Who is a better director?

[deleted]

people shouldn't discredit tarantino's originality. sure, he draws from a lot of influences, but it's still a creative process to sit down and write a film like reservoir dogs. try it some time.

miike is a mix of biting originality and nonchalance. he captures certain things perfectly, others he just seems to say *beep* it."

they're both really fun to watch, but if pressed i'd go tarantino.

--Than I see him drunk, or stoned on Conan or letterman.--

Why would that make you hate him? I can understand the turn-off after he was somewhat devoured by commercialism (as a celebrity, not a filmmaker), but why does it bother you if he smokes or drinks? Are you a puritan or something?

I personally have enjoyed films from both of them, and hated films from both of them. Miike churns out way more, so he's got one up on him there. I don't think Tarantino's "homages" warrant him any less of an original filmmaker, though, since he presents them in a style that's totally his own.

Tarantino has made some movies that are classics IMO. Considering I just recently started watching Miike, I'll have to give it a couple of years to see if Miike does the same for me.
On a slightly unrelated note, I just started watching Miike about 2 months ago and I'm having the movie-time-of-my-life. I mean, I started watching Tarantino with Reservior Dogs and have to wait years in between flicks. With Miike, I love one movie and just pop in the next. The guys got so many.

(spoilers)
there is a scene in this flick that reminded me of dario argento's Bird in the crystal plummage the dog trying to get away from the beastilatity where in darios flick a cat tries to escape the cat eaters place

MIIKE BY FAR, TARANTINO IS JUST A FANBOY WITH A CAMERA

>Miike is better. Tarantino is a one trick pony. Violent movies that all draw their 'influences' from a zillion other movies. Anyone can make a collage, yet not everyone can make a painting.

Speaking of "making a painting," how many of those paintings did Miike actually write? Writing the script is the hardest thing about making a movie, and when you have a good one written a good portion of the director's job is done.

And I think how everyone keeps referencing that Tarantino is such a violent director is just a testament to how great a director Tarantino is. Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown were not violent films (much less violent than any Schwarzenegger movie, which are rarely called violent), but everyone thinks they are? Why is that? Because Tarantino uses his skills as a writer and director to get the ideas violence into your head, even though he isn't actually being all that violent. He didn't need to show us Marcellus going to work on Zed with a pair of pliers and a blow torch, just the way he had the lines written and the staging of Bruce Willis and Ving Rhames was enough to put it in our minds, and make us think it was a violent scene.

I'm not saying this because I think Tarantino is a better director, I'm saying it because I don't think people are giving Tarantino the respect he deserves. It's a classic case of a person's own popularity killing his popularity. In this business you fight to get your movies seen, but at a certain point if too many people see them then everyone will start hating you. It was the same thing when people like Scorsese and Coppola came on to the scene. People were calling them spoiled rich kids who thought they knew more about movies just because they went to film school.

Miike Takeshi is by far a better director, look at the variety and subject matter of his 80 plus masterpieces, while tarrantino just robs things from films we know and love, but normal cinema goers don;t understand them, they think Tarrantino is a god, but all he does is take things from obsecure films and pass them off as his own.
He does not deserve to be a top director, give that title to Fulci or D'Amato or Mattei!