<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TQvM9-IxncQ&hl=en_US&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TQvM9-IxncQ&hl=en_US&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Wr0tAKsdBMk&hl=en_US&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Wr0tAKsdBMk&hl=en_US&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting anything really, just arguing for arguing's sake. I love all of his films except one so far. But if you admit that "some of his films do plain suck" and he's only done, what, ten full films, then that's a pretty high rate of suckiness.
But the thread isn't about "better", it's more about "favorite", two things which could be completely different.

And I think that better is subjective. I'm sure there are film "experts" out there who could eloquently argue that Lynch is a hack and Tarantino is a genius.

Inland Empire sucks, and Dune, while visually interesting, is pretty terrible as well. So yeah, "some" of his films do plain suck.

I agree they are different, but if the thread is just about "favorites" this really is a dumb thread topic in this forum for the reasons I pointed out in my initial post.

I do have to say, though, this is a really strange pair up. It's like Wes Anderson vs. Kenneth Anger. No rhyme or reason to it.

One is trying to make chocolate milk the other one Green Tea.

QT. Now we better get Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown on BD here!

Not even close...

David Lynch