The Director's Chair > Quentin Tarantino

how we lost interest in him

(1/9) > >>

cron:
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
--- End quote ---
.

Ghostboy:
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.

modage:
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.

Kal:
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.

Pubrick:
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.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page