They need to learn how to edit themselves.
Furthermore, Tarantino seems way too self-indulgent. Too many films drag on in an obvious ploy to build up to some scene he envisioned in his mind that would be interesting to put in a film (i.e. comes cross as contrived).
Nolan seems similarly self-indulgent. Good directors don't employ character dialog as exposition to explain WTF is going on. That's Nolan's biggest weakness. He can't tell a story thru cinema (scenes, sequence, acting) without tons of expository dialog.
Can't argue with Kurasowa, Kubrick, or Hitchcock. Regardless, I'm personally a Wes Anderson fan. I also like screenplays by Charlie Kaufman. Haven't seen a Anderson or Kaufman film that I wouldn't watch again. In contrast, I would never sit thru "Hateful 8," "Inglorious Basterds," or "Django I
Unchained," or "Kill Bills" more than once.
Are you talking about editing their screenplay or the actual film itself? Because those are two very different things with a different set of skills and technical know-how.
I've been in the industry for 14 years now, with 9 of those working as an Assistant Director (though I may finally be transitioning out as I want to finally have a LIFE.) 80 hours a week is not my idea of a life, regardless of the pay and insurance. Plus you can work for 18 months straight then have several months off because there's simply nothing filming. And the working conditions are awful, so there's a very valid reason why SAG and WGA are on strike and the entire machine has grinded to a halt.
But I'll tell you, there are few director's that aren't self-indulgent or egocentric. You almost have to be to get to the top... just like all elite wrestlers have an ego, at least to some extent. You have to to get where they're at.
Furthermore, i truly think your misinterpreting Tarantino. Much of his dialog is laced with pop culture references, while also paying tribute to his predecessors that inspired him.
You claim he can't tell a story without dialog, but that's also what makes him unique and popular because he's one of the very few that actually CAN tell an entertaining narrative without relying on CGI and mindless action (which I personally don't have a problem with).
Side note, I'm currently watching Boardwalk Empire and one of the creators/ writers, Terence Winter, mentioned that he hates using flashbacks when dialog can tell the story. It's all personal preference. You either like it or you don't.
Whereas you don't like QT I actually cannot stand Wes Anderson. I find his movies to be boring not only to listen to, but watch. Everything from the over-use of symmetrical framing, flat colors, and frequent snap zooms. 10 minutes in and I have my phone open reading wrestling threads.
I find it very hard to watch things nowadays without thinking about the logistics: framing, extras, continuity. Nothing pulls me from a show faster than a terrible cross from a background actor! Honestly, that's why I prefer watching mindless action movies with never ending explosions.
My apologies for the long-winded response, but considering it's my career I wanted to give my unwarranted 2 cents.
BTW - I was called to work on Django back in early 2012 while they were shooting in Louisiana. I didn't want to travel and I was already on some other shitshow so I turned it down... looking back that was probably a mistake haha.
