Do you think Quentin Tarantino's excellence in cinema is at the same level as Stanley Kubrick?

Question

Do you think Quentin Tarantino's excellence in cinema is at the same level as Stanley Kubrick?

Answer 1

IMAO Tarantino has surpassed Kubrick.

Answer 2

Now you done it. Now you gone and done it. You comparing some of my favorite directors.



Anyway



That's hard to say because they're both great, and, when I think about, not totally dissimilar in style. Both are keen on dark comedy, and not afraid of depicting violence (with Kubrick depicting the sexual just as often and then some). And they're both responsible for a extremely varied body of work (Kubrick did Spartacus, Dr. Strangelove, Eyes Wide Shut. Tarantino did Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill, and The Inglourious Basterds)



Kubrick did astounding research for his movies, and Tarantino uses an unbelievable knowledge of film to make his movies.



Yes, I'll take the plunge and say that by the end of his life Tarantino will have accomplished just as much in film as Kubrick.



edit- someone calling Tarantino pretentious with people like Oliver Stone, and Wes Anderson still working? I'm outta here...virtually, of course...

Answer 3

Quentin Tarantino is one of the most pretentious directors working in the film industry today. He is nowhere near as good as Stanley Kubrick.

Answer 4

He's not gonna be on the same level as Kubrick. Kubrick was innovative and groundbreaking nearly every picture he made. Quentin really only had his Pulp Fiction greatness, and while he's still a great film maker, most of his talent is in dialogue and intense and unique action. Kubrick kind of changed cinema all together. You could liken Cameron to Kubrick far more easily than Quentin to Kubrick.

Answer 5

Both of these guys made a lot of great movies that involved originality, not just your typically Hollywood stuff. Tarantino is a great director but I don't see him as an equal to Kubrick, but perhaps he'll be the "Kubrick" equivalent in our generation.

Answer 6

Apples and oranges. Their styles are so different that they cannot be compared. I am not such a big Kubrick fan. I love Dr. Strangelove, but nothing else. There are three I have not seen, No excuse, since I have them on DVD. I think Barry Lyndon is beautifully photographed, lit with such care, and has a wonderful score. And is boring as boring can be.

I think that his films are always a feast for the eye, but I am never able to connect with them on an emotional level. I never care about anybody in the film.

Tarantino writes the best dialogue I've ever heard. And it is always character specific. Jules couldn't say Vincent's lines and Vincent could never say, "You read your Bible? Well there's this passage...."

I saw Pulp Fiction before I saw Reservoir Dogs. And I was so blown away with the way he put the chronological ending (Butch leaving town) before the aesthetic and moral ending (Jules not killing Ringo and leaving the diner in order to walk the Earth). I thought he could never mess around with time that way again, and yet he does it. I have to say that I was not impressed with Kill Bill. But what I realized about Tarantino was that he doesn't make movies so much as he writes love letters to movies.

I am not sure about Inglorious Basterds. I found myself laughing at things that I felt bad about laughing at.

It was well done, I'll give it that.

Answer 7

I like QT > Kubrick, but that's just me. But they're two legends, no one should deny that. I'm glad they both decided to make movies.

Answer 8

if only better, what Tarantino does is make movies he wants to watch, stanley made movies with moral dilemma's and social acceptance

Answer 9

No, I don't think so, because Stanley was a legend of cinema...