I love them both, for different reasons, but I can say that I watch Fulci films more often than Argento.

I wouldn't say that they're ahead of their European counterparts. I find that really disrespectful to all the amazing talent present in Europe at the time. Personally I have more love for Fulci, but if I had to choose between watching either directors complete works, end to end, with no breaks I would pick Argento. I think it's something of an unfair comparison, though.

yes argento is an artist , but you have to realize something .. argento was born to a father who happense to a proudcer !!..se he was pretty lucky and had all the budgets he needed for his films while fulci actually needed money sometimes , was offered scripts he didn't write ..etc etc
till now i've seen one film to fulci so i can't judge ..i'v seen all of argento films and yes the guy is imagnitive as hell with a powerfull vision .
i have to watch much more films to fulci to be able to pick one.
but i think mario bava , dario argento and lucio fulci are the most famous italian horror directors .
naturally there's another italian name that i think represents the word art! ..and it's sergio leone .
i alwayse felt italy have the best directors '' not so good of an actors though ''

Argento might be an artist, but Fulci was The Genius.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

Fulci is better. Cut the gore in the best Fulci Film and you still have a good movie. Cut i2000t out of a Argento Movie and nothing is left.
"Well, nobody's perfect."

Fulci for gore and drama
Argento for suspense and crime
Both are good directors, and they're both good at their own style. I perfer Argento, but that's because I perfer suspense to gore. I also feel that Argento had more above average attempts at making good films. Only about 7 of Fulci's films are truly well made, while Argento has over 13 good films in his filmography.
For in depth horror reviews, check out my youtube page: Horrorreviews123

This message has been deleted.

Seriously, What Kind Of A Question Is That, Fulci All The Way!

This message has been deleted.

They are EXCELENT!
Maybe Argento for suspense and Fulci for drama!
Grab A Friend before someone in the audience grabs you!
Deadly Friend (1986)

I think it's actually hard to compare the two. Fulci made alot of films in many different genres,some were awful,[especially towards the end of his career],some were okay,some I thought were realy good. I think that sometimes he really cared about what he was making [for example The Beyond,The Psychic,Don't Torture A Duckling] and sometimes didn't. His reputation isn't helped by the fact that he's best known for his 80s gorey horror movies and yet some of his best films were made well before those-they're just not as well known to the general public.
Argento made alot less films and,with the exception of Five Days In Milan and some TV stuff they're all extremely similar,even the supernatural films like Suspiria feature a killer killing people in stylized death scenes. Now as a techni2000cian I do think Argento was better than Fulci,which means that Fulci probably never made quite as good a movie in my opinion as,say,Suspiria,Deep Red or my favourite,Opera. However,Fulci was more diverse,there's no getting away from that. He tried different things,Argento rarely does. How many Argento films feature a head crashing through glass? Lots do. Watching,for example, Sleepless is just like watching The Bird With The Crystal Plumage or Trauma again. Watching The New York Ripper is nothing like watching Beatrice Cenci or City Of The Living Dead except maybe for the use of extreme violence and gore and there are plenty of Fulci movies which don't even have that. Some of Fulci's movies also have a depth that Argento never strained for as well.
Maybe I prefer Argento,I find his movies so thrilling to watch. However,Fulci was [some of the time] very good too. In my opinion though,Mario Bava was probably better than both!

Actually "Fob68ur of the Apocalypse" is well-shotit just lacked a decent script.
"I hate PG-13 horror flicks"- THIS IS MY SIG GENIUSES!

Fulci end of story!!

Oh well, whats the point in responding to you then

But surely you can see it was skillfully directed
Umm No.

But surely you can see it was skillfully directed

Have you seen his westerns?
Only FOUR OF THE APOCALYPSE, but it turned out to be one Fulci Western more than I needed to see.

Have you seen his westerns?

Argento and Fulci are clearly streets ahead of all of their european counterparts, and in my opinion 99% of the American horror director fraternity, but which one rules the roost?
Your question is crippled by your premise, right out of the gate. Asking who is the best, between Argento and Fulci, is like asking who is the best between Orson Welles and Uwe Boll. Fulci is, as so many have said before, a talentless hack, ranking among the least of the "name" European fantasists (at the bottom of that barrel alongside the likes of Bruno Mattei and Umberto Lenzi). Argento can be frustratingly uneven, and even lousy, but at his best, he's a great filmmakerFulci isn't even a moderately passable one on his best day.

Agree and disagree on the scripts from Argento flicks.
I don't think they are bad, but some aren't as good as they could be.
But The Bird with the Crystal Plumage & Deep Red are very well written, Plumage in paticular.
I tried doing that once, making every minute count. It gave me a headache- Adrian Monk

This message has been deleted.