Sedai, Pyro Tramp and all the others who doubted Christopher Nolan

I think 'Belly Laughs' was a bad a choice of phrase but I get the point, Nolan is a very serious director and doesn't have any moments that let off, which can be argued as 'auteur' or reflection of his personality but it does show how there's barely any semblance of humour in his personality. It's not a bad thing, and I couldn't criticise TDK for that or any of his other films but I can see how could be taken as heavy-handed and tedious

__________________

Not really man. I mean seriously watch his films. Look at all the cuts and compositions and tell me that it holds up to some of his contemporaries like Fincher or Park.

Even Scorcese's films are still beautiful.

Or look at the massively detailed care Wes Anderson puts into each and every cut and camera movement.

This kind of craftsmanship simply isn't present in Nolan, and it makes me feel like he is less dedicated to the art as art and instead the craft as means to some end; i.e. sales.

This is not to say he doesn't bring together some good moments, and those "special moments" definitely better my impression, but all things considered he barely has what can be called a coherent style let alone variations upon this so-called "style".

Or the perfect choice of phrase.

__________________
"Loves them? They need them, like they need the air."

I think there is humor in Nolan's movies. I think it just depends on your own sense of humor. Personally, I thought that while TDK was pretty serious overall, like Memento it had touches of dark humor to it.

I personally like that his movies are fully realized in themselves, their own world, and can be so intense without feeling a need to step back and say "Oh, it's just a movie." There is humor there but it's consistent with the narrative and not used to provide a breather for the casual viewer. You either engage for the ride and pay attention or you don't.

I could add something about viewing comprehension but I'll just live and let live.

__________________
#31 on SC's Top 100 Mofos list!!

There's plenty of humour in TDK! Every time Bale did his silly growly voice as Batman, I cracked up.

BB, it's your own fault. Rather than just letting it go after admitting that your problem with Nolan's style was that it was something you didn't like rather than something which was fundamentally wrong and/or something that'll hold him back.

After all, my argument with you was that I couldn't see how Tarantino was "progressing" while Nolan was "stagnating."

Maybe I didn't back off because Nolan's style has potential to get old pretty quick. Inception is a strong argument for this point. It's a film that could have been taken a lot more light-hearted, but it was so self-serious that he even had to dream up an excuse to add tension to the situation. Instead of the fear of dying within the dream meaning failure of their mission (which would have been more than enough tension), they had to add this rediculous layer of "Limbo" and going into some kind of dream coma. Come on, really? Lighten up, Nolan, everything doesn't have to be life and death.

Conversely, Tarantino has progressed a lot. If you can't watch Pulp Fiction and Resevoir Dogs then compare those to Kill Bill and Inglourious Basterds and see his improvement, then I can't help you.

__________________

I was the one who said stagnating, didn't mention Quentin though. Plus my argument is better than BB's no offense.

So what? You're smarter than me, quit showing off...jerk.

I don't see improvement, I just see higher production value.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed Kill Bill and Inglorious Basterds. Great flicks. However, I just don't see how they showcase Tarantino's "improvement." If I met someone who had never watched any of QT's movies, I would suggest Pulp Fiction and/or Reservoir Dogs eons before I would suggest Kill Bill and/or Inglorious Basterds. It's a simple matter of recommending the best examples of QT's work. I'm not suggesting that he's gotten worse over the years, I'm just saying that Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs cannot be improved upon. They are perfect movies.

__________________

Both Resevoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction have pacing issues, IMO. I also don't think they've aged all that well.

The problem I have with Pulp Fiction in particular is there's a lot of scenes that just drag the film's pace down a bit too much. For example, the Jack-Rabbit Slims scene. It's fun to watch, but it slows the film to a crawl. The same thing with the Christopher Walken bit, it's fun, but it drags. The pacing in Inglourious Basterds is pitch perfect. Every extended dialog scene serves to enhance the tension making the eventual explosion of violence all that more impactful. His use of tension in Inglourious Basterds is pretty amazing, actually.

Honestly, I'm surprised you don't see growth in Kill Bill. The action scenes in Vol. One are some of the best staged and filmed action scenes I've seen in an American film in a very long time. And the dialog in Vol. Two is far more engaging and entertaining than Pulp Fiction or Resevoir Dogs, but that one is pretty subjective.

I also think Kill Bill and Inglourious Basterds have more rewatch value, but that's also probably just me. Let me close this BS with one of my favorite film scenes of the last decade:

&feature=related

It's over in seconds, but the impact is powerful. The lines they deliver both before and after the fight have so much impact. It's the end of a truly epic journey. I get goosebumps every time I watch that.

We can go back and forth all day, BB. I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Yeah, particularly on Pulp Fiction. That movie is a fine, 17-year-old wine.

Meh, I'm super burned out on Pulp Fiction. I watched it like heck years ago, but now I'm not as into it.

Inglousious Basterds on the other hand, it's a classic to me. I had to watch it twice for it to really sink in, but I feel like it's more of an event than a film. I absolutely love it.

His best film was actually Jackie Brown.

About QT I would say that he doesn't improve.Also,his all films are the same.Yes,they are different - different plots,different characters,but the style is the same which just becomes boring at some time.Many people usually prefer those Tarantino movies which they saw first .And they don't like those movies which they saw last of QT.That makes sense.Don't get me wrong,I love all his movies but I think that sooner or later he might run out of ideas or become boring.
oh and about Nolan.I don't like his movies.Well maybe it's not that I don't like them but they're either boring or I forget them the next day.The only exception is The Dark Knight.But it's more because of Heath Ledger and probably screenplay because I love the plot in this one.

__________________
"Anything less than immortality is a complete waste of time."

Kill Bill, and Inglourious Basterds are fantastic films. Love them just as much as his earlier films. I think most Tarantino fans do.

Not me, but then, I'm not normally in the majority of anything. I loved Death Proof, but I thought IB was a real damp squib. Kill Bill I'd probably have to see again, as I've seen it twice, but not since it came out, but I didn't care greatly for it and prefered the second half (Vol 2) over the first.