Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

    • Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      Who do you think is better? 6
      1.  
        Darren Aronofsky (5) 83%
      2.  
        Christopher Nolan (1) 17%
      They are, probably, the two most important and successful directors of the last decade. They share a lot of common traits, such as their relatively young age and that they haven't made a below average film, in my opinion.

      Nolan
      Following (1998) - IMDb
      Memento (2000) - IMDb
      Insomnia (2002) - IMDb
      Batman Begins (2005) - IMDb
      The Prestige (2006) - IMDb
      The Dark Knight (2008) - IMDb
      Inception (2010) - IMDb

      Aronofsky
      Pi (1998) - IMDb
      Requiem for a Dream (2000) - IMDb
      The Fountain (2006) - IMDb
      The Wrestler (2008) - IMDb
      Black Swan (2010) - IMDb


      I slightly prefer Aronofsky over Nolan, because he has stayed in a very high level, without making "mainstream" films, in contrast with Nolan. Not that this is bad, the Dark Knight is easily one of my top-5 movies.
      So whom do you prefer and why?

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Dexterace ().

    • Re: Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      Umm, David Fincher blows both of them out of the water.

      Theatrical films



      Also, while Avatar is overrated, its impact blows all of Nolan's movies away. Props to James Cameron.

      If the Dark Knight was never made, Nolan would never even be mentioned anywhere. Heath Ledger is what made Christopher Nolan, not his directing.
      [CENTER][Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/ZnyZSz3.gif][/CENTER]

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Manny ().

    • Re: Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      OK, that's just your opinion, but your statement that Nolan's career is all because of Ledger is not true. Ledger's performance surely blasted off the Dark Knight, but Batman Begins was equally great. Just think that he revived an impoverished comic hero. Not to mention the incredible films Memento and The Prestige.

      And aside from Se7en, Fight Club and Zodiac, Fincher's other films are pretty mediocre in my opinion. And Alien 3 is terrible.
    • Re: Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      the only bad movie on that list is Alien 3 and I believe that was the first movie he directed, and considering it follows one of the best sequels of all time? it was pretty hard to beat.

      dragon tattoo isn't out yet but it's promising to be good with the actors/actresses involved and Fincher's track record.

      curious case was nominated for best picture, and social network is one of the top picks for best picture at the oscars.

      ---------- Post added at 05:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:40 PM ----------

      Dexterace wrote:

      OK, that's just your opinion, but your statement that Nolan's career is all because of Ledger is not true. Ledger's performance surely blasted off the Dark Knight, but Batman Begins was equally great. Just think that he revived an impoverished comic hero. Not to mention the incredible films Memento and The Prestige.

      And aside from Se7en, Fight Club and Zodiac, Fincher's other films are pretty mediocre in my opinion. And Alien 3 is terrible.


      batman begins wasn't even close to as good as the dark knight.

      there was not nearly enough hype surrounding TDK as begins, and the hype was because of heath ledger, who won best supporting actor.

      bryan singer directed superman returns, which is a good movie. do you see him everywhere? no.
      [CENTER][Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/ZnyZSz3.gif][/CENTER]
    • Re: Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      Um, Aronofsky and Nolan aren't similar at all.

      Look at all Aronfsky's movies. All the ones I've seen on that list are great dramas with very well developed characters and include some pretty heart filled emotional moments.

      Now look at Nolan's. They're all a clusterfuck of "OMG" moments and obscure twists. They have no soul or emotion and are just very technical and average movies.
    • Re: Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      Respectful_Gentleman wrote:

      batman begins wasn't even close to as good as the dark knight.

      As said above these are just preferences. :)

      Butthurt Burt wrote:

      Um, Aronofsky and Nolan aren't similar at all.

      Look at all Aronfsky's movies. All the ones I've seen on that list are great dramas with very well developed characters and include some pretty heart filled emotional moments.

      Now look at Nolan's. They're all a clusterfuck of "OMG" moments and obscure twists. They have no soul or emotion and are just very technical and average movies.

      No, I didn't say they have made similar movies, I just pointed out thet they're young and all of their films have gained positive reviews.
    • Re: Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      aphrodite. wrote:

      Nolan isn't even that good, there was something missing from batman begins anyway.

      Great directors of the last decade could include
      Peter Jackson (LOTR)
      Joel and Ethan Coen
      Steven Spielberg
      Quentin Tarantino
      James Cameron

      so manyy


      I can't believe I forgot Peter Jackson.

      Anyway, don't forget Bryan Singer:

      The Usual Suspects (amazing movie)
      X-Men
      X-Men 2
      Superman Returns
      [CENTER][Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/ZnyZSz3.gif][/CENTER]
    • Re: Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      All of the directors that you mention above (except Jackson) are indeed great directors, but they have not appeared in cinema the past 10-12 years, they are much longer.
      This thread is to express whom of these two you think is better, not to mention the greatest directors of all time.

      ---------- Post added at 01:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:25 AM ----------

      Butthurt Burt wrote:

      Tarantino has had more great movies than Aronofsky and Nolan combined. I don't know why anyone would consider them the two best/most important directors ever.

      Just show me where I wrote that they're the greatest directors ever. I said they have directed some of the decade's most important and successful films. And Tarantino reached his peak in the 90's, with Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction.

      And yes, I consider Aronofsky the greatest director of this decade. Requiem for a Dream, The Fountain, The Wrestler and Black Swan are 9/10 for me, while π is a perfect 10/10.

      That, no need to argue, especially over movies.
    • Re: Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      Respectful_Gentleman wrote:

      I can't believe I forgot Peter Jackson.

      Anyway, don't forget Bryan Singer:

      The Usual Suspects (amazing movie)
      X-Men
      X-Men 2
      Superman Returns


      superman returns was alright, but it could of done so much better... kinda like the hulk before it got redone with Eric Bana in it.

      Zack Snyder has done some awesome movies; dawn of the dead, the watchmen and 300
      plus he is directing the new superman movie :o

      ---------- Post added at 11:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:29 PM ----------

      Butthurt Burt wrote:

      Jackson directed the whole Lord of the Rings trilogy in the past 10 years + the awesome King Kong remake. He's shined way more than the two directors you listed.


      I agree with kris, plus tarantino directed Inglourious Basterds and kill bill which easily up there with Dark Knight and Black Swan.
    • Re: Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      Adri wrote:

      you guys forgot about Clint Eastwood who has directed pretty awesome movies in the last 10 years: Million Dollar Baby, Changeling, Invictus, Gran Torino and a few others which I haven't watched yet but had positive feedback


      good point adri.

      i thought invictus fell flat but I liked changeling but I'm a little biased because I really like Jeffery Donovan.
      [CENTER][Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/ZnyZSz3.gif][/CENTER]
    • Re: Darren Aronofsky vs. Christopher Nolan

      Dexterace wrote:

      And Alien 3 is terrible.

      I don't see how Alien 3 was terrible. It concluded the Alien trilogy perfectly.

      aphrodite. wrote:

      Nolan isn't even that good, there was something missing from batman begins anyway.

      Like what?

      aphrodite. wrote:

      Great directors of the last decade could include
      ...
      James Cameron

      Huh?

      James Cameron hadn't directed a film in 12 years. The film he directed before Avatar was Titanic.

      Respectful_Gentleman wrote:


      Anyway, don't forget Bryan Singer:

      The Usual Suspects (amazing movie)
      X-Men
      X-Men 2
      Superman Returns

      Bryan Singer is completely mediocre. The original X-Men was a fun movie because it was the first time the X-Men were portrayed in live action, but other than that it was another run-of-the-mill Hollywood action flick. X-Men 2 was marginally better, but only because the characters had already discovered and developed their powers, so now it was much more fun to watch them. And Superman Returns? Please.

      It disappoints me more that you listed superhero/comic book films but ignored Valkyrie, which was an excellent film.
      "I've never understood ethnic or national pride, because to me pride should be reserved for something you achieve or attain on your own, not something that happens by accident of birth."
      - George Carlin

      Striker88;1062839033 wrote:

      You know why nobody has gotten evidence? God hasn't allowed that and won't.