Christopher Nolan

Vs.

Peter Jackson

Who do you like better?

OK. I'll bite.

Criteria: Sense of space, rhythm and angle; ability to get great performances, eye for framing, understanding of broader skill base i.e. editing, cinematography; empathy for resonance and pattern in storytelling.

Winner by a country mile: Christopher Nolan.

I don't believe that either director has directed many solid films to really make a sound judgment.

Peter Jackson is known for:

HEAVENLY CREATURES (1994) that while I didn't see it, appears to have been a nice little drama about two girls, one of those edgy, off the beaten track movies that good directors have been known to make.

THE FRIGHTENERS (1996) that had Michael J. Fox in a rather intriguing comedy/drama/horror film that is striking because of the is off-balance nature.

The LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy which in itself was a masterful effort and production on a scale that has been rarely matched, based on a tremendously famous fantasy novel which of the films coming out one year of each other.

KING KONG (2005) while I personally had tremendous problems with this movie, the movie itself received king kong sized popular endorsement.

Christopher Nolan on the other hand is known for:

MEMENTO (2000) an innovative, intriguing reverse chronological film that was a hit on the independent market, that expanded nationally.

INSOMNIA (2002) an independent, crime thriller that had its own edgy, raw style along with the backdrop of a mental disorder.

BATMAN BEGINS (2005) again like with KING KONG, this popular audience movie didn't really amount to alot in my eyes, while good, it was great.

THE PRESTIGE (2006) a psychological thriller with magic as a backdrop, that was solid, I still prefered THE ILLUSIONIST that came out the same year.

However, overall, I would give the edge to Mr. Nolan on the basis of his direction of MEMENTO which is the only movie listed above that I have placed on my favorite movie list. But Mr. Nolan hasn't been able to provide me with another movie since that I can really rank highly. It's really hard, though, to discount Jackson's work on THE LORD OF THE RINGS as it is something of a monumental accomplishment and worthy of the time and effort of a number of smaller films.

quote:

...I would give the edge to Mr. Nolan on the basis of his direction of MEMENTO...

my thoughts exactly.

I'd have to hand the award for best director to Peter Jackson for Bad Taste, Meet the Feebles and Braindead.

They meant more to me than a thousand critically-acclaimed masterpieces.

I'll never get over the line -

'Lionel! Your mother ate my dog!'

Wonderfully horrid.

quote:

Duncan Black
Know-It-All
Posted 04 November 2007 02:30 PM Hide Post
I'd have to hand the award for best director to Peter Jackson for Bad Taste, Meet the Feebles and Braindead.

They meant more to me than a thousand critically-acclaimed masterpieces.

I'll never get over the line -

'Lionel! Your mother ate my dog!'

Wonderfully horrid.

None more Black

I haven't seen any of the above mentioned movies all similarly in theme and tone apparently from what I've read of their movie synopses. From what I gather from these movies, none of them particularly intrigue me so I have to assume that you even have a very different sense of what you like than my tastes and therefore your better director is based on subject matter or that you are looking at stuff that is difficult to fathom. All these movies are three of Jackson's first four movies, released more than decade ago. Personally, I like the more serious, edgy, independent movies that Christopher Nolan directed.

I like Nolan well enough, but he certainly doesn't have Jackson's sense of humor or visual wit.

Jackson is a better visual director, but I find his films very bloated in the storytelling department. I enjoy Nolan's films a heck of a lot more.

OK, Jackson's last four films average over three hours, although you could practically consider LOTR a mini-series, but his four films made previously were all considerably shorter than Nolan's last four films, which average 125 minutes. I'll be interested to see if you find Jackson's The Lovely Bones bloated. I really don't know what to expect from it.

quote:

Originally posted by tabuno:

quote:

Duncan Black
Know-It-All
Posted 04 November 2007 02:30 PM Hide Post
I'd have to hand the award for best director to Peter Jackson for Bad Taste, Meet the Feebles and Braindead.

They meant more to me than a thousand critically-acclaimed masterpieces.

I'll never get over the line -

'Lionel! Your mother ate my dog!'

Wonderfully horrid.

None more Black

I haven't seen any of the above mentioned movies all similarly in theme and tone apparently from what I've read of their movie synopses. From what I gather from these movies, none of them particularly intrigue me so I have to assume that you even have a very different sense of what you like than my tastes and therefore your better director is based on subject matter or that you are looking at stuff that is difficult to fathom. All these movies are three of Jackson's first four movies, released more than decade ago. Personally, I like the more serious, edgy, independent movies that Christopher Nolan directed.

Seriously - check those films out!

They represent the wonders of low budget cinema and are among the most warped and darkly humorous films ever made.

I'd say Braindead is the pick of the bunch. I haven't seen a film yet that tops it in the gore stakes. It has everything from kung-fu vicars to unlikely zombie romances and the most revolting use of custard in cinema history.

Despite all of that, Braindead harbours an inventive high quality of film-making that may explain how Jackson was picked for bigger things like Heavenly Creatures and The Frighteners.

I don't mind serious films at all, but I also like films with a sense of fun and mischief - Jackson's early films have plenty of that. Most entertaining in a very grim way.

quote:

Duncan Black
Know-It-All
Posted 05 November 2007 12:23 PM Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by tabuno:

quote:
Duncan Black
Know-It-All
Posted 04 November 2007 02:30 PM Hide Post
I'd have to hand the award for best director to Peter Jackson for Bad Taste, Meet the Feebles and Braindead.

They meant more to me than a thousand critically-acclaimed masterpieces.

I'll never get over the line -

'Lionel! Your mother ate my dog!'

Wonderfully horrid.

None more Black


I haven't seen any of the above mentioned movies all similarly in theme and tone apparently from what I've read of their movie synopses. From what I gather from these movies, none of them particularly intrigue me so I have to assume that you even have a very different sense of what you like than my tastes and therefore your better director is based on subject matter or that you are looking at stuff that is difficult to fathom. All these movies are three of Jackson's first four movies, released more than decade ago. Personally, I like the more serious, edgy, independent movies that Christopher Nolan directed.


Seriously - check those films out!

They represent the wonders of low budget cinema and are among the most warped and darkly humorous films ever made.

I'd say Braindead is the pick of the bunch. I haven't seen a film yet that tops it in the gore stakes. It has everything from kung-fu vicars to unlikely zombie romances and the most revolting use of custard in cinema history.

Despite all of that, Braindead harbours an inventive high quality of film-making that may explain how Jackson was picked for bigger things like Heavenly Creatures and The Frighteners.

I don't mind serious films at all, but I also like films with a sense of fun and mischief - Jackson's early films have plenty of that. Most entertaining in a very grim way.

None more Black

In the back of my mind comedy is more difficult a medium to do well. If I have the time and energy among the rest of my life.

quote:

Originally posted by mark f:
but his four films made previously were all considerably shorter than Nolan's last four films

In all fairness, I haven't seen Jackson's pre-Heavenly Creatures work.

I have enjoyed all of Nolan's movies.
I haven't seen all of Jackson's work though, but from what I have seen I would choose Nolan decisively.

By the way, what is the connection here? Nolan and Jackson are very different filmmakers. Nolan's stuff seems to be more plot driven, while Jackson is all about the visual spectacle.

quote:

EricG75
"Forum Moderator"
Jedi
Posted 07 November 2007 01:57 PM Hide Post
By the way, what is the connection here? Nolan and Jackson are very different filmmakers. Nolan's stuff seems to be more plot driven, while Jackson is all about the visual spectacle.

-----
Use all your well-learned politesse, or I'll lay your soul to waste.

www.last.fm/user/ericg75/

Yep It takes a keen movie critic to uncover the more interesting angle shot here. We could be talking about apples and oranges (both fruit) but different flavors. Instead of comparing on the basis of the same standard we may different preferences for different styles of movie which would then require either how did they do according to their own styles or which style is better. Oh my.

I'd have to say Peter Jackson because of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Although I have liked almost every movie directed by Christopher Nolan as well.