Clint Eastwood vs. Spike Lee vs. Quentin Tarantino

[Legend]

Whose movies do you prefer and why?

[fred41]

Eastwood....he's more consistent, without hyperventilating.

[MrBlonde]

I'm a huge QT fan. Always have been. Simply put...his movies are just always cool as hell.

[saifan]

QT by a mile.
Eastwood can be dreadful although Unforgiven is a true masterpiece. And Spike is so inconsistent.
QT understands film. He knows how to let a scene "breathe" and he never lets the camera work outshine anything.

[chefmike]

I consider all three to be great directors with three different styles.

I like 'em all.

Although I'd prefer to talk about legendary directors like Elia Kazan, Orson Welles, Alfred Hitchcock, or even Billy Wilder...

But not tonight...I'm fixin' to play me some poker....

[johnb]

if this is a serious question, and you are talking about a body of work, being an actor, producer, director...oscar nominations...it ain't even close. I guess I don't even need to give my answer.

[johnb]

go ahead, make my day

[Dino Velvet]

Clint Eastwood is like John Wayne & John Ford in one package.

Quentin Tarantino makes movies that are entertaining but not groundbreaking.

Spike Lee is an angry little troll. If it wasn't for his constantly playing the race card he'd have nothing to talk about.

[Mugai_hentaisha]

Clint Eastwood hands down

QT well, don't like his movies but to be fair I have found most of the movies where he has played bit parts entertaining and I also like his taste in some the films he likes.

As for Spike Lee well never found any of his movies remotely interesting, just not me. but his Miracle of St. Anna could be a different matter


TES
William

[alpha2117]

Million Dollar baby was so bad it made other films worse. I cannot stand to hear a Morgan Freeman voiceover now and I just want to strangle Hilary Swank every single time she opens her mouth. Clint was even worse than those two in it. Clint has become self indulgent and his films are a mess. Play Misty for Me and Unforgiven are exceptions rather than the rule over his career. He makes more crap than good.

Lee was always patchy. His big selling point was a willingness to confront hard issues. His best actual film was Inside Man where he finally constructed a proper film narrative rather than a string of observations.

QT is strange, he mixes pop culture and homage with extreme violence and stylisation. He is very much an aquired taste.

I'd say QT is a better director merely on the fact that he has never put out a true turkey although I'm sure people who dont like his stylistic flourishes would disagree..

[Legend]

if this is a serious question, and you are talking about a body of work, being an actor, producer, director...oscar nominations...it ain't even close. I guess I don't even need to give my answer.

Yes it's a serious question and i'm taking about movies they've directed.Clintwood is well rounded i give you that.

[Legend]

Spike Lee is an angry little troll. If it wasn't for his constantly playing the race card he'd have nothing to talk about.

That's the only thing i hate about spike he bitched about eastwood having no black people in his films.

[brickcitybrother]

Eastwood ... its an east choice. It is only recently that Spike has realized that the movie is what is important and not HIM.

[MrBlonde]

Clint Eastwood is like John Wayne & John Ford in one package.

Quentin Tarantino makes movies that are entertaining but not groundbreaking.

Spike Lee is an angry little troll. If it wasn't for his constantly playing the race card he'd have nothing to talk about.


Well Pulp Fiction was one of if not the most imitated and copied films in the last 2 decades. Now I am fully aware that most directors steal this and that from various other places, but as far as groundbreaking here in the states I'd say he's doing pretty good. I love Eastwood as a movie star and now a very good director also, but for originality and pure coolness, QT is far ahead.