Tarantino or Coen brothers ?
-
franzkabuki — 11 years ago(June 23, 2014 10:24 PM)
If only QT had an5b4 ounce of the Coen's versatility, it wouldn't have been necessary to endure stuff like well, more or less anything he's done in the 21st Century.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan -
Naughty-God — 10 years ago(April 25, 2015 08:42 PM)
similarities: they both capture some essence of their story's settings and its relationship to the main characters better than most writer/directors who focus more on actors or more on setting, but never both.
differences: Joel and Ethan are way more prolific in their subject matter and themes AND they aren't afraid to adapt other people's books. QT has only done it once and it's the best work of his I've seen even more so than Pulp Fiction. -
erudite925 — 10 years ago(June 14, 2015 06:04 PM)
Coen brothers. I've been a fan ever since
Blood Simple.
. They just keep surprising me with their versatility and tight filmmaking. I can watch
Fargo
and
Raising Arizona
over and over.
"Take your hands off my lobby boy!" -
jpowers4667 — 10 years ago(February 23, 2016 07:46 PM)
QT and the Coens are both good with characters and dialogue. Obviously, Tarantino is more dialogue-drivenalthough, it doesn't really seem to serve much purpose to the overall story other than to fulfill his "trademark" style.
Both sets equally embrace absurdity, but I personally think the Coen's handle it much better with their "quirky" style. It's ridiculous, but you still can believe these characters would do these things. Tarantino films are more over-the-top and feel like a comic book/grind house flick.
Both share a love for Fast-paced editing styles with emphasis on tight shots for transitions.
Overall, I think the Coens are immensely better. They have a better grasp on their characters and their story, in my opinion. Although, "Hail, Caesar!" certainly wouldn't testify to their tremendous catalogue in my book