XIXAX Film Forum

The Director's Chair => Quentin Tarantino => Topic started by: cron on March 04, 2005, 10:01:51 PM

Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: cron on March 04, 2005, 10:01:51 PM
hello,

i don't think i'm the only person who  lost interest in his films after watching kill bills and the interviews he gave circa their release.   the reaction wasn't immediate, i enjoyed the first part, i saw it three times in theatres but i think what made me lose interest in him and actually started making me dislike him was watching him being president at cannes. it was so embarassing! it was then when i realized that his hyperkinetic way of being was charmless and that his supposed mythology was nothing more than  boxes of cereal and  theme songs from old tv shows. which kind of makes me sad because my first avatar over here was that kaboom cereal box.
i'm sure people like modage will label me as a posser or whatever the term and it's even funny because i remember not understanding people that didn't thought tarantino was cool  when i was young .

does anyone knows who said this? i had this in some notebook

Quote
When you're a kid your view is very pure, and to be affected by stuff like is kind of sweet. In adulthood you go back and there's a huge melancholy to finding out what affected you as a child is actually trash
.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Ghostboy on March 04, 2005, 10:09:19 PM
No, you're right. I still love both Kill Bill films - as well as Pulp and Jackie Brown, of course - but finds his personality, for the most part, does not mix well with his output. I can overlook that while watching the films, and I can enjoy his goofy, film geek personality on its own terms, but often, while reading interviews and such, I have to remind myself that his films are pretty brilliant. I think his talent - and he does have talent, and a lot of it - is sort of a lucky charm, more than anything else, and I wonder if he's not necessarily in complete control of it.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: modage on March 04, 2005, 11:03:39 PM
posser.  actually i dont care if you dont like his personality.  the only problem becomes when his films dont give you a reason to defend his attitude.  the disappointment of vol. II has turned me off to him more than anything else.  that and his low output of films.  anyone who makes you wait that long between films had better be doing so for a reason, like if you're kubrick and the greatest director on earth, otherwise you better be putting one out every 3 years like everybody else at least.  when you're  spielberg and you make 1 or 2 a year, i think it gives you more leeway (in my mind) to miss occasionally because you're out there, you're trying new things and you're experimenting.  if the terminal isnt ace, thats fine because we'll have 2 more within 18 months.  however when you wait 6 years to make a new film it had better be worth the wait.  THE WHOLE THING, not just the first half.  still, even with all that i still find him to be more interesting than 90% of the people making movies right now.  and i grew up on him.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Kal on March 04, 2005, 11:12:37 PM
What you just said modernage is what worries me about PTA... if he doesnt come out with an amazing next film, better than the ones we've already seen (which is not easy at all - and I dont think he will make a better film than Magnolia) people here will either overrate his work or hate him forever...

But going back to Tarantino... he is good... and he was lucky... and he does have an amazing imagination and a very creative mind which lead to Pulp Fiction for instance. But he will never be Kubrick, and he will never be Spielberg. Not with his films, or his personality. And like his films, his personality is a mix of many personalities, and he tries to push the limits and he is not always successful doing it. It seems he tries too hard and is not as natural as it probably was when he did Pulp Fiction (similar to maybe also the Wachowskis with The Matrix and its sequels - and probably their future projects).

I think that is why you can love or like or dislike his films but nobody can have such a strong connection with his work, as you might do with other filmmakers.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Pubrick on March 05, 2005, 01:00:50 AM
let me state my position: i used to love the guy unconditionally until the kills. i mean, what a total piece of shit those movies were. and the wait was definitely the worst part.

the problem with tarantino is he never learned anything beyond his pop-culture obsession. he never seemed to enrich his mind with any substantial knowledge of the world or his extraordinary experience. as a direct example, PTA has no chance of going the way of tarantino, because even tho he may hav grown up on film and still feeds on it as his inspiration (they both clearly love cinema) he actually realises the world is more than cinema. PTA talks about joseph campbell, and the origins of mythology. Malick travelled the world and became spiritually enlightened (moreso). Kubrick read everything he could get his hands on, he never took anything for granted. Tarantino does not give this impression.

the only person who could be said to hav known everything there is to know even at his first film is Welles. everyone else has always matured, and this expansion of knowledge has been reflected in their films. see kubrick for example, can a person BE more of a genius?? tarantino, sadly, is not.

perhaps it's all the cocaine which has influenced him to believe every idiot who tells him 'to be COOL is enuff'. this might explain his appearances on American Idol and other wastes of time. it's sad that he has become this way, but the fact is he was this way all along. how can anyone so in love with Pop Culture not become a victim of it? if this is all he wants to be, that's fine, he has become a pop culture reference.. what more could anyone ask for.

the line which i find most striking here is from his worst film, and so far most revealing about his intellectual/artistic development .. "you didn't think it would be that easy, did u?" ironically, he's still acting as if it is.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Gold Trumpet on March 05, 2005, 01:20:59 AM
I'm worried he's becoming a director-for-hire. I don't think he's evolved since Pulp Fiction. Jackie Brown was an attempt at a plot but the film seemed too lazy at assemblance and too easily cushioned in a humor he already developed further with other films. His transition of focus (there was some) was not very satisfying.

Kill Bill is muddled. Its cocky and free with the violence its displaying, but I never once was astonished by anything. I never felt like he was breaking ground. Even in my limited exposure of martial arts films, I've seen fights more impactful than those in Kill Bill and in the second, I've seen better character portraits than the one he gave me. Whats weird about the second is that I felt like he was trying to make a signature Tarantino film. It felt a little too forced that the character portraits became imitations of Pulp Fiction. I feel he's relying too much on these tricks and not really moving forward. That's my main problem.

Actually, I enjoy his personality to just see how far he will go. His interviews are always oddly enjoyable and he's such a dork for how far he will go to prove himself as whatever he has to at any given time. The most annoying though was the story i heard of him at a matrix 2 screening throwing mints (or whatever they were) at the screen yelling to take the blue pill because he hated the movie so much. Such a bad ploy for attention when you know no one will really hear about it.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Myxo on March 05, 2005, 02:04:47 AM
Quote from: Pubrick
the problem with tarantino is he never learned anything beyond his pop-culture obsession. he never seemed to enrich his mind with any substantial knowledge of the world or his extraordinary experience. as a direct example, PTA has no chance of going the way of tarantino, because even tho he may hav grown up on film and still feeds on it as his inspiration (they both clearly love cinema) he actually realises the world is more than cinema. PTA talks about joseph campbell, and the origins of mythology. Malick travelled the world and became spiritually enlightened (moreso). Kubrick read everything he could get his hands on, he never took anything for granted. Tarantino does not give this impression.


I agree with this unconditionally.

Actually, I loved both Kill Bill films, but I think he's going downhill quick and I don't see a war movie doing much to give me hope really. There is a quality that Tarantino is fantastic at, but I wonder if he's gone the way of M. Night and started to recycle things we've seen far too many times. There is definetly something to be said for directors who are out in the world reading books and getting away from film for a while.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: cine on March 05, 2005, 03:28:38 AM
Quote from: cronopio
how we lost interest in him

whoa whoa whoa.. this thread and you freaks can speak for yourselves. me.... i'll be over here.. enjoying his films..... alone....
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Bethie on March 05, 2005, 03:45:56 AM
Quote from: Cinephile
i'll be over here.. enjoying his films..... alone....






You can say that again.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: SiliasRuby on March 05, 2005, 03:08:37 PM
Perhaps I am veing a bit redundant on this suject but what the hell...

Myxomatosis is right, I really fear that he is going downhill with his film making and while Pulp Fiction was and still is one of my favorite flicks of all time (aside note: Kill Bill wasn't breaking ground and just seemed to be his take on the martial arts/asian cinema but I still love those movies and I will be getting the Kill Bill Special edition DVD's which are rumored to come out in august of this year), I think tarantino is running out of steam and fast.
I hope he doesn't turn into anothe M. Night. recycling films that he has already done. Pubrick is also right about how Tarantino is more or less turning into a victim of pop culture. He seems like his mind is a dictionary filled with it and there is nothing else that he can spew out other than films of the past and present.
Another thing that is starting to bug me is how he gives the impression that he is wishy washy about new projects on his plate. In alot of the articles about QT's upcoming projects and stints to write and direct the word that seems to pop up the most is MIGHT. He might be doing this, He might be doing that. Might....bleh, just pick something and do it...sorry now I am getting a bit frusterated...but anyway, that's just my opinion.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: picolas on March 05, 2005, 08:54:24 PM
he turned into an impression of himself. i still enjoy his movies, though.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Myxo on March 05, 2005, 08:58:47 PM
I love Quentin Tarantino films.

..and I could care less if he keeps recycling the same stuff over and over again. What is interesting is how Quentin himself spoke of this very thing on Charlie Rose. He spoke of a director reaching a point creatively where that person goes downhill.

As much as Tarantino loves Brian De Palma, even he admitted that it happend with him as well. I think it was Bonfire of the Vanities for De Palma.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: pete on March 05, 2005, 09:14:49 PM
are we all judging QT by the Kill Bills?  I don't think he's lost it or became a joke or whatever, I think he's as creative as the best of them out there right now.  He's very flashy though, and he's way more articulate about his influences than a lot of directors care/ dare to be.  The Kill Bills to me have this joy of filmmaking that's just soaked through the four hours.  He loves making movies and loves watching movies, and the Kill Bills are a celebration of that, just like Goodbye Dragon Inn, just like The Dreamers, just like the Five Obstructions.  True self-indulgence could not be this entertaining or creative.  He didn't just take twenty movies and put them in a blender (the Watchowskis, however, did).
I think it's unfair to use his declaration of his inspiration against him.  Sure he is inspired by movies, but that doesn't make his film any less personal.  It's also fairly obvious that he has the biggest crush on Uma Thurman and is probably more inspired by her than Sonny Chiba or whatever.  And he puts it right there, in front of everyone.  It's a cool love song and I don't think many other directors could direct a love song this blatant and this entertaining.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Gold Trumpet on March 05, 2005, 11:30:20 PM
Quote from: pete
are we all judging QT by the Kill Bills?  I don't think he's lost it or became a joke or whatever, I think he's as creative as the best of them out there right now.  He's very flashy though, and he's way more articulate about his influences than a lot of directors care/ dare to be.  The Kill Bills to me have this joy of filmmaking that's just soaked through the four hours.  He loves making movies and loves watching movies, and the Kill Bills are a celebration of that, just like Goodbye Dragon Inn, just like The Dreamers, just like the Five Obstructions.  True self-indulgence could not be this entertaining or creative.  He didn't just take twenty movies and put them in a blender (the Watchowskis, however, did).
I think it's unfair to use his declaration of his inspiration against him.  Sure he is inspired by movies, but that doesn't make his film any less personal.  It's also fairly obvious that he has the biggest crush on Uma Thurman and is probably more inspired by her than Sonny Chiba or whatever.  And he puts it right there, in front of everyone.  It's a cool love song and I don't think many other directors could direct a love song this blatant and this entertaining.


Even though I think he's on the downhill, I agree mostly with this. My beef with him never has been his lack of interest in world topics or continuing need to quote other films. From information I've gotten, he quoted just as badly with Pulp Fiction and Resevoir Dogs. Its said the films he quoted there are mostly unkown to American viewers. I haven't seen them either. I think there are some great films to be made still with his interest of vision, but I don't think he's making a transition. Kill Bill Vol. 2 feels like the lesser Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown never impacts with carrying a plot.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: pete on March 06, 2005, 12:12:47 AM
I think he's making a transition.  kill bill is a huge movie, all his previous movies are kinda on smaller scales.  I think he's moving on to do big epic movies and elaborate action sequences, which he learned on kill bill.  It's his School Daze.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on March 06, 2005, 02:06:47 AM
How can you really say he's going downhill? Reservoir Dogs was good, Pulp Fiction was great, Jackie Brown was just as great, and Kill Bill is... different... and great in its own special way. Doesn't "going downhill" require, like, a hill? This is more of a plateau.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Gold Trumpet on March 06, 2005, 02:21:43 AM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
How can you really say he's going downhill? Reservoir Dogs was good, Pulp Fiction was great, Jackie Brown was just as great, and Kill Bill is... different... and great in its own special way. Doesn't "going downhill" require, like, a hill? This is more of a plateau.


if one agreed with your basic assessment of each film, I guess one could say its more of a plateau :?
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Myxo on March 06, 2005, 02:38:45 AM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
How can you really say he's going downhill? Reservoir Dogs was good, Pulp Fiction was great, Jackie Brown was just as great, and Kill Bill is... different... and great in its own special way. Doesn't "going downhill" require, like, a hill? This is more of a plateau.


Ever notice how nobody mentions "From Dusk Till Dawn" in his body of work? It's true that he only wrote the screenplay, but I can't imagine it being that much better even if he had directed it. That movie is a mess.

I also think that because of Pulp Fiction, he's held to a far higher standard with each subsequent film he releases. We've seen how talented he is. I don't question his brilliance for a moment. The trouble is, once everyone has seen him at the top of his game, anything less is a disappointment.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: modage on March 06, 2005, 10:16:20 AM
Quote from: Myxomatosis
Ever notice how nobody mentions "From Dusk Till Dawn" in his body of work? It's true that he only wrote the screenplay, but I can't imagine it being that much better even if he had directed it. That movie is a mess.

a mess of awesomeness.  what are you talking about?  plus, nobody mentions true romance in this either, we're only talking about the films in which he has been solely responsible for.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Pubrick on March 06, 2005, 10:42:30 AM
myxo has gone from agreeing with the thread, to awkwardly defending QT, to making completely irrelevant comments, to "i just want attention".

mod, u'd be best off ignoring his ramblings.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: SoNowThen on March 07, 2005, 07:11:58 AM
I agree with what most of you guys said about losing interest in QT, which makes me feel especially weird as it was Reservoir Dogs that got me interested in film.

However, if he does become a victim of pop culture / parody of himself, at least we can look forward to one thing: he'll still get to make movies, and while they might not be the brilliance we were hoping for, maybe he'll just become a solid director of stupid mindless genre movies, and to be honest, we need some talented directors of those kinds of movies working in Hollywood. If they're gonna pump so many of them out every year, I'd rather one of them was by a guy like QT.

at the end of the day, I'm hoping when I see Kill Bill put together as one movie I'll somehow be exposed to whatever magic was missing (particularly from the second part), and do a full turnaround and love it...
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Myxo on March 07, 2005, 07:34:12 AM
Quote from: SoNowThen
However, if he does become a victim of pop culture / parody of himself, at least we can look forward to one thing: he'll still get to make movies, and while they might not be the brilliance we were hoping for, maybe he'll just become a solid director of stupid mindless genre movies, and to be honest, we need some talented directors of those kinds of movies working in Hollywood. If they're gonna pump so many of them out every year, I'd rather one of them was by a guy like QT.


Nothing is really original anyway right? Everything is a copy of a copy of something else. So, in essence even the most original filmaking was inspired from or is a mirror of previous work in the history of cinema. The difference is, some work is blatently familiar and other work is more subtle and original. Tarantino basically put a bunch of Shaw brother movies and Sergio Leone in a blender and hit frappe for Kill Bill. I'm totally ok with that, but I hope he doesn't turn into a really good cover band over the next few years.
Title: how we lost interest in him
Post by: soixante on March 08, 2005, 06:24:38 PM
QT even on an off day makes better films than 99% of the directors out there.  I felt the Kill Bill films were an improvement on Jackie Brown, so actually I still love his work.

Every director goes through dry spells.  Scorsese made a few mediocre films in the 80's, but then he did GoodFellas.

admin note: all scorsese discussion moved to http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=7359
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: MacGuffin on June 04, 2007, 08:29:11 PM
Italian film industry rebukes Tarantino
Source: Hollywood Reporter

ROME -- The Italian cinema industry is up in arms after recent comments from director Quentin Tarantino, who called the current state of the film industry "depressing."

Italian newspapers on Monday and over the weekend were full of reaction to the director's comments, which came less than a month after it was revealed that he would co-present a series of Spaghetti Westerns in a special sidebar at this year's Venice Film Festival.

Tarantino is known to be a fan of old Italian films, but according to his recent comments published in Sorrisi & Canzioni -- the country's leading television magazine -- his love for the country's film productions does not extend to more contemporary cuts.

"New Italian cinema is just depressing," Tarantino said. "Recent films I've seen are all the same. They talk about boys growing up, or girls growing up, or couples having a crisis, or vacations of the mentally impaired."

Those defending modern Italian cinema included some of the best-known names in the game.

"How dare he talk about Italian cinema when he doesn't know anything about American cinema?" asked Naples-born Sophia Loren, according to media reports.

"Tarantino is a brute," said Marco Bellocchio, a five-time Palme d'Or nominee in Cannes and a member of this year's Cannes jury.

Even editorial writers got in on the counterattack, with the left-wing daily L'Unita saying Tarantino was himself "mentally impaired."

The center-left daily La Repubblica, Italy's second-largest newspaper, said that if Italian film isn't what it used to be, neither was Tarantino.

"Tarantino is no longer the Tarantino that made 'Pulp Fiction,' " the newspaper opined.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: The Sheriff on June 06, 2007, 04:12:53 AM
ego is his weakness i 6think
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: MacGuffin on June 20, 2007, 12:31:29 PM
Almodovar defends Italian Cinema from Tarantino
Source: italymag

Spanish director Pedro Almodovar hit back at Quentin Tarantino’s criticism of Italian cinema Thursday, claiming the Pulp Fiction maker suffers from “verbal incontinence”.

Tarantino said he was “appalled” at the current state of Italian cinema at the Cannes Film Festival last month.

“Quentin is a good director, a passionate cinema enthusiast and great expert on all the world’s trash,” said Almodovar.

“But you shouldn’t take his comments too seriously because he suffers from a form of verbal incontinence and he is nostalgic for the Italian cinema of (Umberto) Lenzi, (Mario) Bava and (Lucio) Fulci.

“I don’t think he was comparing the best auteur cinema of yesterday and today. I doubt he had the cinema of Luchino Visconti, Pietro Germi and Pier Paolo Pasolini in mind.

“And I don’t think he knows Italy’s auteur filmmakers of today”.

Almodovar, who has won Academy Awards for Talk to Her (best screenplay, 2003) and All About My Mother (best foreign film, 2000), was speaking at a ceremony at which Culture Minister Francesco Rutelli made him a ‘Commendatore’, one of Italy’s top honours.

The director will also be awarded the best European film prize Thursday at the 2007 David di Donatello awards - Italy’s Oscars - for Volver.

“There are only two countries where I don’t have to explain what putting passion into your cinema means - Spain and Italy,” he added.

“These are cultures where emotion, instinct and the art of getting by and suffering to express talent are part of the national DNA”.

Almodovar paid tribute to the influence Italian movies had had on his career too.

“When I went to the cinema as a child in the 1950s I was most attracted to the films that portrayed real life honestly, without filters of form and style,” he said.

“This is the recipe of the best Italian cinema. I tried to take inspiration from that lesson, putting heart and brains to the fore, like (Federico) Fellini, for example”.

Tarantino also acknowledged Italian cinema as one of his main sources of inspiration - particularly in B-movie directors like Bava - before blasting its current state at Cannes.

“I really loved the Italian movies of the 1960s and 1970s. What happened? It’s a real tragedy,” the American director said.

“The (Italian) films I’ve seen over the last few years all seem the same. All they talk about is boys growing up, girls growing up, couples in crisis and holidays for the mentally disabled”.

Tarantino’s outburst also earned him a rebuke from Italian film diva Sophia Loren.

“How dare he talk about Italian cinema when he doesn’t even know anything about American cinema,” the 73-year-old said.

Tarantino will be a guest at this year’s Venice Film Festival in September, where he will present his favourite spaghetti westerns.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Pubrick on June 21, 2007, 12:32:39 AM
Spanish director Pedro Almodovar hit back at Quentin Tarantino’s criticism of Italian cinema Thursday, claiming the Pulp Fiction maker suffers from “verbal incontinence”.

that made my day. thanks.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: modage on August 15, 2009, 03:24:22 PM
"I HAVE sibling rivalry with Orson Welles. I don't think he's that good. All right? I have sibling rivalry with him and Stanley Kubrick" -- Quentin Tarantino to Charles Osgood on "CBS Sunday Morning"
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Pas on August 15, 2009, 11:30:01 PM
that's fucked up  :shock:
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: hedwig on August 15, 2009, 11:41:25 PM
Hahahah. It's ... impossible for me to be offended by Quentin Tarantino at this point. I've come full circle. I like him again. It's fine with me. I wish I could rewatch Kill Bill Vol. 1 right now. And I'm very excited for Inglourious Basterds or whatever it's called.  :yabbse-thumbup:
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: SiliasRuby on August 15, 2009, 11:54:15 PM
That IS what it is called.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: picolas on August 16, 2009, 02:45:32 AM
nawww man that's so dumb. don't give him a free pass. and at this point no one loves qt more than qt. still. he's yet to make a movie i hate. i'm just worried inglorious will be the true beginning of his real-life pomposity melding into his actual work.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: hedwig on August 16, 2009, 11:03:32 AM
Hahahah. It's ... impossible for me to be offended by Quentin Tarantino at this point. I've come full circle. I like him again. It's fine with me. I wish I could rewatch Kill Bill Vol. 1 right now. And I'm very excited for Inglourious Basterds or whatever it's called.  :yabbse-thumbup:
haha what the fuck! this is what whiskey does to me.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Neil on August 16, 2009, 11:23:53 AM
nawww man that's so dumb. don't give him a free pass. and at this point no one loves qt more than qt. still. he's yet to make a movie i hate. i'm just worried inglorious will be the true beginning of his real-life pomposity melding into his actual work.


How many more films do you give this guy?
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Stefen on August 16, 2009, 12:26:49 PM
He never makes bad movies. It's not like he's M. Night or something. His movies are always, if nothing else, a lot of fun and don't take themselves too seriously.

I can only speak for myself, but I just wish his influences were great movies instead of weak sauce b-flicks.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: picolas on August 16, 2009, 01:59:04 PM
yeah stefen sums it up pretty well.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Pas on August 16, 2009, 03:18:00 PM
yeah exactly... I like Russ Meyer as much as the next guy but I'm pretty sure QT makes him out to be better than Welles or Kubrick. That's just silly talk.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 16, 2009, 04:39:45 PM
Tarantino is better to be influenced by bad movies. He is a creature of stylistic films and if he started to directly take from great films, his shortcomings would be highlighted more.

When Sergio Leone remade Kurosawa's Yojimbo, the remake was obviously a stylistic departure and weaker than the original. A Fistful of Dollars was rightly criticized because the original was sincere to the themes and the remake wasn't. When Sergio Leone stopped remaking good films with The Good, The Bad, And the Ugly and Once Upon a Time in the West, he was better credited for his stylistic choices.

Tarantino needs to exist in his own realm. He needs to continue to be honest to his own taste buds, but I think he just needs to show better judgement about what is worthwhile to him. In the discussion of genre movies, there are levels of quality. It seems Tarantino started out his career by investigating the better genre movies. Afterwards he continued to explore other genre movies, but doing so has led him to some less forgivable genre, but he does it in the name of exploration. I would like to see him revisit some old subjects and see if he can find new ways to tell those older stories.

Sergio Leone is a hero to Tarantino, but he was able to make numerous Westerns. It shouldn't be above Tarantino to make numerous gangsters movies. It seems to be his best genre.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: socketlevel on August 16, 2009, 05:56:46 PM
i agree 100% with GT, if Tarantino is going to take major influence from anything it's much better when it's kinda bad trashy stuff, but has brilliant bits.  tarantino is great not only in recognizing the brilliance of genre stuff that is often overlooked, but he also has a knack for bringing many of those moments together in the ultimate homage film.  this model doesn't work if he's influenced by Terrence malick, or someone similar, because that kinda film is more about the whole, despite having some astonishing moments.  Tarantino works in pieces.

however, the best tarantino is when he writes more organically and influence (be it high or low brow) isn't so clear cut.  the problem is, he has this "I'm going to tackle a (insert genre) movie" mentality and i think that's kinda bullshit.  sure sure, people saw his influences in reservoir dogs and pulp fiction but they didn't ooze too much of fanboy.  also, they were lower budget and less colourful/glossy.  because everything seems like a set in his movies now, from all of kill bill(s) to the bar in death proof.

i actually like everything he's ever made, not a single film disappointed me enough to give it a fail.  while i do nod my head understanding most points made in this thread, it's more-so because tarantino to me is a solid director that used to be inspirational.  his newer stuff reeks of intent, the older stuff was made from a frame of mind that wasn't expecting the audience's reaction.  though i bet it's hard to lose that headspace due to his popularity, every script is written with the fans/critics's possible reaction from the moment of it's inception i'm sure.  maybe the best thing for tarantino's future originality would be if he had the ultimate bonfire of the vanities failure that would force him back down to earth.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: MacGuffin on August 16, 2009, 11:15:43 PM
QT on Letterman Monday night.
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Neil on August 17, 2009, 12:36:41 AM
 if he's 48 and he kept his average (which i do not know, come on smart people!) how many would that equal?
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: New Feeling on August 17, 2009, 04:25:53 AM
well Neil, he's been releasing one movie approximately every two years since Kill Bill v.1, and approximately every three years since Reservoir Dogs.  So if he makes movies until he's sixty it would be fair to say we can expect 4-5 more.  According to my calculations. 

I hope he goes through a Fassbinder phase at some point.   
Title: Re: how we lost interest in him
Post by: Neil on November 27, 2010, 12:29:03 PM
(http://www.wallandpiece.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/girls_and_guns.jpg)

Something QT took to heart.