Movies Christopher Nolan or Quentin Tarantino - Who's the superior film director?

Choose One.


  • Total voters
    59

Takes Two To Tango

The one who doesn't fall, doesn't stand up.
Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
37,317
Reaction score
50,871
In terms of movies they've directed and created.

Who do you say is better?

They are two of the best in what they do. They're not as versatile as like a Stanley Kubrick or Steven Spielberg.

But they are geniuses in their own rights.

what-should-be-my-first-tarantino-film-v0-6zdeymift1cc1.jpeg


4itrud643hpb1.jpg
 
Nolan used to be my favorite. The guy couldn't miss. But now with Dunkirk, tenet, and Oppenheimer, it feels like the guy does nothing but miss now.

So I'm going with Tarantino. The guy makes high budget exploitation films that are super enjoyable and rewatchable.
 
QT - he re invented making movies . He brought 70s flair combined with 90s imagery with 50s/60s cool. Nolan perfected what was already there. Both are great but QT was just imo very unique when he started. Matter of preference tho
 
Nolan used to be my favorite. The guy couldn't miss. But now with Dunkirk, tenet, and Oppenheimer, it feels like the guy does nothing but miss now.

So I'm going with Tarantino. The guy makes high budget exploitation films that are super enjoyable and rewatchable.

I understand not being a fan of Dunkirk or Tenet but I thought that Oppenheimer was fantastic. But to each their own.
 
Never liked Tarantino, so easy choice.

Plus Tarantino is a scumbag,
defended Roman Polanski and worked and praised for years Harvey Weinstein.
 
Nolan wins for me by a big margin IMO. That's not to say Tarrantino is bad, I like his movies, but Nolan is a step above.

Consider this: Nolan's arguably worst movie is Tenet, and it has a 7.3/10 on IMDB
 
Not one of my favorite directors, but the choice is easy between these 2. And it will be Tarantino.

As a big lover of nature films, I want to compare Nolan's films with BBC's AAA titles called Planet Earth, Blue Planet etc, such miniseries where they have as high a budget as a Hollywood film. Latest technology, best photographers. It simply looks fantastic on a big screen to watch these BBC miniseries and Nolan's films.

But if I want more depth, soul and a better understanding, it will be something else like PBC Nature, the unfortunately now defunct BBC Natural World, NHK Great Nature or anything from Doclights.

That is to say that a director like Denis Villenuve has just as good an eye for the technical and eye candy as Nolan, but his films do not feel empty like Nolan's films.
 
If I have no knowledge of a film other than it was directed by QT, I will make a point to go see it. The same is not true for CN or pretty much any other filmmaker.
 
Couldn't say. They're two different things imo. One makes big idea blockbusters and the other makes stuff for filmheads who grew up on Z Channel. Both made solid flicks early on and haven't made a good film in a long time.
 
This is like which is better vanilla or chocolate ice cream?

I'm very happy to be able to live in a world with both.
Each has its own distinct flavor and nuance.


Folks will probably argue with me about this but I would pull several of those QT films and replace them with

True Romance
From Dusk Till Dawn
Natural Born Killers

I know he didn't direct them but his style is all over them.
True Romance that Elvis dialogue is lifted directly from My Best Friends Wedding. Whichever Scott brother (tony?) Did a great job of directing that film, but it is very very Tarantino to me.



I'd pull- Deathproof, Grindhouse and no need for 3 slots of Kill Bill (which is one of his best, but it is either 1 movie or 2, not 3).
 
Last edited:
For me this is a simple choice. It comes down to kill Bill v memento.

kill Bill is amazing, it's fun, it's rewatchable, it's got it all.

Memento is probably the best film I've ever seen the backward idea is one of a kind and the actual story just rocks my world.

I went with Nolan
 
Back
Top