Which one is the most overrated?

Which one is the most overrated?

Attached: lynch-tarantino-kubrick-diccionario-770x513.jpg (770x513, 85.59K)

>>168997328Your mum

>>168997328Out of these 3, probably Tarantula

Tarantino.Nobody really likes Lynch. They just say they do to get arthoe pussy.

>>168997328for hipsters: lynchfor low iq normies: qtfor regular normies: kubric

Tarantino is not even in the same league as Lynch and Kubrick

>>168997328Tarantulino, but that isn't saying much. They are all pretty great at their craft.

>>168997328Tino. Kubrick hasn’t made a movie since 98 and Lynch hasn’t since 2006

>>168997328Fincher by far

>>1689973282, 3, 1the shinning is the best though

>>168997328Tarantino is pure shit

>>168997328Tarantino.He's made what, 2 good films. And they've dated really badly

>>168997328QT easily, the man is basically just really good at making collages. Cutting out things he sees in other films and just pasting them with things he's seen in other films to make a new picture. Kubrick and Lynch at least paint their own pictures.

>>168997370>Nobody really likes LynchI do. He's not quite the artiste everyone pretends he is though. Nigga makes stick figures out of fetuses and calls it a day.

holy shit, we're finally getting a glimpse at what old-man Tarantino looks like. its that weird phenomenon where if you were familiar with the person beforehand you'll fish out their younger features from their old to compute with your accustomed vision of the person, but if you weren't familiar with them you'll fish out the old features and it just registers as "old man". does this make any sense? I think I might have Aspergers

all three are fucking annoyingly overrated but kubrick is the only real master there even though he's a jew with an annoying fanbase. tarantino is the worst cause he hasn't made anything great since the 90s.

>>168997328Uno Farto

>>168997520You do but it's okay we're all here together.

Tortellini. I enjoyed his last two movies though



>>168997328Tarantino easily

>>168997328Genuinely INARGUABLY KubrickNo one is looking for signs and symbolism and hidden messages of the fucking moon landing and making literal featur length documentaries about Lynch and TarankinoKubrick is the most overrated director ever just on the basis of how much people headcanon his movies

Tarantino looks like my aunt now kek>>168997370Lynch has a lot of fans but there are a ton of dickriders who don't "get" his work at all. You don't talk about a lynch film, you think about it and talk about something else.

>>168997370>Nobody really likes Lynch.midwits actually believe this

Attached: 1497039112583.webm (1280x692, 1.2M)

Attached: EAA2C797-9F3C-481F-83C0-FF9D8EAEAC06.jpg (1469x1616, 1.19M)

>>168997328On Holla Forums? LynchAs a whole it's QT

>>168997665Kubrick just attracts genuine autismos far more so than Lynch and Tarantino, which is ironic as Tarantino is most definitely autistic whereas Kubrick is likely OCD or something.

>>168997328Tarantino, easily.

Barry Lyndon is better than QT's entire filmography put together. Lynch is ok.

>>168997328Mulholland Drive is considered the best film of the century so far. Clearly Lynch.

>>168997328Tarantino without a shadow of a doubt


>>168997723it do be like that sometimes

>>168997328Kubrick by a long shot. He is great, but not god.QT does riffs on exploitation genre film, not meant to be any deeper than thatLynch doesn't have a large enough actual following to be overrated

>>168997328Quentin "When I See Your Feet You'll Smell What I Eat" Tarantino is pretty overrated.

>>168997328Thats not kubrick, retard. Thats Werner Herzog you faggot.

>>168998032lollmao even

>>168997328Tarantino, the other two are more mischaracterised by their fans than overrated

>>168997328Kubrick, no question asked. lynch is also pretty bad, babby first surrealist.

>>168997379only acceptable answer

>>168997328a more fun debate

Attached: overrated.jpg (2459x1200, 531.54K)

>>168997328Tarantryhard. Although if one excludes Mulholland Drive and Dr. Strangelove, the other two are almost as overrated.

>>168997983>QT does riffs on exploitation genre film, not meant to be any deeper than thatHe used to have a unique filmmaking voice though. Even though Reservoir Dogs is at times almost a shot-for-shot remake of City on Fire, it still has a very distinct Tarantinoesque character. Concentrating on the aftermath and only depicting the "primary event" in brief flashbacks was a brilliant strategy. Pulp Fiction was a step in the wrong direction, as if continued this non-chronological structure, but for no underlying purpose other than to bring a false sense of resolution to a convoluted plot lacking any coherent narrative arc. And since then he has just churned out pastiche revenge-fantasy trash. While he has always been great at dialogue and set dressing, Tarantino couldn't think up a unique plot scenario to save his life.

>>168998550Tarantino still has a distinct rhythm in his pacing of sequences that is consistent even in his later films

>>168997328BETTER YET, which one is more edgy, Lars von Trier or Gaspar Noe?

>>168997328Lynch. At this point there's a good chunk of people who understand that Tarantino is a hack, and Kubrick deserves at least some of the recognition he gets.

>>168997430Reservoir and pulp fiction are dated? I haven’t watched those in years but they still held up fine

>>168997665>making literal featur length documentaries about Lynch and TarankinoYeah they are.

Attached: MV5BMDdmOTg0YzktZmY0Yy00OGViLTk1OTctYmNmNTlmZThkOTVmXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjY0ODAwNTc@._V1_.jpg (1522x2094, 3.07M)

>>168997705>You don't talk about a lynch film, you think about it and talk about something else.Why?

>>168998654I wouldn't be surprised if that was due to his editor. It's easy to ascribe some trait to the director, because it appears consistently in their films, but then you realize that they *always* collaborate with a specific person, and it becomes more questionable. For example, consider Tarantino's more recent cinematographer, Robert Richardson: I used to think the overexposed quality of Oliver Stone's and Scorsese's later films was part of the director's vision, but then I realized they all have the same cinematographer.


Attached: FwrfQbvZaprLrUBsQuUW8T-1200-80.jpg (1200x675, 104.69K)

>>168997328I don't know any of them so I'm going to guess and say right


Attached: lunch.png (929x921, 1.36M)

>>168997328Tarantino is trash, he copies alters and pastes compositions into film. There are no homages, just stolen material. He is trash.

>>168999160Editors are incredibly underrated, but even with a great one like Menke to save you, you still have to shoot with the editing in mind, even more so for Tarantino shooting on film. I agree that the final vision is the work of multiple parties.

>>168999231Lol you fags don’t even try anymore. I for one blame porn

>>168997403>Kubrick hasn’t made a movie since 98 He literally died the year after

>>168997328Tarantino and it's not even close lmao


>>168999160Tarantino's original editor gets a lot of credit, he let her go after Inglorious Basterds though.

>>169000257She died of heat stroke in LA, hiking in 45 deg C temperatures like a retard.

>>168997328The feetfag

>>169000823I guess that's natural selection.

>>169001109Once upon a time in Hollywood, her dead body was found in a ravine, no different than a reservoir dog. It reads like something out of a pulp fiction novel; it's hard to think of a more inglourious way to die. I guess she thought she was death proof?

>>168998883There's little to talk about directly. You can give a book report of scenes or try to discuss the symbolic but that isn't very enjoyable. Instead of being a pretentious tryhard, you talk about things related to it, your own experiences and what it conjured up in you. They're films you bait people into watching with the words thriller or lesbians so that they may come back more interesting than they were before. It's really good for that.

Attached: P4293400.jpg (2000x1500, 527.4K)

>>168997328Do you have to ask? Tarantino is a super hack compared to both

>>169001704Lynch understands that art is like a Rorschach test. A successful artist is one who is able to more deeply evoke archetypal structures from the collective unconscious.




>>168997379I wonder what you fucking watch?

>>169002878Actual kino perhaps. Not what a teenage boy thinks is kino

>>169001704I appreciate the genuine response but Jesus Christ you seem like a pretentious midwit.>dude people need to watch this movie so they're more interesting to me, but if they think it's interesting to discuss why and how the movie conjured up things to them then they're pretentious tryhardsThis is basically the narcissistic normie approach to film criticism in general: you just talk about your feelings and how "literally me" the movie is, and anybody who goes beyond that is just being a meanie trying to dab on me.

lynch, not even close

>>168997328Tarantino obviously and it's not even close.>>168997370I love Lynch's work. Except Inland Empire, which sucks.