God that guy's ego his bigger than his forehead. I wish he wasn't so discouraged about making more novel based movies because Jackie Brown was amazing. He is still a decent writer too though don't get me wrong, but his best original work I believe was still Pulp Fiction.
I loved Jackie Brown, it really makes no difference to me as a viewer whether he wrote it or not, it's just more bragging rights for him if he did, it annoyed me that he basically said that he has more of a voice than Fincher in hindsight, because that isn't true.
@paulod27 It's not about QT's ego but about a fact: writers/directors are a different type than single directors, who can make much more movies without burning themselves in writing, without bringing any voice, but still... Hitchcock's never written any movie in his career and look at the voice he still is now. But films like Seven or Fight Club or The Social Network wouldn't exist without the hard writing works from other people than Fincher, who's never sit in front of a blank sheet of paper.
fincher is as overrated as 'the social network'.even the oscars jury found that it is overrated.well directed and better film 'the king's speech' won.academy dint lose my faith
@charan5253 I hope you know how absurdly stupid you are. You obviously don't know what you're talking about if you believe the value of any movie can only be reaffirmed by an institution like the Academy Awards. Go back to sleep.
There seem to be a good number of Fincher detractors roaming around here. I'm surprised by that. Every movie of his that I've seen has come off as masterful and compelling. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was really fantastic and a huge improvement over the original version.
I think Fincher is better than Tarantino these days, Inglorious basterds was not that good. And yeah a director doesn't have to write the film to show his mark, You can tell all of Fincher's work just by watching it, hes a great director, and probably now a greater director than Tarantino who seems to write better than he can direct, although i found the writing in IB just boring compared to reservoir dogs (which we all know has the same plot as that hong kong film) and pulp fiction which is grt
@peteagassi get some maxi-pads for ur period and get some film knowledge for ur pea-sized brain.his brother jonathan nolan writes script along with chris nolan.his films have more no.of plotholes.he didnt even get nominated for academy award in best director category.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
HAS THIS OVERRATED DOUCHE BAG NEVER HEARD OF CHRISTOPHER NOLAN?! NOLAN IS A WRITER DIRECTOR/PRODUCER (YES, HE DOES IT ALL!) AND IS FAR BETTER THAN TARANTINO; NOLAN'S MOVIES ARE SERIOUS ART, UNLIKE TARANTINO'S--WHICH ARE SILLY COMEDIES. NOLAN IS THE BEST FILMMAKER TODAY. PERIOD.
@peteagassi You should be ashamed of yourself. Did Chris Nolan make Fight Club? 7even? The Game? Alien 3? The Curious Case of Benjamin Button? The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo? Cause David Fincher did. I rest my case.
@mdilla11 In what way are those movies bad? I appreciate Fincher because he's one of the few directors who still puts effort it in shooting his movies, not everything is special effects or CGI, it's all real and natural. (Now Benjamin Button is an exception.) So please, enlighten me.
Everything for Fincher is about effects. The Girl w/ the Dragon Tattoo was just a replica of the first one with more atmospheric lighting and music. The Social Network was steeped to a fault in daunting and moody music and acting. Fincher is all about the superficial and his movies are boring as a result. He hasn't made one good movie. You are now enlightened.
@mdilla11 Even though i don't agree with your opinion, i do give you MAJOR props for giving logical reasons. Alot of people on here use reasons that don't back up their own opinion.
@mdilla11 Here's where I question your point. Before you can assert what is superficial, don't you have to at least explain what worked in the film as well as didn't. I find balance to be more educational for film review. Also, what context do you place the actual "acting"? Indeed his version is a character piece. Moody is also known as emotion. Did you not find the characters intelligent? If so why? Thanks.
No, I don't have to explain what worked in the film before i assert what is superficial. Also I am completely unsure of what you are trying to say. What context do i place the actual "acting?" What does that mean? Moody is also known as emotion? Okay? Help? Can't... understand...
@mdilla11 No sense in trying to convince someone who's at an elementary level regarding cinema. It's obvious that MrSuperFilmBuff knows very little about film or film history, much less international cinema. Either he'll do himself a favor, by expanding his film viewing, or not. If he wants to keep making a spectacle of his ignorance, that's his choice. Why waste your time on him?
@ishmyl99 the idea that I know "very little about film or film history, much less international cinema" is somewhat amusing considering that 1) I'm French and 2) I work in the film industry (as an editor). Just out of curiosity, how did you come to these conclusions about me? Is it solely because I like (most of) Fincher's work? I like other films too, including the ones @mdilla11 mentioned. Isn't it a spectacle of ignorance for you to assume as much as you did with so little actual information?
@MrSuperFilmBuff A wide variance of subjective opinions is a given, and welcome. However, credibility of assessment when it comes to any discipline of craft or art form, in this case film, is not validated or invalidated by one's nationality or profession or non-profession in the specific field in question. Someone could be a Portuguese national, homeless in South Africa, whose keen, discerning references to film indicate the depth & range of his/her knowledge of cinema. (End)
@ishmyl99 Nationality & cultural background influences how people experience film. As for your point about profession, I wouldn't be a working editor if I didn't understand cameras, lenses, shot composition, story subtext, the subtleties of an actor's performance, comedic/dramatic timing, etc. I have to step into the shoes of the writer, the director, and lastly the audience in order to do my job. Your 1st post about me is completely baseless and uninformed, not to mention pompous and arrogant.
bbc film critic mark kermode makes the interesting observation that tarantino's only really good film is the one he adopted from a novel...because he doesn't know how to create individual characters. once you begin to actually notice this, you realize how fuckng terrible his movies really are.
i do not agree 100%, i agree 99%. but it is true that films by writer/directors like Trantino, Kevin Smith, Richard Linklater, Scorsese, Anderson are better executed, even if you dont like Dogma you have to admit, the dialogue is awesome the editing is spot on unlike films of Tim Burton for example, his films have his style but sometimes he fails miserably to get the message across (alice for example).
I think Tarantino and Fincher complement each other very well in their styles. For this generation to have two completely different and brilliant filmmakers like these is such a blessing, in my opinion. Different approaches but also have that same cool, assured feel to their work. i just like to picture both of them in a room sitting across from each other like Smiley and Karla. "We're not so different, you and I."
good writing is tough.Direction is also tough task.Directors take credit from writers.if a film becomes success,people giv most of the credit to director.nobody cares abt writer.writers r true creators.directors r portrayers.if someone is good at both writing and directing,he must be damn Genius
@charan5253 I agree. Writers should get a lot more credit than they got now. I, for instance, know perhaps two or three writers that only produces screenplays and not movies. I don't claim to be an expert in movies but I have seen a lot of them and I know about many actors, directors and composers for films. I think that if being a writer became a more status job and if writers became well known people, like directors, the quality of movies would rise drasticly.
@Wass0o7 That doesn't necessarily mean the movie is gonna be good. There's a chance that movie would come out worse than if either of them had made it on their own! If 2 great chefs get together to make a dish their food might be too salty or too bland.
A director does not have to write his own films to convey the "voice", as Tarantino so cleverly puts it. Someone like Fincher projects himself in every frame, camera angle, choice of colour palette, editing....the list is endless. It's just that the "voice" is harder to analyse for the general viewer than that of the writer/director. Doesn't mean it's any less meaningful
@djphilips1 I agree! Auteurship is still present for many directors who don't write their own scripts. Just because Tarantino writes and directs his own films doesn't mean his work is better or more meaningful. I agree it is hard work to write and direct your own film from scratch, though you have more freedom than say, a novel adaptation because you are writing whatever you want and you don't have to hold true or work around a previous script. Either way, it looks like a tough job to handle.
@djphilips1 personally i think (i saying this as a director) is that theres SO much more that can be change outside of the screen play... The audio can change everything, Editing can change everything, but the director can change EVERY SINGLE THING! about how a movie looks, feels and is portrayed. how things are said and how places are presented can change the feeling of a movie entirely. and i think that's very neat because there's so many factors in making a movie
@IsThis4Entertainment Well put. A highly collaborative medium, cinema. But, yes, a strong, assured director can "change everything" out of any number/combination of production factors. The sum effect of a movie can turn on the 'smallest' of insightful details. And sly directors (such as, say, Luis Bunuel), in their mastery of the form, can brilliantly subvert constraints which undermine a movie's integrity, and which are imposed by studios, funders, censors, and so on.
@djphilips1 shut up. fincher is not an artist, fincher is a craftsmen, perhaps one of the most brilliant craftsmen of all time. Fincher doesn't begin to originate material within the medium he works in. he is always an interpretor. he interprets, doesn't create it within his medium. i mean adapting a novel can still have you be an artist because your still originating it within the medium.
@malows1234 Your explanation can be easily reasoned out to be incorrect: Art is the product of a creative skill. You said it yourself that Fincher is creative, as to be a "brilliant craftsm[a]n" one surely needs to be creative. And someone who creates art, especially good art, is an artist. Watch something like Se7en and tell me the director who made that thing of beauty isn't an artist. Fincher is not an interpreter as a script doesn't tell you how to edit, colour and pace a film,amongst others
@malows1234 And also, a script is only a compartment of a film. Just because a director does not write the script does not mean he shouldn't be credited for it, and not be called an artist for it. If this is not so, why is Spielberg said to be optimistic and sentimental when he doesn't write his own films? It's because there is SO MUCH MORE to a film that its script, and the fact that a director makes a film means he becomes one with the script to channel it into the art form of film
@mdilla11 I have no admiration for Fincher's movies either. But the point that a director need not script his or her own work, to make that work meaningful, is valid. To some viewers, Fincher may not be an ideal example of a worthy cinematic "voice," but his visual/tonal approach, like it or not, is predictable or typical of him. Not necessarily something to aspire to, but it does indicate that a director's "presence," however derivative, can be felt, w/o his penning the script.
@djphilips1 Good point. It's also one that relates to some of the misinterpretations or misuses of the "auteur" theory. Many examples exist to what you've said. One is director John Huston, among other gifted but unfairly overlooked craftsmen of cinema. A stamp of particular, individual character, inclination & sensibility ("voice") IS recognizable in some directors' works, across many films not scripted by them -- which makes them no less meaningful, I agree.
@OralAgreement69 um, no, directing and writing are two different things, and they channel each other through different mediums. Just because your film has someone else's dialogue doesn't mean it's not yours. It's like saying a pie you make using ready-made pastry isn't a pie made by you
@djphilips1 um... NO... u are saying that Tarantino is wrong and you dont have the wherewithal to make that comment. if you DID , you would be a filmmaker. but you arent, so just shut up.. BAMMM all up in yo azz
@OralAgreement69 I am not saying that Tarantino is wrong. He is in fact also very talented. I'm just saying that it's ignorant to say Fincher isn't talented because he doesn't write his own scripts. Now if you think that the be all and end all of a film is its script, there is nothing else I can say, only that you need to look into a director's role in film. And are YOU a filmmaker? I believe that that comment was rather unfair, as where I live it's impossible to get noted in the film world =/
What he's saying here makes a lot of sense. Of course it takes a different kind of work to be able to think up and film a story from scratch than it does to film an adaption. Whether Tarantino's theory that it's a more difficult art in general is true, i'm not sure. You can't put Stanley Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange in the same category as say, some Stephen King adaption. It takes a lot more than a good story to make a movie great.
Why is he so fucking full of himself? He writes shit shocker films that only teens and young adult like. With the exception of pulp fiction, he really hasn't written or directed a single actually good movie. Just a bunch of gore and f bombs and maybe some nudity. Takes some crazy talent to write that hahahahaha.
@selleckman2 Don't get to offended. Some people just lack the ability to read into Tarantino films. They only see the blood and violence at face value, and never for the context/commentary they actually represent.
@65g4 I also agree, I love how you have put it, I have all these amazing ideas in my mind and I just get carried away thinking what the trailer would look like, who would act in the film, yet, not even a finger has touched that keyboard . OR, I write it
this guy is amazing!! what better director than the writer i would say.
CalebRodvaz 10 hours ago
Tarantino is an Aries and Fincher a Virgo. One is all ego and the other all intellect :)
MyRychlik 13 hours ago
Let's not bullshit. It's like comparing Martin Scorcese to Steven Spielberg. Both have an audience and make entertaining movies. I love Fincher and Tarantino, but for different reasons. Fincher is a visual and I would say complicated genius (his films reflect this). Tarantino is a master of the written word, hes known for his off beat dialogue.
MyRychlik 13 hours ago
@thecalvinmovies: I wouldn´t say that.I think this whole comprehension is kinda pointless caus of their different styles. But I see it like this: Tarantino has his own way of looking at movies. He is the one modern filmmaker who makes most people get in contact with movies. But I can´t say if u can call it originality, cause of the amount of quotes in his movie. Like Kill Bill--> Basically a remake of the asianmovie Lady Snowblood. Don´t get it wrong, I like his work, but no match to Fincher
MrShritz 15 hours ago
Fincher is an ok studio director that has made a few decent films. His visual styles changes a little from film to film, it's nowhere near as distinct as fanboys make it out to be. He is not an auteur. He is just a decent studio director, that's all. he is more of a technician than an artist.
Tarantino used to be good, but he is just wasting his talent now. at least he is distinctive.
lamentate07 21 hours ago
Dear Tarantino.
Where is your voice now?
You used to be original, now you just "borrow" from other movies.
Tyler2004durden 1 day ago
@Tyler2004durden @NoDataNoFuture Tarantino has never been really original, since "Reservoir Dogs" is basically a loose remake of Ringo Lam's "City on Fire". But everybody's always been inspired by everybody in movie history. Tarantino's visual, different style makes his films really personal, his own, even if he always 'borrows' a lot.
writerblaster 17 hours ago
@Tyler2004durden - Uh he's been borrowing ever since his first movie. Where have you been? lol
egglady 6 hours ago
they're both good
Eddddddddddyz 1 day ago
Wow...what an enormous asshole tarantino is.
Enormous.
Wow.
Raagiol 1 day ago
@Raagiol
I disagree, but the spelling on Bastards is BS. The studio forced him to change it. He right on creating something from scratch. Do you know how hard that is to do in any entertainment medium? To make something totally original? It's very hard, man.
IndygoEEI 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@writerblaster he dint say that fincher is the most talented director.he said fincher is ONE OF THE most talented directors of their gen.
bunny5253 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@writerblaster he dint say that fincher is the most talented directors.he said fincher is ONE OF THE most talented directors of their gen.
bunny5253 1 day ago
I guess most of people here misunderstand what Tarantino is saying here. He's not trying to say that he's better than Fincher because he writes scripts when Fincher doesn't, but that he's playing in a different category. Tarantino even said that Fincher is the most talentful director from their own generation. So I don't know what his 'ego' is doing here. They are both amazing directors.
But the fact is, what Tarantino does is much more difficult and takes much more time.
writerblaster 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
QT is the JAMES BOND of film directors
bunny5253 1 day ago
gotta love the arrogant fuck
allg0odnamesaretaken 1 day ago
@allg0odnamesaretaken How is Tarantino arrogant?
AveryCulture 1 day ago
There's no such thing as a writer-directer job. Tarantino does two jobs whereas Fincher (to use his example) only does one. I think Fincher's a better director than Tarantino. Obviously Tarantino's a better writer, because Fincher isn't a writer at all. Tarantino shouldn't lump the two jobs together, it's unfair. He writes, so compare yourself with writers. He directs, compare it with directors. But they're two separate things. The fact that they're done by the same man doesn't make it one job.
Redspy27 1 day ago 4
@Redspy27 I really agree with this. Smart comment.
MyRychlik 13 hours ago
Tarantino>>>>>>>>>> ALL directors in the world
johann2779 2 days ago
I really like Tarantinos' movies but my only problem with them is (although I love good dialogues) most of the times the dialogues are genuinely amazing and solid but in some occasions they get boring and can slow the pace of the the movie. He knows how to regain that pace with the action sequences but it can be a real issue in the movie as a whole. I can't say much about Fincher becaus I may be the biggest Fincher fanboy on the planet (with good reason because he's a genious).
Mrsupermatt2172 2 days ago
Tarantino is nowhere near Fincher's league. Fincher is trying to make something unique with every movie -> Tarantino is just living in the past remaking other more talented peoples movies.
NoDataNoFuture 2 days ago
@NoDataNoFuture Tarantino has never done a remake. Which movies were you thinking of?
Wezzipooh 2 days ago
@Wezzipooh He hasn't done a regular remake but the "inspiration" from other movies shines heavily through. Be it samurai, blaxploitation, grindhouse, spaghettiwesterns etc. I think these influences are too dominant in his movies and it prevents him from doing something more personal, more unique.
NoDataNoFuture 19 hours ago
finchers was great, but the girl with the dragon tatoo is unwatchable for european audiences.
1789Bastille 3 days ago
@1789Bastille I am European. Read the book. Saw both movies. Love it all. Did I ass your test?
leekepwn 2 days ago
I respect what Tarantino is saying, he does make sense in his statements. Finchers movies as a whole can engage me, with the combination of tone and cinematography etc... Tarantino can grab my attention for scenes at a time, but then some random 80's song will play and i'm quickly taken out of his... inglorious bastards did have some amazing scenes, both of these directors have made it hard for me to enjoy just any old movie
SpringSauce23 3 days ago
i'll take girl with the dragon tattoo over inglorious basterds any day of the week, just saying
dirtycelinefrenchman 3 days ago
The idea that Tarantino can write is a total joke. Not a single conversation in any film of his is remotely interesting or insightful. This is why he uses cheap comic book tricks and gimmicks. If he didn't have his gimmicks, his films would be unbelievably boring. He is a master of triviality and banality. His films are defined as style over substance. Truly great filmmakers (like Ozu, Tarkovsky, Cassavetes, Dreyer, Rappaport, Bergman etc) don't need gimmicks to be great.
ASRIBEIRIO 3 days ago 2
Fincher is an amazing DIRECTOR, Tarantino thinks of himself as a WRITER-DIRECTOR, children. That's what makes them different from one another. So, shut the fuck up.
apewillrise 3 days ago
I think if you have achieved what Tarantino has achieved, you can afford to be a little bigheaded. Far more refreshing than false modesty don't you think?
palfrensis 4 days ago
He's got a point about voice, but I couldn't quite hear him over his ego, lol... I love Tarantino, but man... And as far as Fincher's concerned, his working with scripts that aren't his own hasn't lost him a thing, IMHO. He's got a visual and rhythmic style that a lot of people can spot a mile away.
OWickedOne88 4 days ago
Pulp Fiction & Reservoir Dogs are one of the greatest movies ever made!!!!
Sadclownbc6 5 days ago
Inglorious is a remake. He is lying.
thomaslesourd 5 days ago
@thomaslesourd he explained that there is a 1978 film named the same, but you chose to ignore that?
withersn 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fuckingDracula u Draculafucker,go to ur Nut house,take ur pills and sleep
charan5253 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fuckingDracula u Draculafucker,go to ur Nut house,take ur pills and sleep
charan5253 5 days ago
What? You're comparing Tarantino to Fincher? Yeah, sure Fincher is better but you can't even compare them, it's like the student and the teacher. YouTube is THE place for useless arguments
FuckingDracula 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
most of the people who admire fincher more than QT, doesnt know that fincher doesnt write for his films
charan5253 6 days ago
Tarantino >>>>>>> Fincher.
When you die, I BET you'll be able to name more lines from Tarantino films and his movie titles than David Fincher's . . . because originality is more memorable.
thecalvinmovies 6 days ago 9
@thecalvinmovies I'm pretty sure you won't be able to name any lines when you're DEAD!
Be4TinGyoU 1 day ago
@thecalvinmovies Oh yeah, because originality is clearly synonymous with quoting lines. Not dissing Tarantino, I mean I love Tarantino, and I prefer him over Fincher, but originality can be achieved other ways. "Eraserhead" by David Lynch for example, is an original piece of cinema, that really doesn't have any lines at all.
The4thGuy 11 hours ago
What did he say wrong about Fincher that's got all of you pissed off? He just said he's a director/writer whereas Fincher is a director, which is true. Tarantino's voice speaks through his movies, specifically because he writes them, and thats why they so cool. he's an artist and a truly gifted filmmaker. Fincher is a great director too, Quentin says that he's one of the most talented filmmakers of his generation. But Fincher never writes: he only adapts (very well) other stories that exist.
samthebeast00835 1 week ago
@samthebeast00835 I love Fincher's films maybe even a little bit more than Tarantino's but i couldn't get what he said wrong too... he's actually 100% right. it's a lot easier to direct something that's already been writing than start from zero.
ohadohad12 1 week ago
tarantino is just mad at fincher because fincher uses digital
videotapereturner24 1 week ago
wot he's trying to tell us? something like:"hey, don't blame me if my movies suck, i didnt use a professional writer"
ozoshah 1 week ago
Is he insane?
pacmansays 1 week ago
@pacmansays No, he's just very into what he does, he talks with a passion about film. In other words his brain speaks faster than his mouth, I'm like that too.
1king4all 6 days ago
fincher is not even half the director that tarantino is and i am not even that big of a fan of tarantino.
moviemanwill 1 week ago
The interviewer didn't even ask him a question yet. haha
chevypillow247 1 week ago
@writerblaster hitchcock wrote for two of his films.he could write a screenplay.but fincher was a music video director.spielberg,scorsese wont strain themselves to write scripts,they just direct now-a-days.kubrick always wrote scripts with others.fact be told.writing is difficult.it needs creativity
charan5253 1 week ago
@writerblaster hitchcock wrote for two of his films.he could write a screenplay.but fincher was a music video director.spielberg,scorsese wont strain themselves to write scripts,they just direct now-a-days.kubrick always wrote scripts with others
charan5253 1 week ago
@charan5253 I'm sorry but Hitchcock has not written any major script in his life. Spielberg and Scorsese have both written scripts in the past (Mean Streets, Goodfellas, Casino, Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind, Poltergeist, A.I.) I know writing is difficult. It's the most difficult thing to do. That's the point. That's Tarantino's point. Joe Eszterhas (writer of Basic instinct) said it's more difficult to write a film than to direct it. I definitely agree with that.
writerblaster 1 week ago
Charlie Rose is probably the only interviewer Tarantino actually likes.. lol
DemiathDoomhammer 1 week ago
BIG KAHUNA BURGER
str8ridah786 1 week ago
django unchained
kvyas2 2 weeks ago
Yeah right inglorious basterds started witha blank paper...yeah right
Juandiegoles 2 weeks ago
@Juandiegoles Yeah, right. What d'you think?
writerblaster 1 week ago
@writerblaster That Tarantino in here it is talking like if out of fucking nowhere he create the ideas for his movies, almost all of his movies are reinterpretations of old movies specially Inglorious Basterds
Juandiegoles 1 week ago
That is a tought road to hoe
Mario94177 2 weeks ago
I can't believe ripping on Quentin Tarantino for being conceited and plagiarizing. Makes me sad how stupid people are
cheeseitman8 2 weeks ago
The Game , etc
westside159 2 weeks ago
Fincher = seven , fight club , zodiac 2007 ,
westside159 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Irgendwann einmal werden die U****menschen aus Ami-Land dafür zahlen!
Tod allen ***s und deren Freunden! Denn nur ein t***r Ami - ob Mann, ob Weib, ob Kind - ist auch ein Mensch! Euer ARCANVS
ARCANVS1 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Irgendwann einmal werden die U****menschen aus Ami-Land dafür zahlen!
Tod allen ***s und deren Freunden! Denn nur ein t***r Ami - ob Mann, ob Weib, ob Kind - ist auch ein Mensch! Euer ARCANVS
ARCANVS1 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Irgendwann einmal werden die U****menschen aus Ami-Land dafür zahlen!
Tod allen ***s und deren Freunden! Denn nur ein t***r Ami - ob Mann, ob Weib, ob Kind - ist auch ein Mensch! Euer ARCANVS
ARCANVS1 2 weeks ago
Fincher >>>>>>>> Tarantino..
Benny1642 2 weeks ago 19
@Benny1642 tarantino happens to be director and writer he has both abilities,finches may not be a writer but he is the best director i have ever seen so far with a dark visual style that drives me crazy i agree with you friend
kokomanation 1 week ago
this isn't Quentin Tarantino on David Fincher, this is Tarantino mentioning Fincher, and bragging about how great he is. i like his movies but this guy is a douche.
p.s fuck movies, read books.
SomeBoredGuy94 2 weeks ago
I think in some point is right... but he sounded like a dush!
TheIveet 2 weeks ago
He's mad he didn't direct Fight Club.
99knives 2 weeks ago 4
God what a prick
Baddboy187 2 weeks ago
Tarantino should stick to directing other people's novels, unless he can come up with another Pulp Fiction. Kill Bill Volumes 1 and 2 and Inglourious Basterds just ain't gonna cut it.
bfor42 2 weeks ago
David Fincher should adapt the Dangerous Habits storyline from Hellblazer
Exiled86 2 weeks ago
@Exiled86 Dangerous Habits would be too far in the storyline without providing an actual idea of who exactly John Constantine is (but then again, Original Sins didn't provide that much of an image either). I'd consider a better part to start out on would be Son of Man or Haunted.
MovieholicsAnonymous 2 weeks ago
dead nigga storage.
colossalko 2 weeks ago
On an unrelated note, I always find it interesting that Tarantino and Paul Thomas Anderson are such good friends, considering that QT is ridiculously pompous (more so now than ever, I'm afraid) and PTA is ridiculously humble. Opposites attract, I guess.
ColtVonInc 2 weeks ago
I can see where Tarantino is coming from, but a writer/director can lose their voice just as easily as someone who just sticks solely to directing.
ColtVonInc 2 weeks ago
If Quentin Tarantino had a dick big enough he would fuck himself. God that guy's ego his bigger than his forehead. I wish he wasn't so discouraged about making more novel based movies because Jackie Brown was amazing. He is still a decent writer too though don't get me wrong, but his best original work I believe was still Pulp Fiction.
paulod27 2 weeks ago 13
I loved Jackie Brown, it really makes no difference to me as a viewer whether he wrote it or not, it's just more bragging rights for him if he did, it annoyed me that he basically said that he has more of a voice than Fincher in hindsight, because that isn't true.
ReeceJackson 2 weeks ago
@paulod27 lol how does having a big dick mean you can fuck yourself
just being pedantic though, i get what you're saying.
Concerning ego, however, i have to quote Kanye West:
"yall want me to be genius but not to say that i am one"
huntedrasta 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@paulod27 lol how does having a big dick mean you can fuck yourself
just being pedantic though, i get what you're saying.
Concerning ego, however, i have to quote Kanye West:
"yall want me to be genius but not to say that i am one"
huntedrasta 2 weeks ago
@paulod27 "a decent writer" shut your dumb face
brybry19871987 2 weeks ago
@paulod27 He's going to be a full blown novelist after a few more movies.
biggiedickson 1 week ago
@paulod27 It's not about QT's ego but about a fact: writers/directors are a different type than single directors, who can make much more movies without burning themselves in writing, without bringing any voice, but still... Hitchcock's never written any movie in his career and look at the voice he still is now. But films like Seven or Fight Club or The Social Network wouldn't exist without the hard writing works from other people than Fincher, who's never sit in front of a blank sheet of paper.
writerblaster 1 week ago
@paulod27 Ok but Inglorious Basterds did top PF for original work in his catalouge :D
venuecam 1 week ago
Kings speech was fucking stupid and so are you charan
stk32018 2 weeks ago 2
fincher is as overrated as 'the social network'.even the oscars jury found that it is overrated.well directed and better film 'the king's speech' won.academy dint lose my faith
charan5253 3 weeks ago
@charan5253 I hope you know how absurdly stupid you are. You obviously don't know what you're talking about if you believe the value of any movie can only be reaffirmed by an institution like the Academy Awards. Go back to sleep.
kelvinho84realmadrid 2 weeks ago
There seem to be a good number of Fincher detractors roaming around here. I'm surprised by that. Every movie of his that I've seen has come off as masterful and compelling. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was really fantastic and a huge improvement over the original version.
TomCharlesLee 3 weeks ago 2
I think he might be...up his own ass...a bit. And he has every right.
connorisawsome8440 3 weeks ago
I think Fincher is better than Tarantino these days, Inglorious basterds was not that good. And yeah a director doesn't have to write the film to show his mark, You can tell all of Fincher's work just by watching it, hes a great director, and probably now a greater director than Tarantino who seems to write better than he can direct, although i found the writing in IB just boring compared to reservoir dogs (which we all know has the same plot as that hong kong film) and pulp fiction which is grt
landondonovanify 3 weeks ago
@landondonovanify
You eat, drink, and breath, commas,.
mdilla11 3 weeks ago
@mdilla11 i, know, i, just, love, them, ,,,,,,,
landondonovanify 3 weeks ago
@mdilla11 many people think that praising fincher makes them movie experts.fightclub,7 r not boring.fightclub is fincher's best work
charan5253 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ever wonder how a script becomes a film? Visit my blog on my Youtube channel page to find out!
Screenplay12 3 weeks ago
@thehollywoodworld it shud happen in heaven only.we miss heath.QT is the best in squeezing best performance frm artists
charan5253 3 weeks ago
IMAGINE..JUST FREAKING IMAGINE..HEATH LEDGER AND QUENTIN TARANTINO working together OMFG HEAVEN ON HOLLYWOOD
thehollywoodworld 3 weeks ago
too bad he can't act. That's all he ever wanted to to.
2fivefilms 3 weeks ago
@peteagassi get some maxi-pads for ur period and get some film knowledge for ur pea-sized brain.his brother jonathan nolan writes script along with chris nolan.his films have more no.of plotholes.he didnt even get nominated for academy award in best director category.
charan5253 4 weeks ago
I LOVE QUENTIN TARANTINO, HE IS A BRILLIANT WRITER/DIRECTOR!!!
UMBUBA 4 weeks ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
HAS THIS OVERRATED DOUCHE BAG NEVER HEARD OF CHRISTOPHER NOLAN?! NOLAN IS A WRITER DIRECTOR/PRODUCER (YES, HE DOES IT ALL!) AND IS FAR BETTER THAN TARANTINO; NOLAN'S MOVIES ARE SERIOUS ART, UNLIKE TARANTINO'S--WHICH ARE SILLY COMEDIES. NOLAN IS THE BEST FILMMAKER TODAY. PERIOD.
peteagassi 4 weeks ago
@peteagassi You clearly have never seen a Fincher film.
Mollykamikaze 4 weeks ago
@peteagassi You should be ashamed of yourself. Did Chris Nolan make Fight Club? 7even? The Game? Alien 3? The Curious Case of Benjamin Button? The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo? Cause David Fincher did. I rest my case.
MovieGod12345 3 weeks ago
@MovieGod12345
All of those movies are bad... maybe you need to watch them again and hop off the fincher bandwagon
mdilla11 3 weeks ago
@mdilla11 In what way are those movies bad? I appreciate Fincher because he's one of the few directors who still puts effort it in shooting his movies, not everything is special effects or CGI, it's all real and natural. (Now Benjamin Button is an exception.) So please, enlighten me.
MovieGod12345 3 weeks ago
@MovieGod12345
Everything for Fincher is about effects. The Girl w/ the Dragon Tattoo was just a replica of the first one with more atmospheric lighting and music. The Social Network was steeped to a fault in daunting and moody music and acting. Fincher is all about the superficial and his movies are boring as a result. He hasn't made one good movie. You are now enlightened.
mdilla11 3 weeks ago
@mdilla11 Even though i don't agree with your opinion, i do give you MAJOR props for giving logical reasons. Alot of people on here use reasons that don't back up their own opinion.
MovieGod12345 3 weeks ago
@MovieGod12345
Oh, thanks... Although I'm not logical and I also have herpes
mdilla11 3 weeks ago
@mdilla11 Oh...well..uh...carry on.
MovieGod12345 3 weeks ago
@mdilla11 Here's where I question your point. Before you can assert what is superficial, don't you have to at least explain what worked in the film as well as didn't. I find balance to be more educational for film review. Also, what context do you place the actual "acting"? Indeed his version is a character piece. Moody is also known as emotion. Did you not find the characters intelligent? If so why? Thanks.
FirstAndLastLook 3 weeks ago
@FirstAndLastLook
No, I don't have to explain what worked in the film before i assert what is superficial. Also I am completely unsure of what you are trying to say. What context do i place the actual "acting?" What does that mean? Moody is also known as emotion? Okay? Help? Can't... understand...
mdilla11 3 weeks ago
@mdilla11 Seven, Fight Club, Button, Zodiac, Social Network, Dragon tattoo were pretty awesome.
MrSuperFilmBuff 3 weeks ago 2
@MrSuperFilmBuff
No. Not even close.
mdilla11 3 weeks ago
@mdilla11 so what movies do you consider "pretty awesome"?
MrSuperFilmBuff 3 weeks ago
@MrSuperFilmBuff
Raging Bull, Eyes Wide Shut, The Exorcist, Mean Streets, The Departed, E.T., No Country for Old Men, Fargo, etc. etc.
mdilla11 3 weeks ago
@mdilla11 No sense in trying to convince someone who's at an elementary level regarding cinema. It's obvious that MrSuperFilmBuff knows very little about film or film history, much less international cinema. Either he'll do himself a favor, by expanding his film viewing, or not. If he wants to keep making a spectacle of his ignorance, that's his choice. Why waste your time on him?
ishmyl99 3 weeks ago
@ishmyl99 the idea that I know "very little about film or film history, much less international cinema" is somewhat amusing considering that 1) I'm French and 2) I work in the film industry (as an editor). Just out of curiosity, how did you come to these conclusions about me? Is it solely because I like (most of) Fincher's work? I like other films too, including the ones @mdilla11 mentioned. Isn't it a spectacle of ignorance for you to assume as much as you did with so little actual information?
MrSuperFilmBuff 3 weeks ago
@MrSuperFilmBuff A wide variance of subjective opinions is a given, and welcome. However, credibility of assessment when it comes to any discipline of craft or art form, in this case film, is not validated or invalidated by one's nationality or profession or non-profession in the specific field in question. Someone could be a Portuguese national, homeless in South Africa, whose keen, discerning references to film indicate the depth & range of his/her knowledge of cinema. (End)
ishmyl99 3 weeks ago
@ishmyl99 Nationality & cultural background influences how people experience film. As for your point about profession, I wouldn't be a working editor if I didn't understand cameras, lenses, shot composition, story subtext, the subtleties of an actor's performance, comedic/dramatic timing, etc. I have to step into the shoes of the writer, the director, and lastly the audience in order to do my job. Your 1st post about me is completely baseless and uninformed, not to mention pompous and arrogant.
MrSuperFilmBuff 3 weeks ago
fincher is still the shit
roycesboy 4 weeks ago
He has a funny voice. At least, when you see him you don't expect him to sound like that.
gghice1 4 weeks ago
@Wass0o7 Pulp Club, Resovoir Network, Inglorious Tattoo
TheNOTchosen1 4 weeks ago 4
Tarantino is so over rated.
robair9911 4 weeks ago
bbc film critic mark kermode makes the interesting observation that tarantino's only really good film is the one he adopted from a novel...because he doesn't know how to create individual characters. once you begin to actually notice this, you realize how fuckng terrible his movies really are.
clockworkscott 1 month ago
QUENTIN = KING.I AM COKED.
charan5253 1 month ago
i do not agree 100%, i agree 99%. but it is true that films by writer/directors like Trantino, Kevin Smith, Richard Linklater, Scorsese, Anderson are better executed, even if you dont like Dogma you have to admit, the dialogue is awesome the editing is spot on unlike films of Tim Burton for example, his films have his style but sometimes he fails miserably to get the message across (alice for example).
romas1995 1 month ago
WOW..."The Voice..."
SpikeMichaels 1 month ago
I think Tarantino and Fincher complement each other very well in their styles. For this generation to have two completely different and brilliant filmmakers like these is such a blessing, in my opinion. Different approaches but also have that same cool, assured feel to their work. i just like to picture both of them in a room sitting across from each other like Smiley and Karla. "We're not so different, you and I."
thatfilmgeekguy 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Fincher sucks.
robair9911 1 month ago
@robair9911 Seven, Benjamin button, fight club, and zodiac were very well written movies.
300daysandnights 1 month ago
@300daysandnights zodiac and benjamin button were not good movies. fight club was an adaptation and it wasnt that good
robair9911 1 month ago
@robair9911 that's bull.
300daysandnights 1 month ago
Quentin tarantino,James cameron,coen brothers,cristopher nolan,David.o.russell,p.t.anderson r the best ''writer&director'' s
charan5253 1 month ago
good writing is tough.Direction is also tough task.Directors take credit from writers.if a film becomes success,people giv most of the credit to director.nobody cares abt writer.writers r true creators.directors r portrayers.if someone is good at both writing and directing,he must be damn Genius
charan5253 1 month ago
@charan5253 I agree. Writers should get a lot more credit than they got now. I, for instance, know perhaps two or three writers that only produces screenplays and not movies. I don't claim to be an expert in movies but I have seen a lot of them and I know about many actors, directors and composers for films. I think that if being a writer became a more status job and if writers became well known people, like directors, the quality of movies would rise drasticly.
Tionsity 1 month ago
Will Forte reminds me so much of Tarantino I wonder if he ever parodied him.
Galactic123 1 month ago
Now just imagine Quentin and David fincher got together and made a movie o_0
Wass0o7 1 month ago 40
@Wass0o7 My head would explode out of awesomeness.
mydsbr 1 month ago 2
@Wass0o7 That doesn't necessarily mean the movie is gonna be good. There's a chance that movie would come out worse than if either of them had made it on their own! If 2 great chefs get together to make a dish their food might be too salty or too bland.
scarypsycho 2 weeks ago
@Wass0o7 Dear LORD!
LeTrungAnh 1 week ago
A director does not have to write his own films to convey the "voice", as Tarantino so cleverly puts it. Someone like Fincher projects himself in every frame, camera angle, choice of colour palette, editing....the list is endless. It's just that the "voice" is harder to analyse for the general viewer than that of the writer/director. Doesn't mean it's any less meaningful
djphilips1 1 month ago 34
@djphilips1 I agree! Auteurship is still present for many directors who don't write their own scripts. Just because Tarantino writes and directs his own films doesn't mean his work is better or more meaningful. I agree it is hard work to write and direct your own film from scratch, though you have more freedom than say, a novel adaptation because you are writing whatever you want and you don't have to hold true or work around a previous script. Either way, it looks like a tough job to handle.
dronescanflyaway 1 month ago
@dronescanflyaway Hurrah.
ishmyl99 3 weeks ago
@djphilips1 personally i think (i saying this as a director) is that theres SO much more that can be change outside of the screen play... The audio can change everything, Editing can change everything, but the director can change EVERY SINGLE THING! about how a movie looks, feels and is portrayed. how things are said and how places are presented can change the feeling of a movie entirely. and i think that's very neat because there's so many factors in making a movie
IsThis4Entertainment 1 month ago
@IsThis4Entertainment Well put. A highly collaborative medium, cinema. But, yes, a strong, assured director can "change everything" out of any number/combination of production factors. The sum effect of a movie can turn on the 'smallest' of insightful details. And sly directors (such as, say, Luis Bunuel), in their mastery of the form, can brilliantly subvert constraints which undermine a movie's integrity, and which are imposed by studios, funders, censors, and so on.
ishmyl99 3 weeks ago
@djphilips1 shut up. fincher is not an artist, fincher is a craftsmen, perhaps one of the most brilliant craftsmen of all time. Fincher doesn't begin to originate material within the medium he works in. he is always an interpretor. he interprets, doesn't create it within his medium. i mean adapting a novel can still have you be an artist because your still originating it within the medium.
malows1234 1 month ago
@malows1234 Your explanation can be easily reasoned out to be incorrect: Art is the product of a creative skill. You said it yourself that Fincher is creative, as to be a "brilliant craftsm[a]n" one surely needs to be creative. And someone who creates art, especially good art, is an artist. Watch something like Se7en and tell me the director who made that thing of beauty isn't an artist. Fincher is not an interpreter as a script doesn't tell you how to edit, colour and pace a film,amongst others
djphilips1 1 month ago
@malows1234 And also, a script is only a compartment of a film. Just because a director does not write the script does not mean he shouldn't be credited for it, and not be called an artist for it. If this is not so, why is Spielberg said to be optimistic and sentimental when he doesn't write his own films? It's because there is SO MUCH MORE to a film that its script, and the fact that a director makes a film means he becomes one with the script to channel it into the art form of film
djphilips1 1 month ago
@djphilips1
yes it is less meaningful... fincher's atmospherics are way overappreciated and are taken for more than they are... he is a fraud
mdilla11 3 weeks ago
@mdilla11 I have no admiration for Fincher's movies either. But the point that a director need not script his or her own work, to make that work meaningful, is valid. To some viewers, Fincher may not be an ideal example of a worthy cinematic "voice," but his visual/tonal approach, like it or not, is predictable or typical of him. Not necessarily something to aspire to, but it does indicate that a director's "presence," however derivative, can be felt, w/o his penning the script.
ishmyl99 3 weeks ago
@djphilips1 Agreed. I think if some one put on a movie, in one frame, you could tell it was Fincher.Although, The same could be said for Tarantino.
MrThomaswalsh1988 3 weeks ago
@djphilips1 Good point. It's also one that relates to some of the misinterpretations or misuses of the "auteur" theory. Many examples exist to what you've said. One is director John Huston, among other gifted but unfairly overlooked craftsmen of cinema. A stamp of particular, individual character, inclination & sensibility ("voice") IS recognizable in some directors' works, across many films not scripted by them -- which makes them no less meaningful, I agree.
ishmyl99 3 weeks ago
@djphilips1 um, yes, he does have to write it or else its his spin on someone elses voice. duh...
OralAgreement69 2 weeks ago
@OralAgreement69 um, no, directing and writing are two different things, and they channel each other through different mediums. Just because your film has someone else's dialogue doesn't mean it's not yours. It's like saying a pie you make using ready-made pastry isn't a pie made by you
djphilips1 2 weeks ago
@djphilips1 um... NO... u are saying that Tarantino is wrong and you dont have the wherewithal to make that comment. if you DID , you would be a filmmaker. but you arent, so just shut up.. BAMMM all up in yo azz
OralAgreement69 2 weeks ago
@OralAgreement69 I am not saying that Tarantino is wrong. He is in fact also very talented. I'm just saying that it's ignorant to say Fincher isn't talented because he doesn't write his own scripts. Now if you think that the be all and end all of a film is its script, there is nothing else I can say, only that you need to look into a director's role in film. And are YOU a filmmaker? I believe that that comment was rather unfair, as where I live it's impossible to get noted in the film world =/
djphilips1 2 weeks ago
Zodiac > anything QT made
CaptainRidley 1 month ago
@CaptainRidley You're out of your damn mind if you think Zodiac is better than Pulp Fiction.
HilmCharlotte 1 month ago
David Fincher sucks compared to Tarantino, he just makes movies for the BOX office. It takes alot to be able to write/direct a movie.
MetallicSisters 1 month ago
@MetallicSisters U out yo damn mind if you think David Fincher sucks. He is one of the best directors out there PERIOD!!!
kobemusiqtony 1 month ago
@MetallicSisters So he made se7en and fight club for the box office? if that's what you think then....wow.
thatfilmgeekguy 1 month ago
sweet lord, what an asshat! total cliche of the narcissistic hollywood director.
in b4 'go watch transformers'; i'm as big a tarantino fan as they come, but the dude's egoism is really astounding!
blueshifter 1 month ago
@captainBroha u r full of shit,u ignorant scumbag.QT hasn't shown any nude scenes in his films.STFU and GTFOH.
charan5253 1 month ago
What he's saying here makes a lot of sense. Of course it takes a different kind of work to be able to think up and film a story from scratch than it does to film an adaption. Whether Tarantino's theory that it's a more difficult art in general is true, i'm not sure. You can't put Stanley Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange in the same category as say, some Stephen King adaption. It takes a lot more than a good story to make a movie great.
LuxHaley 1 month ago
Why is he so fucking full of himself? He writes shit shocker films that only teens and young adult like. With the exception of pulp fiction, he really hasn't written or directed a single actually good movie. Just a bunch of gore and f bombs and maybe some nudity. Takes some crazy talent to write that hahahahaha.
CaptainBroha 1 month ago
@CaptainBroha i agree
by the way he steal a lot of material from everybody
saprissa30 1 month ago
@CaptainBroha go watch your fucking Transformer movies
MillaHead 1 month ago
@CaptainBroha Oh my God... please actually watch a single fucking Tarantino movie. Just one.
selleckman2 1 month ago
@selleckman2 Don't get to offended. Some people just lack the ability to read into Tarantino films. They only see the blood and violence at face value, and never for the context/commentary they actually represent.
Frontigenics 1 month ago
@booriley781 look-how-smart-iam-trying-to-be guys talk that way.ignore 'em
bunnypa1charan 1 month ago
@quandrax And why is that not entirely accurate Mr. Genius director?
booriley781 1 month ago
"To me, the glory in what I do is the fact it starts with a blank piece of paper". <--Not entirely accurate.
quandrax 1 month ago
@65g4 I also agree, I love how you have put it, I have all these amazing ideas in my mind and I just get carried away thinking what the trailer would look like, who would act in the film, yet, not even a finger has touched that keyboard . OR, I write it