Clint Eastwood Forums

Other/Miscellaneous => Off-Topic Discussion => Topic started by: masterchief on April 24, 2004, 01:31:14 PM

Title: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: masterchief on April 24, 2004, 01:31:14 PM
Okay, what everyone favourite Tarantino films ?

Out of the ones I've seen, it goes:

Resivior Dogs
Kill Bill
Pulp Fiction

But that is a very hard choice to make, and, If your read the GBU Special Edition May '04 (http://www.clinteastwood.org/forums/index.php?board=2;action=display;threadid=1999 (http://www.clinteastwood.org/forums/index.php?board=2;action=display;threadid=1999))you may have heard my tale of trying to see "Kill Bill Vol.2" (http://www.clinteastwood.org/forums/index.php?board=2;action=display;threadid=1999;start=75)

Has anyone else seen it and what are there thoughts ?
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: allycat on April 24, 2004, 02:04:08 PM
Actually I've never been a real fan of Tarantino. I think the guy's insanely cool, but I couldn't get into Reservoir Dogs, found Pulp Fiction overrated and Jackie Brown just annoying. But I'm going to watch Pulp Fiction again and see if I can't change my mind...because...

I absolutely loved Kill Bill! I think Vol. 1 is better than Vol. 2 in terms of action/fight scenes, Vol. 2 is better for emotional depth, character development etc. I've only seen each once so I can't comment too much, but I think it would've worked better as one film, though I know that Tarantino couldn't release it that way as the studios wouldn't let him.

It's good that there are some strong female characters in the films that really kick ass! ;D I think Uma Thurman is great, and so is David Carradine in his role.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: dane with no name on April 28, 2004, 03:31:23 PM
Reservoir Dogs wins hands down.
The acting, the story, the setting, all is superb. I cant think of a single bad thing to say about that movie except that i would have loved a few more rants by mr. brown. ;D
Of all the movies i´ve seen, only jackie brown dissapointed me (not that i was expecting a action flick, mind you) his small directing part of Four rooms is also worth mentioning (tim roth shows once again his impressive talent) I havent seen Kill Bill vol. 2 yet  :'(
but it´s on top of my to do list  ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on April 28, 2004, 06:14:31 PM
Four Rooms was trash except for Tim Roth and Tarrantino's bit. Those are the only reasons I would watch that again.

As for the movies of his I like, well, Reservoir Dogs was the first one I saw and it blew me away. I think actually it was the first time I had seen a parrallel action movie, and since it was so new to me I just loved it. So any concept done very, very well.

Pulp Fiction is great. I also liked From Dusk Till Dawn just for the chessyness of it. I remember going to see Jackie Brown in theatres and found to be extremely boring and disapointing. I have since re-watched it and enjoyed it a bit more, but it still doesn't compare to Pulp or Dogs.

But for me it's Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill Vol.1, From Dusk Till Dawn and then Jackie Brown.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on April 29, 2004, 08:18:58 AM
I've seen two Tarantino movies: Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown. Like them both. I saw Brown first, and probably like it more.

I think De Niro's role in Jackie Brown has been one of his overall best in recent years (along with Wag the Dog).

I don't think I really care if and when I see Kill Bill. I've said it before, I only really try to see stuff that catches my eye.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: masterchief on April 29, 2004, 08:26:05 AM
I highly recommend Kill Bill, I think its brilliant, the best film of 2003 (I didn't get to see Mystic River) I think it was better that the supurb "Finding Nemo"
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: dane with no name on April 29, 2004, 01:27:23 PM
Quote
Four Rooms was trash except for Tim Roth and Tarrantino's bit. Those are the only reasons I would watch that again.
I agree, still felt it should be mentioned though.

How about True romance? he didnt direct it, but he wrote it. it has stellar cast (hopper, walken, oldman, pitt, even a blink-and-you-miss-it appearence by samuel jackson) a typical tarantino setting (read; extreme violence), and a ton of oneliners.   ;D
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on April 29, 2004, 01:32:15 PM
I haven't seen True Romance, but I have heard some good things about it. Perhaps oneday I'll check it out.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on April 29, 2004, 05:41:44 PM
Pulp Fiction is his masterpiece, and he'll never be able to top it, simply because of its timing and its impact on cinema.  But I now much prefer Jackie Brown.  It's the movie I can watch over and over and never get tired of it.  I also think True Romance is great and I like its ending, which was not the ending Tarantino wrote, so perhaps I like it better that he didn't direct it.

Kill Bill Vol. 1 I think was trash.  I did not like it at all.  But Vol. 2 is very good, with a totally different feel.  It has great writing, some well-timed surprises, and an emotional content that was lacking in the first one.  When the title "Last Chapter" came on the screen, I couldn't believe the movie was almost over, it'd just flown by.  It's no masterpiece, but it is very enjoyable.  
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on May 01, 2004, 02:14:25 PM
I don't know, I've never gotten the whole Quentin Tarrantino mystique. Perhaps it's just that I haven't been exposed to much of his work, but I just don't see it. I have seen Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown , so my exposure has been rather limited, but I didn't think either one of them were particularly fabulous works of cinema. They were certainly strange and offbeat, and if that's where his appeal comes from, that I can understand, but beyond that, I just thought the films were okay. I have been avoiding the Kill Bill movies just because it looked to me as if the films were just an excuse to have more blood and gore and some meaningless violence. I'm usually not interested in seeing these kinds of gratuitously violent films. I could be wrong, but I didn't think seeing limbs hacked off by swords was really my cup of tea.  
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: bdc28 on May 03, 2004, 06:50:41 AM
Quentin Tarantino, hands down..is going to go down as one of the best movie writers/directors of all time. He has vision that can only be summed up as genius.

Reservoir Dogs, was the nucleus, and bar none the best work. Never has a human being done so much with so little (if you think about it, ninety percent of the movie happens in one little space..there was no money for proper sets). The performances are stand out.

Lets be truthful on the next movie...Quentin Tarantino MADE Samuel Jackson (oh he was around..but not a big player), and revived John Travolta with PULP FICTION.

I admit, other than resurrecting some film careers of the seventies, JACKIE BROWN was a true disappointment.

I can only say one thing about FROM DUSK TILL DAWN...George Clooneys performance in that movie could be compared to Denzel Washingtons in Training Day. I have NEVER seen someone seem so fierce and brutal as Clooney. Like at any moment, he would blow up and try to take the entire world with him. His quick temper and quicker gun kept the movie going...and the viewers AWED....they were only used to the cute Dr. Ross...the the demented SETH GECKO.

The other great thing about Quentin Tarantino is his mind for creation. Everything in one movie blends into the next movie. We have a KILL BILL ONE, and a KILL BILL TWO...do you know they are currently writing a KILL BILL THREE? About the daughter who watched her mother killed in VOL 1 getting revenge? AND, hes going to hold onto the script for ten years. Talk about patience.

Another good example. Little known detail. Anyone notice the fascniation with the name Vega? In Reservoir Dogs, Michael Madsens character was named "Toothpick" Vic Vega...and in PULP FICTION, John Travoltas character, was named VINCENT VEGA.

Well guess whats in production now? You guessed it. The two most popular characters from his most popular movies, are getting together in a movie called THE VEGA BROTHERS.

If thats not genius, what IS?

Kill Bill, VOL 1, cinematically, was a masterpiece. There wasnt a film genre that he didnt catch. Whether it be a STANLEY KUBRICK type scene (Darryl Hannah brining the syrnge to kill **** with), or Anime...he covered it all...and with style.

Lets face it, under all that madness, is a genius.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on May 03, 2004, 07:49:32 AM
Ok ok..you've talked me into it.  ;D

Tonight I've rented Kill Bill vol 1.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on May 03, 2004, 06:56:08 PM
Hey BDC. Nice to see you around again. Shoot me over a PM and we can catch up.

BDC and the rest of y'all, feel free to love Tarantino. It's cool if you do. Maybe I'm in the minority here. I think I just generally don't like style and flash and attempts to be clever in films. It's probably the reason I hated Adaptation too. I guess I'm just not into avant garde filmmaking.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on May 04, 2004, 01:31:06 AM
Well... it was an experience.
To be honest I did enjoy it, tho' I'm not sure my life has been enriched by the experience  ;D ;)
 The fight scenes were great, I never watched the old FU movies of the 70's of which I guess this is some kind of homage.. it was fun for what it is and I will rent 2.. but I'd put this below Dogs,Pulp and Jackie Brown..
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: dane with no name on May 04, 2004, 04:55:02 AM
Quote
Well guess whats in production now? You guessed it. The two most popular characters from his most popular movies, are getting together in a movie called THE VEGA BROTHERS.
Heard that one myself, and am looking forwards to it. As far as i´ve heard, it´s going to take place before Madsen goes to jail, which could mean that it´s going to be a movie taking place in the late 70íes. Taking Tarantinos fascination with the 70ies into consideration i think it´s going to look like the new Starský and Hutch Without the "fun" parts. (of course tarantinos movies are always fun in that twisted violent kinda way ;D) but i think you get the idea.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: allycat on May 04, 2004, 11:44:21 AM
I haven't seen True Romance, but I have heard some good things about it. Perhaps oneday I'll check it out.

Now I knew there was something I'd forgotten to mention. True Romance was on tv here a few weeks ago and I watched it again, having not seen it for years. And I have to say, it's brilliant! Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette go really well together. The humour is great, and so are the performances and the plot. You really warm to the protagonists. So, maybe I am a fan of Tarantino, after all...

Gant, so glad you rented and liked Kill Bill! I knew you would... ;D Now you gotta see Vol. 2...am I allowed to say that there's a gloriously gory bit in the face-off between The Bride and Elle Driver? ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on May 04, 2004, 12:00:19 PM
Good....... I was wondering when the action was gonna come along... ;D
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: dane with no name on May 05, 2004, 06:38:06 AM
Quote
You really warm to the protagonists.
Can you do naything but like slater when he´s talking to THE KING  ;D
My favorite scene is the one with Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper. I have never seen a mobster being made a jerk off so throughly like that  ;D
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on May 05, 2004, 12:14:32 PM
I agree.. that scene is great..one of my fave Hopper scenes of all time.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Seagal Fan on June 05, 2004, 10:18:44 PM
Did you know that Tarantino got his name from Burt Reynolds?
Reynolds movie name in a serie of the sixties was Quentin. Tarantino´s mother loved the name that much that she called her son "Quentin" after the Burt Reynolds character....
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: masterchief on June 06, 2004, 11:55:01 AM
If you ever wondered whats in the briefcase in "Pulp Fiction" there are some interesting theorys here:

http://pulp.linuxroot.org/case.shtml (http://pulp.linuxroot.org/case.shtml)

I like the "Soul" theory the most.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on June 06, 2004, 11:59:34 AM
The most likely one there is the column headlined "Kiss Me Deadly." I saw Kiss Me Deadly a second time just a few weeks ago in a film class, and the teacher mentioned it as being a film that Tarantino has most likely seen many times.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on June 06, 2004, 12:08:41 PM
It's cool not knowing.  8)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: dane with no name on June 08, 2004, 05:20:21 AM
I prefer to be left in the dark about what´s in the briefcase, but i can easily understand why some people wants to know. Tarantino was briefly in scandinavia during the promotion of jackie brown, and a reporter asked him what was in the briefcase. he answered that it could be anything, from uranium, the holy grail, to eastwoods poncho.  ;D

We talked briefly about True Romance, but what about another certain other movie he wrote the script for?
I am (of course) talking about Natural born killers.
In my mind, one of his most provocative scripts ever. Whats your take on it?
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: masterchief on June 08, 2004, 11:29:30 AM
I have seen the for about 50 minutes, and I loved it. I enjoyed the wiredness of the stuff onscreen, and I the start in the cafe, was exelent. I don't really have much to say about the sitcom after the cafe, because I was distracted at that moment in time. I think the last thing I saw was the wedding. I am thinking of getting it on DVD.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on June 08, 2004, 12:33:17 PM
Actually he didn't really write Natural Born Killers. He wrote the original draft but then Oliver Stone had some peeps re-write it almost completely, and since then Tarantino pretty much wants nothing to do with it.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on June 09, 2004, 11:29:15 AM
The original screenplay is available by Grove Press and you can compare Tarantino's script to the movie.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on June 11, 2004, 07:22:39 AM
I watched "the fourth film by Quentin Tarantino" ( ::) ::)) last night. Kill Bill doesn't have a thing on Jackie Brown or Pulp Fiction. It's a huge step down from those films. It might be an okay film, but it certainly isn't great. There were aspects of it that I liked. I certainly (and I don't want to give anything away here, so read on with caution) liked the animated scenes, that was an interesting way of doing those. And there were times when the music obviously had a Leone feel to them, and I thought to myself that the only major saving grace the film has is that it reminds me of Leone's work. But yet, it isn't as fun to watch as a Leone film.

I have to ask about the violence. You know, the blood spurting as it does. Was there a reason for this? Anybody know? Honestly, I saw very similar violence just a few weeks ago when I watched Freddy Vs. Jason. Was it for humor? Are we supposed to laugh?

I remember back when I first watched Jackie Brown. I went to school the next day and raved about it to my friends. Then, I think I was just out of high school by the time I got to watch Pulp Fiction. And again, I really liked it. Tarantino has made some good films, but Kill Bill isn't up there with them. It's not particularly horrible, but it ain't particularly good either. Mediocre is a word that comes to mind to describe it.

I beleive it's Doug who mentioned he didn't care for Volume 1, but liked Volume 2. I hope so, cause I'll most likely watch Volume 2 at some point.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on June 11, 2004, 08:07:19 AM
Well the film was a slight homage to the Anime/Kung-Fu films, and although I don't watch Anime, I have seen pieces of some of the more popular Anime movies and they are pretty violent. I just felt that the violence was to over the top to be taken seriously.

I liked it becuase Tarantino told a great story using a great method, which he does so well. He made good action and he got some good performances as well. And the music, well, Tarantino and Wes Anderson are pretty much the only ones who knows how to use music properly in a film. By that I mean the the rock music stuff, not instrumental scores.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 21, 2004, 09:12:06 PM
I have to ask about the violence. You know, the blood spurting as it does. Was there a reason for this? Anybody know? Honestly, I saw very similar violence just a few weeks ago when I watched Freddy Vs. Jason. Was it for humor? Are we supposed to laugh?

I think he uses the techniques like the blood hoses that shower the room with a spray of blood when a limb is cut off to actually tone down the violence. It makes it less real, and ultimately less gruesome because it's so obviously just special effects.

I found a lot of humor in Kill Bill Vol 1, and at the same thought the action sequences where fantastic. Lucy Liu... what can you say? She and Uma were out of this world... damn.  I think Lucy only raises her voice twice in the film, and the first time, at the table with the other crime bosses (trying not to reveal a spoiler here, if you've seen it, you remember the scene)  man... when she raised her voice there I just was stunned by how good she was.  

I just saw this film for the first time tonight and really enjoyed it.  I haven't seen Pulp Fiction since it first came out, so I don't remember it enough to compare. Same with From Dusk to Dawn. I have seen Reservoir Dogs fairly recently and I really enjoyed that. But I'd give Kill Bill a slight edge only because when it was over... I felt good... energized. It was a fun experience. Reservoir Dogs, while I enjoyed every minute of it and thought the acting was out of this world... just left me feeling slightly deflated in the end. So, I have to give KB the higher mark just because I liked the way I felt after watching it... not necessarily because it was a better film.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on June 22, 2004, 01:06:55 PM
The violence didn't offend me by any means. I didn't feel anything for it, and that's why I asked. I felt no energy or repulsion for it.

Had it felt more real, and I'd felt repulsed by it, chances are I would have liked it a bit more.

I have to say though, I'd heard about Tarantino's opening credit "The Fourth Film by" before I'd seen it, and that really soured me. How egotistical! Is that a very small thing? You bet! ;) But even after sitting through the movie and seeing things I liked, it never came together for me.

Most martial arts movies have very stylized action scenes, but here I only saw Tarantino being fancy. I thought some of it looked nice, but I never felt anything for the characters or the action.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: allycat on June 22, 2004, 02:07:42 PM
I think he uses the techniques like the blood hoses that shower the room with a spray of blood when a limb is cut off to actually tone down the violence. It makes it less real, and ultimately less gruesome because it's so obviously just special effects.

I agree. I'm not into gore, but I didn't see this as gory at all. At least, it didn't turn my stomach. It was over the top, almost comical because it wasn't realistic.  

Quote
I found a lot of humor in Kill Bill Vol 1, and at the same thought the action sequences where fantastic. Lucy Liu... what can you say? She and Uma were out of this world... damn.  I think Lucy only raises her voice twice in the film, and the first time, at the table with the other crime bosses (trying not to reveal a spoiler here, if you've seen it, you remember the scene)  man... when she raised her voice there I just was stunned by how good she was.


Yeah - I've never considered myself to be a fan of Lucy Liu, though she was fantastic in Ally McBeal. But in this film I thought she was great, and, like Uma Thurman, she played a strong, take-no-crap-from-anyone character. More importantly, another strong woman character.

Quote
I just saw this film for the first time tonight and really enjoyed it.  I haven't seen Pulp Fiction since it first came out, so I don't remember it enough to compare. Same with From Dusk to Dawn. I have seen Reservoir Dogs fairly recently and I really enjoyed that. But I'd give Kill Bill a slight edge only because when it was over... I felt good... energized. It was a fun experience. Reservoir Dogs, while I enjoyed every minute of it and thought the acting was out of this world... just left me feeling slightly deflated in the end. So, I have to give KB the higher mark just because I liked the way I felt after watching it... not necessarily because it was a better film.

Yeah, I felt full of beans after seeing Kill Bill as well. After seeing both parts, really. Though I don't want to spoil Vol. 2 for anyone who hasn't seen it, I do feel that Vol. 1 is the better part, but only because Vol. 2 has more depth and character development, so it's a slower-paced film in comparison. Put the two together however, and you have one amazing film...

Finally, I loved the anime sequence. I love Japanese anime and manga anyway, and this was in the same vein. I like unconventional styles of filming, and when directors do something different.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on June 22, 2004, 02:55:54 PM
Vol. 2 has more depth and character development, so it's a slower-paced film in comparison. Put the two together however, and you have one amazing film...
That actually gives me more hope that I might like Volume 2 more. ;) You're probably right, the movie would have probably worked best as one whole film, not broken up in two parts.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 22, 2004, 03:47:35 PM
The violence didn't offend me by any means. I didn't feel anything for it, and that's why I asked. I felt no energy or repulsion for it.

Had it felt more real, and I'd felt repulsed by it, chances are I would have liked it a bit more.

Christopher, if we agreed on a film more than once every couple of years, I'd have to rethink my evaluation of it. ;)

I don't like horror films, haven't watched one since I was a teenager. So I don't know if the sense of comedy is there or not, as it is in Kill Bill Vol. 1. But for me, this was refreshing because these scenes would be really hard to take if they were filmed to look realistic. For instance, I love Scarface, but the one chainsaw scene is PLENTY for two hours of film. A movie like Kill Bill with all the limbs and heads coming off would be too much for me if it was filmed to look real.

I thought it was a fun movie. I loved the soundtrack too. I only wish I had timed my viewing of it better. Kill Bill Vol. 2 has just left the theaters near me, and it's about two months before it's due to be released on DVD, so I've got to wait.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on June 22, 2004, 04:10:00 PM
Christopher, if we agreed on a film more than once every couple of years, I'd have to rethink my evaluation of it. ;)
I thought that myself! ;D You knew deep down that you'd like it when you saw I didn't care much for it, didn't you? ;) ;D

I'm sure this is another time when it's certainly possible my view of a movie could change. It's happened quite a bit in the past. As I've said, there are elements to this film I liked. It looks good. It's good technically. Honestly, I wish I had enjoyed it as much as some of you who have had such a good time with it.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 22, 2004, 05:56:44 PM
I thought that myself! ;D You knew deep down that you'd like it when you saw I didn't care much for it, didn't you? ;) ;D

I'm gonna start paying more attention to the films you say you don't like. ;D

P.S., anything you really didn't like that's out in the theaters now? I'll probably be going to the movies this weekend or next.  ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on June 22, 2004, 06:09:28 PM
We could run a test, though this thread probably ain't the place for it. I could give you a list of movies I think are awful, and you check them out. ;D (Though I would have to exclude the bad horror movies I've seen - or, I guess those could be the ones that would get you into the genre ;))
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 22, 2004, 09:07:26 PM
Well, we share similar taste in avatars, anyway!  ;D
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: masterchief on June 23, 2004, 12:54:26 PM
I saw "True Romance" last night, and, Like all the other Tarantino film I've seen, loved it.

I love the Hopper and Walken scene, did any of you find this racist though ? I didn't, but what do the rest of you think ?

Thought the acting was great all round and nice casting.

Plus, I agreed with the GBW reference.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on June 23, 2004, 02:06:30 PM
The 5678's are playing in town soon... I might check em out.... ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: dane with no name on June 24, 2004, 06:58:38 AM
Quote
I love the Hopper and Walken scene, did any of you find this racist though ? I didn't, but what do the rest of you think ?
I dont think it racist per see, hopper use the word deliberatly to piss of Walken, not to offend black people directly. In the quote
Quote
and your great-great-great-grandmother f*cked a n*gger, and she had a half-*ggerkid
he clearly associate walkens character with blacks no matter how pale he is, thus spitting him in the face while being tortured. He caps it off after asking vincent concotti (walkens character) if he´s lying,(which concotti agrees that he dont.)by telling him that he is half eggplant.
Tarantino takes it just to the edge, and stops there. Two of my black friends consider this their favorite scene as well so i dont think it´s racist at all. If it´s racist, it´s pointed at the sicillians, but as hopper says
Quote
i´m quoting history
You cant really say anything about that...  ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: masterchief on June 24, 2004, 09:14:30 AM
Tatantino was acctually told that by a black friend of his, and the way how you wind up an Sicillian is to compare them with a black person, I read somewhere.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on June 24, 2004, 10:16:12 AM
And the whole point of the scene is to anger Walken's character enough that he'll kill him because he knows otherwise he will be tortured and will betray his son.   It's a great scene, exposing the false racial pride of this guy.  And it's the last redemptive act of a guy who's been a poor father his whole life.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on July 17, 2004, 08:28:31 PM
I just watched Reservoir Dogs. I liked it. Very interesting film. It has a nice pace to it as well, it didn't feel like I spent an hour and forty minutes with it.

Brendan, you mentioned early on in this thread that it was the first parallel film you'd seen (or at least you used words somewhat to that effect), but have you ever seen Stanley Kubrick's The Killing? Since every movie Tarantino has directed is like this, I'm guessing he has. ;) :D

I've only seen each of Tarantino's films once apiece (aside from Kill Bill Vol. 2, which I haven't seen yet), so I really can't make a list as to which I like the best. Plus, as I've mentioned, Pulp and Jackie were a few years back. But if I had to, I'd say:

Jackie Brown
Pulp Fiction
Reservoir Dogs

Kill Bill Vol. 1
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on July 18, 2004, 12:21:59 AM
I just watched Reservoir Dogs. I liked it. Very interesting film. It has a nice pace to it as well, it didn't feel like I spent an hour and forty minutes with it.

I love Reservoir Dogs. I don't think I can say that enough. I love it becuase he was able to do so much, with so little. Pretty much all of the movie took place in one room with four characters (not including the cop), and Tarrantino managed to use the room and the performances to hold your interest and keep you on the egde of you seat until the end.

The pacing was also very well done, which goes with what I said about keeping you on the edge of your seat. I've seen two of the deleted scene, both of which were crap and were rightfully deleted. One consisted of Freddy (Mr. Orange) and his partner getting informatio about Mr. White's history. The scene dragged on and revealed too much about Mr. White, it's better that we don't know all that much about him. The other scene featured Mr. White, Mr. Pink and Nice Guy Eddie heading back to the rendezvous after ditching the cars and getting the diamonds. All it is is just Mr. White yelling at Nice Guy Eddie because he refuses to get a doctor for Mr. Orange. It was a waste of time and never accomplished anything, so with those scene edited out, the movie ended up perfect.

There were also differant angles of the famous ear cutting scene, which were close-ups of it being cut off. I liked it better that Tarrantino just panned away from the action and then panned back in. It was just... better.

Reservoir Dogs is truly and amazing film, and will forever be in my top ten.

Jackie Brown... ick. BORING. That about sums it up.

Christopher you should check out From Dusk Till Dawn. It's a stupid, cheesy movie, but I think you'd enjoy it alot.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on July 18, 2004, 10:24:00 AM
I remember going to see Jackie Brown in theatres and found to be extremely boring and disapointing. I have since re-watched it and enjoyed it a bit more, but it still doesn't compare to Pulp or Dogs.
Now it's "Ick. Boring." ???
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on July 18, 2004, 04:05:48 PM
I enjoyed it more then I did before, but I still don't like it all that much, and it is still slightly boring. Perhaps a third viewing will change my mind.  ;D
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: masterchief on August 08, 2004, 05:53:35 PM
In Pulp Fiction, when Mia and Vince walk into 'Jack Rabbit Slims' what is the song in the background, I think it's by Ricky Nelson, and I think it goes:

1,2, Gonna find you too, 3,4, get down on the floor, 5,6 gonna get your ya kicks.

Thats the chorus, anyone know the name?
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on August 20, 2004, 08:28:01 PM
I just saw Kill Bill Volume 2, and it's a whole heckuvalot better than Volume 1! I had hope that I'd like it better, but it even surprised me a little. It felt like a whole different movie to me.

I know my brother has recently seen both of these movies, though I don't know what he thought of Volume 2 yet. He told me that he remembered reading an interview with Tarantino back when the first movie came out where Tarantino said he broke the movie up into two parts because he was afraid the audience wouldn't be able to handle all the killing and blood, only my brother said he felt Volume 1 was...(shall I even say it amongst such fans on this board? :P)...boring ( :o). I didn't use that term myself, though I can understand it as I didn't find too much excitement in the movie. So, I'm quite interested in talking to him about Volume 2.

Hey, Matt, we might even agree once again on a movie! ;) ;D If you liked the first, you have to like the second one.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on August 20, 2004, 08:40:11 PM

I know my brother has recently seen both of these movies, though I don't know what he thought of Volume 2 yet... only my brother said he felt Volume 1 was...(shall I even say it amongst such fans on this board? :P)...boring ( :o).


One of the DVD reviewers over at IGN.com didn't like Volume 1 either and he got quite the load of hate mail for it. I don't see how Volume 1 could be boring, but I can understand why people wouldn't like it because of the violence.

Volume 2 is alot better and one of my only problems with it comes at the end, (I don't think I'm spoiling anything but look away if you must) when Bill and Beatrice are talking. Damn that just goes on for so long. And it's also slightly anti-climactic...
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: masterchief on August 21, 2004, 03:55:22 AM
(I don't think I'm spoiling anything but look away if you must) when Bill and Beatrice are talking. Damn that just goes on for so long. And it's also slightly anti-climactic...

I agree with you, we have been watching the two films for around three to four hours, and how she has gone on about killing Bill, and, when she is with him, they start talking! I was expecting a sword fight (or fire fight) that would be more entertaining than the 'O-Ren' fight, and end in some exreamly gory ending.
SPOILER!!!!!!!!!















But no, they have a ten minuite chat, and a 15 second fight. I was quite dissapointed with that

















SPOILER END

Also, I watched 'Jackie Brown' and, to be honest, I was as Brendan said:
Quote
Jackie Brown... ick. BORING. That about sums it up.
And I completely agree with that.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on August 21, 2004, 06:19:13 AM
One of the DVD reviewers over at IGN.com didn't like Volume 1 either and he got quite the load of hate mail for it. I don't see how Volume 1 could be boring, but I can understand why people wouldn't like it because of the violence.
I don't think I've heard anybody say they didn't like it because of the violence. ??? The whole film is just fight scenes. It doesn't take the characters into consideration (I'm sure that's much like the kung fu movies being paid homage to). This led me to believe it would be a normal revenge movie (and not a great one at that). But Volume 2 complicates that a bit. Makes it a little more. I appreciated the style much more in 2 as well. I could feel the excitement in the fight scenes because I knew a little more about these people.

And I don't see how anybody could find Jackie Brown to be dull, so I guess we're all even there. ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on August 21, 2004, 10:27:00 PM
I may be repeating myself, but oh well.  I did not like Vol 1.  I had to see it twice in the theatres to make sure, but I felt the same about it after both times, that it was trashy and really quite stupid.  Scenes that were supposed to be funny weren't.  There's no suspense, just a lot of campy gore.  Vol 2 is a completely different movie, with great scenes, great action, and great surprises.  The time flew by while I watched it, I was so engrossed in the movie.  And I like the finale, I like its understatement.  And mostly I liked its emotional impact.  It's too bad Vol 1 is so bad, because instead of having a four hour movie to enjoy over and over, I only have the last hour and half.

And Jackie Brown is still my favorite of his movies.  Dull ... hardly!    :)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on September 27, 2004, 08:20:17 PM
Right now, Kill Bill Vol. 2 is my favorite movie. I've watched the DVD about 4 times since I got it a couple of weeks ago. But, does anyone know why Quentin Tarantino used different first names for this actor (Michael Parks)?

(http://img90.exs.cx/img90/2600/Parks1.jpg)

(http://img48.exs.cx/img48/7008/Parks2.jpg)

I'll say that one of the things I love about both of the Kill Bill films is that the characters are so fun and memorable. Esteban Vihaio is one of my favorite 'bad guys' of all time. Put him in the category of Angel Eyes... and he made that much of an impression with only about 5 minutes of screen time.

The time flew by while I watched it, I was so engrossed in the movie.  And I like the finale, I like its understatement.  And mostly I liked its emotional impact.

Oh, absolutely, I loved the last few scenes. I was never bored of the dialogue, I found it all fascinating. I loved Bill's story of Superman and Clark Kent in relation to Beatrix Kiddo and Arlene Plimpton.
Quote
Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent? He's weak. He's unsure of himself. He's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race.
Wow. Never thought of it that way. :o

Anyway, I liked these movies so much that I bought the DVDs for Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction... can't wait to watch them both again.

Doug, I'll be sure to get your favorite, Jackie Brown, next. :)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on September 27, 2004, 08:42:24 PM
But, does anyone know why Quentin Tarantino used different first names for this actor (Michael Parks)?

(http://img90.exs.cx/img90/2600/Parks1.jpg)

That's Michael Parks son, James Parks (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0662960/) standing behind him. And his character name was "Edgar McGraw". ;) :D

Also Matt, do you realize who Michael Parks is? He's none other then the Outlaw Josey Wales himself!!
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on September 27, 2004, 08:44:08 PM
Ahhhhh... now it's making sense! (http://home.swfla.rr.com/mattreigns/lol.gif)

mgk just told me tonight that Parks was Josey Wales in the sequel. I looked it up on the IMDb... it has a 1.1 rating.  :o  Yikes.

Okay, HERE we go:

(http://img61.exs.cx/img61/670/Parks3.jpg)

Now I've got him. :) ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Conan on September 28, 2004, 02:51:21 AM
  That same actor is in the beginning of "From Dusk 'Till Dawn".  He plays a Texas Ranger or Sheriff-like character.  Gets blasted point blank in the head by Tarantino's character.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on September 28, 2004, 04:11:47 AM
He has the same name, too. Earl McGraw.  ;D
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: bdc28 on September 28, 2004, 06:04:30 AM
Chiming back in on this subject (Matt has that effect, I follow him around thread to thread like a lost puppy).

I dont believe that Tarantino calling his movie a 4th Tarantino movie is arrogant. Its a sign that all of these movies tie together in some way shape or form. Tarantino has a big thing about all his movies having some kind of "heritage", they are all family. For example.

THE VEGA BROTHERS: His first two movies are going to have main characters with the last name Vega, and of course they are going to be related.

BLACK SUITS: In RESERVOIR DOGS, PULP FICTION, and even FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, all of the alpha male lead aggressive people wear black suits.

RED APPLE CIGARETTES: In Reservoir Dogs, when Mr. Pink asks Mr. White for a cigarette, he pulls out a fictional brand of cigarettes called RED APPLE. In Pulp Fiction, Bruce Willis' character walks up to the bar and orders a pack of RED APPLES before his verbal show down with Vincent Vega. Also when seen in the airport in KILL BILL, Uma Thurman's character walks past a advertisement on the wall for RED APPLES.

EARL MCGRAW: Yep, same guy in both Kill Bill and FROM DUSK TILL DAWN. Obviously the timeline is reverse, but some of his characters he has a total love for.

There are also consistencies with his characters and the way he writes them. We had mentioned earlier the use of the "N word" by Dennis Hopper. But racial tensions are a consistent in alot of his movies. The heritage of Lucy Liu's character being brought into question by the Japanese mob in KILL BILL, and the N word also being used by Mr. Pink in RESERVOIR DOGS, as well as the drug dealer in PULP FICTION. There is also reference to it in FROM DUSK TILL DAWN from Seth Gecko, regarding latino. "Richie, these are not spic firecracker salesmen from Tiuana".

Also, consistent in alot of his movies are respect of the older movie genres. Aside from the obvious homage that he pays to every director he respects in KILL BILL by changing the way he directs each scene to another discipline (Kubrikian, Scorsese), there is also subtle ways. In KILL BILL, they mentioned "a Hatori Hanso sword"...Hatori Hanso was actually a hero character in some Kung Fu films, that was so popular he actually got a threequel from it. Now if you want to see homage, Hatori Hanso was played by Sonny Chiba in the movie, but also in TRUE ROMANCE, a DIFFERENT Sonny Chiba character was mentioned in the movie theater.

So in other words...ALL THESE MOVIES tie together.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on September 28, 2004, 04:32:13 PM
BLACK SUITS: In RESERVOIR DOGS, PULP FICTION, and even FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, all of the alpha male lead aggressive people wear black suits.


So in other words...ALL THESE MOVIES tie together.

I read on the IMDb trivia board for Kill Bill Vol. 2 that:

Quote
Elle Driver wears the same outfit that Uma Thurman wears in Pulp Fiction (1994). It was also worn by Pam Grier in Jackie Brown (1997).


In fact, there's so many ways these movies all tie in together that it would be a major chore to list them all. Some of these are discussed HERE (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0378194/trivia).  I think it's really cool.  8)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: misty71 on October 06, 2004, 04:47:26 AM
even though Ive only seen Pulp Fiction and the two Kill Bill's I must say I am a big fan of tarantino's work (from what ive seen of course... :))

Pulp fiction I though it was great although maybe a bit overrated but still great

Kill Bill volume 1 was simply awseome I liked pretty much everything about it
Kill Bill volume 2..I think I like it even better than the first. I find it deeper and more character-oriented and both those movies are sorta like modern day spaghetti westerns if you will with the over the top action and camera angles and all.

I usually do not like martial-arts type movies and stuff like that but kill bill has a genre of its own and I though it was just awesome :)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: slacker on October 09, 2004, 01:14:41 PM
Tarantino ...hmmm...well i'd say for starters that his directing is a damn site better than his acting....

But the best film had to be

Jackie Brown

Great cast.........real good story line (for a change)

And one of the best film soundtracks ever...well almost
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: GBU on October 11, 2004, 11:37:16 AM
The only good ones.

Resivior Dogs
Pulp Fiction

I thought the Kill Bills wern't good at all, though I did think they were a little like the spaghetti westerns, which was kinda cool. But Hero isn't that good either. I guess I'm just not a big fan of his.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on October 11, 2004, 01:33:21 PM
But Hero isn't that good either.

As far as I know Tarrantino wasn't actually involved in the production process of the film, he just helped get it a theatrical release in the States after it had been sitting on Miramax's shelf for a few years.

Quote
I guess I'm just a big fan of his.

Then why the love for only two movies?  ???
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Philo Beddoe Jr on October 11, 2004, 08:54:20 PM
I just saw Kill Bill 1&2 back to back in a double screening at a local cinema.  They were a lot of fun.  Obviously Tarantino was having a great time doing homages to many A and B cinema genres, and I'm sure I missed quite a few connections (not having a big B genre, exploitation film, or Japanese martial arts film catalogue of viewing experiences).

As much as I appreciate the 'fun' Tarantino is bringing into cinema (and having with cinema), I do not consider the Kill Bill films to be 'modern classics' by any means.
They are great fun films, but I think they have been overrated.

I think that it is only in an era where viewers consider substandard motion picture productions the norm that Tarantino's works could be considered classic or superior.   Placed up against truly great films, his work fades quickly from the memory.

I look forward to his next production.

WKC.

 
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on November 10, 2004, 08:47:53 PM
Okay, I've just finished watching the five films directed by Tarantino, and I have to say I absolutely loved them all, not because they're "cool" or it's "hip" to like them... but because they're some of the most entertaining films I've ever seen. I agree with bdc28 when he said:

Quentin Tarantino, hands down..is going to go down as one of the best movie writers/directors of all time. He has vision that can only be summed up as genius.

It's pretty tough to list the order in which I liked Tarantino's films most, and that's surprising... it's only FIVE FILMS. But, I think that's because they're all so good. Here's my attempt at it anyway. Don't shoot me for these choices... I know they won't be popular, but they're just my opinion. In order of least favorite to favorite:

5.  Jackie Brown --  This film does not come in last place for me because it's boring. God, I didn't find it at all boring!  The only reason I rate this last of the five is because I had more fun with the others (except for Reservoir Dogs, which I wouldn't call "fun", but it's so intense, and because the performances are some of the best I've ever seen that I have to rate it higher.) Jackie Brown has a smart story that entertained me through every frame of the film and, once again, was filled with outstanding performances--one of my favorites was the subtle and sensitive performance by Robert Forster, and on the other end of the spectrum, the dynamic performance of Samuel L. Jackson. One thing you come to expect from a Tarantino film (other than amazing dialogue and a great soundtrack) is that the acting is going to be top notch. He seems to cast the perfect actor for each part, and he must be an absolute genius of a director to get such astonishing performances out of everyone who appears in his films. Jackie Brown may be last on this list, but it still gets two big thumbs-up.

4.  Reservoir Dogs -- I completely agree, again, with bdc28 when he says "Never has a human being done so much with so little (if you think about it, ninety percent of the movie happens in one little space..there was no money for proper sets). The performances are stand out."  Absolutely...  and although all the performances are great, can enough be said of Michael Madsen's? The "ear scene" feels so real and is so terrifying that even though you don't see the actual act (the camera cuts away) you think you do because it's so powerful. I'll never hear "Stuck in the Middle with You" again and not think of this scene.  The entire film felt so real that when it was over, I felt really drained... it took a lot out of me.

3. Kill Bill Vol. 1 -- Maybe I'm rating this higher than I should, but it's because this film is so damn much fun and full of energy and humor that I felt great after watching it. This may be sacrilege, but I'd put the Kill Bill films in the same league as The Good, The Bad and The Ugly just on entertainment value and for subtle humor that makes you laugh out loud, and of course, for having an incredible soundtrack. If I needed to sum the film up in one word, it would be "fun".  I almost moved Pulp Fiction down a notch to keep the two Kill Bills together because I think they should be viewed as one film: without Vol. 2, you don't have the heart, and without Vol. 1 you don't have the background, or as Tarantino called it, the mythology. But it seemed hard to put Pulp Fiction so low on the list, so I think this is probably more accurate of the way I rate them.

2. Pulp Fiction -- It's touted as Tarantino's masterpiece... and it IS... I'm just not sure it's his only one.  I know everyone talks about the incredible dialogue in his films, but it really is entertaining and fascinating to listen to the characters, assassins, having regular conversation on what for them is just another day of work where they're about to kill a roomful of college-aged kids. It does give the characters soul, and you wind up liking and maybe even identifying with them. Even though the film itself is violent, to me, it doesn't ever feel violent (much like with Kill Bill) because of the humor.  I laugh through most of the film even when Vince accidentally shot the informant in the back of the car... "Oh sh*t, I just shot Marvin." Not really sure what's so funny about it...  but it came off that way when watching it. Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson were fantastic... (didn't you almost cheer out loud when Butch picked up the sword?) The scene in the back room wasn't funny at all, it was disturbing as hell, but Tarantino manages to take scenes like that and mingle them with lighter scenes that have enough humor that you wind up not being bogged down with the violence. Instead, you can watch a film like this and find it incredibly fun.

1.  Kill Bill Vol. 2 -- Okay, everyone who hates Kill Bill can pull out the buckets. I think this is one great movie! As with Kill Bill Vol. 1, Vol. 2 is a visually stunning film with spectacular cinematography, but what really makes this film my favorite are the characters and the story. You didn't really get to know much about The Bride in Vol. 1, but in Vol. 2 Tarantino wants us to know her ... he finally lets us know her name, and as the movie unfolds you can't help but sympathize with her. The scene where she was being buried alive was directed in such a way that you could feel how frightening that experience would be-- it's one of the most powerful scenes in any of his movies. I think it was bdc28, again, who asked if anyone had ever used music better in a film than Tarantino. I'm not sure I know of any director who's better at putting together a soundtrack. Ennio Morricone's music fits in just as perfectly here as it does in the Leone films, and Malcom McLaren's "About Her" is a wonderful reworking of the Zombies' "She's Not There" that is soulful and haunting in the climactic scene (I'm gonna have to buy the soundtrack just so I can have this song).  As for the characters, as in all other Tarantino films, they're all unforgettable, and this goes beyond just the main characters -- Esteban Vihaio and Pai Mei are now two of my favorite movie characters of all time. The scenes between just David Carradine and Uma Thurman are the very heart of this film... their last scene together was heart-breaking at times. "Could you do what you did? Well, of course you could. But I never thought you would or could do ... that... to...  me." The final scene of the film, just before The Bride joins her daughter in the bedroom, is filled with so much emotion that you can feel it along with her. This film has heart. In the end, this revenge film actually leaves you feeling hopeful, happy, and amazed at everything The Bride went through to win the beautiful prize she claims at the end of her journey.

(http://img32.exs.cx/img32/3314/KB2.jpg)

I had read somewhere not too long ago that the next film Tarantino will direct won't be Inglorious Bastards (as is listed on the IMDb) but a martial arts film with the entire dialogue in Mandarin Chinese. I read he planned on making two versions... one with subtitles, and one where he dubs it out of sync, just like the old Kung Fu films of the 70's. It sounds like it could be another fun film. If anyone finds any information on this, post it here.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on November 11, 2004, 05:13:21 AM
Interesting insights, Matt.  You got it right about Jackie Brown, but here is why it's my favorite of his movies:  Pulp Fiction loses something with each viewing, but Jackie Brown gains something (for me) on each viewing.  To paraphrase Tarantino, he wanted this to be the movie you watched over and over just to enjoy the characters.  The first time you concentrate on the plot, but after that you go back to it just for the characters.  It's not a better movie than Pulp Fiction, but I enjoy rewatching it way, way more, and it wasn't until I'd rewatched it a couple of times that it became my favorite of his.  Kill Bill Vol. 2 is quite like that, too, but not quite as much for me.  

As for the violence of Pulp Fiction, I think you got it wrong.  In that movie you only see a few people killed on screen, and there's no scene with the intensity of the "ear scene" from Reservoir Dogs, but yet it is a violent movie.   Why?  Because in a big way it's the humor that makes it so violent.  The whole of the Bonnie Situation (is that the right title?) is all humor -- I laughed out loud the first time I saw it when Marvin got shot and then felt guilt as heck for it.  And then the language in the film is so over-the-top, that it too adds to the "violence" of the movie.  Death (and violence) is treated so lightly in the movie, but yet we're allowed to see these people as real -- unlike, say, Where Eagles Dare which certainly has a lot higher body count.  I think many people who have no trouble watching an action movie where dozens of people are shot to hell would and have squirmed when seeing this movie.  BUT the real genius is that Tarantino never went too far in humanizing the victims, so in the end we can still appreciate the movie as fun entertainment.  It's a delicate line he balanced on there.  

Even though he didn't direct it, I also highly recommend True Romance, if you haven't already seen it.  
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: mgk on November 11, 2004, 02:04:33 PM
Jackie Brown has a smart story that entertained me through every frame of the film and, once again, was filled with outstanding performances--one of my favorites was the subtle and sensitive performance by Robert Forster, and on the other end of the spectrum, the dynamic performance of Samuel L. Jackson.

Interesting insights, Matt.  You got it right about Jackie Brown, but here is why it's my favorite of his movies:  Pulp Fiction loses something with each viewing, but Jackie Brown gains something (for me) on each viewing.  To paraphrase Tarantino, he wanted this to be the movie you watched over and over just to enjoy the characters.  The first time you concentrate on the plot, but after that you go back to it just for the characters.  It's not a better movie than Pulp Fiction, but I enjoy rewatching it way, way more, and it wasn't until I'd rewatched it a couple of times that it became my favorite of his.  

I have seen all of these Tarantino movies, too, and I do like Jackie Brown better than the others as well.  As Matt said, "it's a smart story" and it has very smart characters who spend the entire movie trying to outsmart eachother.  I like this movie because I was thoroughly entertained trying to figure out if this character was going to be smarter than this other character.  Was one going to slip up and end up losing it all and, if so, which one?  The stakes were high......if someone stumbled, then death was inevitable.  A couple of times, I was even caught off guard with what ended up happening.  And, because of all of that, I agree with Doug.....I could watch this one over and over without getting tired of it.  I can't watch all Tarantino movies over and over.  Thoroughly entertaining, suspenseful, and intelligent with great characters.  Robert Forester's understated performance was excellent and Samuel Jackson's over the top performance was great to watch.  This is a deadly serious movie with enough humor thrown in to create a great movie-watching experience.

For me, it is really next to impossible to put these five movies in any preferential order and keep them there.  They are all excellent but in very different ways.  And, each time I watch them, I find something else I like about them.  So, for me, it's similar to trying to put Eastwood's movies on a Top Ten List or a Top Five List........it often depends on which one I last saw.

But, as things stand for me now, Jackie Brown comes in first.

Next, I think I would have to go with Pulp Fiction, if for no other reason, for it's uniqueness.  As Doug said, he felt guilty after finding the shooting of Marvin funny.  I did, too, but I still laughed.  I think what made that scene so funny for me is that here you have two characters, Vincent Vega (Travolta) and Jules Winnfield (Jackson), who could easily kill everyone they ran into that day, but Vincent didn't mean to kill Marvin.  Marvin was sitting in the back seat of the car and almost totally innocent of any crimes against Vincent and Jules.  Vincent is playing with his gun and has it pointed toward the back seat.  It accidentally goes off and poor Marvin is dead.  Vincent can't believe he did that and makes a very big deal out of it.  Jules is upset because Vincent has made a mess out of his car.  The dialogue between the two during this scene is very funny.

Also, there are so many clever references to familiar faces and familiar things that they're impossible to count.  The scene where Mia (Thurman) overdoses and poor Vincent can't figure out what to do is hysterical.  I know.....some of you, who have not seen these movies, are saying to yourselves, "How can someone overdosing be funny?" but it can.  That's just Tarantino........the over the top humor.

Third on my list would be Kill Bill 2.  I really enjoyed the second one a lot better than the first.  As has been pointed out, we get to know the characters better in this movie than we did the first.  Michael Parks's performance of Esteban Vihiao is unbelievable.  It took Matt over thirty minutes and several screen captures to convince me that THAT really was Michael Parks.  Fantastic!!  Kill Bill 1 was full of great action scenes but Kill Bill 2 has great character development, mythology, and story-telling to it.

Reservoir Dogs would be fourth on my list.  Even though I think this movie is one of the most intense movies I've ever seen, I find it lacking in scope.  As bdc28 said, most of the movie takes place in this one small area in a warehouse.  It is so real that you feel like you are there....you're one of many right there in that building.  The agonizing suffering of Mr. Orange from his wounds that seems to go on forever, saps every bit of strength out of you.  (Maybe that's why this one is fourth on my list.)  You find yourself almost wishing he would just go ahead and die so that you don't have to see and hear him anymore.  The wickedness of Mr. Blonde (Madsen) is almost unparalled and the irony of Madsen's performance is that, if you only look in his eyes and have the sound off, he almost looks like he's happy but his character is one who loves to hurt and that can plainly be seen in his "happy" eyes.

Kill Bill 1 is my least favorite of these five.  It does have some great action scenes where you find yourself amazed and asking yourself, "How did she do that?"  Or, "How did he do that?"  But, so much of it was just too unbelievable....things just don't happen that way.  I know....it was supposed to be that way.  I liked the character of O-Ren Ishii (and well done by Lucy Liu) and the music was great.

Even though he didn't direct it, I also highly recommend True Romance, if you haven't already seen it.  

I'm glad to hear you say that, Doug.  I have always liked True Romance and thought there were some really gritty performances in that one.  Brad Pitt has a tiny role that really goes against his sex-symbol image but he is a very convincing completely "stoned" person who doesn't have a clue who just knocked on his door.   I can't really put my finger on why I like this one so much but I do.  Guess I need to watch it again and see if I can figure it out.  ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on November 11, 2004, 02:24:53 PM
mgk, that's pretty much how I'd rate the films. I gave my list a few pages back, but that was before I'd seen Kill Bill Vol. 2.

The only one I own on DVD is Jackie Brown. If I was going to get any of the others, they'd be Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill Vol. 2 (yeah, I'd get it without getting Volume 1 ;)). David Carradine's performance is Volume 2 is a highlight in the film.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: mgk on November 11, 2004, 02:51:53 PM
Well, as I said above.......it probably depends on which one I saw last.  They're all great works by Tarantino and they certainly have his "brand" on them.  

Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on November 11, 2004, 04:56:41 PM
Death (and violence) is treated so lightly in the movie, but yet we're allowed to see these people as real -- unlike, say, Where Eagles Dare which certainly has a lot higher body count.  I think many people who have no trouble watching an action movie where dozens of people are shot to hell would and have squirmed when seeing this movie.

I can see that some people would feel that way and that the movie would feel violent to them for that reason. There is definitely violence in this movie, and some of it is anything but funny. The scene where Jules shot "Flock of Seagulls" and then shoots "Kahuna Burger" (don't know his name) first in the knee and then the shoulder just before finishing him off... that was as cold-blooded and harrowing as any scene in any crime film I've ever watched, and it was deadly serious. So, maybe I misstated what I meant above when I said it didn't feel violent. It feels violent at times... but then, somehow, Tarantino manages to change the beat and feel of the film in the next scene so much so that you're having a good time again.  I think what you said here could have a lot to do with that:

Quote
BUT the real genius is that Tarantino never went too far in humanizing the victims, so in the end we can still appreciate the movie as fun entertainment.

The only death in this film that I was actually saddened by was Vincent's, and that's because he was humanized.

Quote
It's a delicate line he balanced on there.  

Yup, and I don't know any director who has been more successful at balancing that delicate line than Tarantino.

Quote
Even though he didn't direct it, I also highly recommend True Romance, if you haven't already seen it.

Funny, I just ordered that last night. I'll be watching it next week. I've heard a lot of good things about it, so I'm looking forward to it. :)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on November 11, 2004, 05:07:05 PM
If I was going to get any of the others, they'd be Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill Vol. 2 (yeah, I'd get it without getting Volume 1 ;)).

That would be like only owning half the film. Actually, that's exactly what it is.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on November 11, 2004, 06:33:59 PM
That would be like only owning half the film. Actually, that's exactly what it is.
Very true, which is probably why I won't get either of them. Of course it's necessary to watch Volume 1 before 2, but like I mentioned previously (which Doug had mentioned before me) that 2 has the feel of a whole different film.

And I like martial arts movies too. I recently got the 2-disc version of Enter the Dragon. Amazing movie there. But if you took out all the emotional content, all the character development from that movie, you'd have what Volume 1 is. Even though it's Bruce Lee (I realize those statements only mean something to me and a few others that wasn't crazy about Volume 1 ;)).
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: bigdai on November 13, 2004, 09:38:59 AM
I thought the Kill Bills were ok although nowhere near Tarantino on top form.  

Lets hope he shows good bouncebackability with Glorious Bastards. ;D
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on March 18, 2005, 02:55:20 PM
Had anybody heard about the supposed rumors of Tarantino doing a Friday the 13th movie? I heard about it a few days ago on the radio, but they were saying that Tarantino had said that the story was completely made up.

But he is interested in doing a horror movie.

If he does it, I just hope it's a serious horror film, or else he'd might as well do a Friday the 13th movie. Though I have to admit, an artsy version of Friday would be interesting. ;D
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: gimpy on March 18, 2005, 04:19:36 PM
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/news/comments/?entryid=172733

does this answer your question?
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on March 18, 2005, 04:34:54 PM
What question is that supposed to be answering?

I heard about it a few days ago on the radio, but they were saying that Tarantino had said that the story was completely made up.
Seemed to be the same infomation here (minus the reports of him saying he was interested in doing a horror).

Can't wait for the next Kill Bill movie. ::)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on March 18, 2005, 07:31:30 PM
Everyone mark this down on your calenders though... the CSI season finale will be written and directed by Tarrantino.  ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on March 18, 2005, 07:35:23 PM
A date would help me to mark it on my calendar. (http://home.swfla.rr.com/mattreigns/boardwink.gif)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: The Schofield Kid on March 18, 2005, 07:40:03 PM
Everyone mark this down on your calenders though... the CSI season finale will be written and directed by Tarrantino.  ;)

Are you fair dinkum.Tarantino doing T.V. work seems like a come down ???
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on March 18, 2005, 07:42:36 PM
A date would help me to mark it on my calendar. (http://home.swfla.rr.com/mattreigns/boardwink.gif)

Don't know. Mid to late May maybe, that's when most shows have their season finales.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Lilly on March 18, 2005, 07:48:26 PM
Are you fair dinkum.Tarantino doing T.V. work seems like a come down ???
He's written and directed CSI before, in 2000 (episode 5.23), and directed ER in 1994 (episode Motherhood).

I got that from his IMDb entry (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000233/).

Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on March 18, 2005, 07:52:57 PM
He's written and directed CSI before, in 2000 (episode 5.23),...

I got that from his IMDb entry (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000233/).



Gots to correct you Lilly... the show premiered in 2000, which is what that year there means, and episode 5.23 (season 5, episode 23) is the season finale for CSI's current season.  ;) So that's just the listing for the episode he is going to direct.

And I just found an old article on the Hollywood Reporter (http://hollywoodreporter.com/thr/television/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000816531) that states the season finale is May 19. Which is a Thursday and it will air at 9pm on CBS.

Quote

Tarantino bloodying 'CSI' team

Feb. 24, 2005

By Nellie Andreeva and Borys Kit

Call it "Kill Gil."

Quentin Tarantino has signed to direct the season-finale episode of primetime's most-watched series, CBS' "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation." Tarantino also has come up with an original story for the episode, which is expected to shoot in early April and air May 19, according to "CSI" executive producer Carol Mendelsohn.

Tarantino has long been a fan of the stylish forensic drama as series creator/executive producer Anthony Zuiker learned when he bumped into Tarantino at an awards show during "CSI's" first season. They have pursued him to direct an episode for some time, and after members of the "CSI" crew ran into Tarantino a few weeks ago while the show was doing some location shooting in Las Vegas, the stars finally aligned for him to helm the show's fifth-season closer, Mendelsohn said.

"He knows everything there is to know about 'CSI,' and he is into the whole mythology of 'CSI,' " Mendelsohn said. "Quentin came in a couple of weeks ago. We had a story meeting with the writers. He had a great idea, and it was so much fun to have him in the room. ... We are positively giddy."

Zuiker, in particular, "worships Quentin," she added.

Mendelsohn said the story will involve a plot that finds one of the key members of the CSI team, led by Gil Grissom (William Petersen), in serious jeopardy. The teleplay will be penned by Mendelsohn, Zuiker and Naren Shankar.

"There will be more bugs and blood this time," Mendelsohn joked.

Tarantino, who earned an Oscar for co-writing the screenplay to his 1994 smash "Pulp Fiction," directed a 1995 episode of "ER" and appeared as a guest actor on ABC's "Alias" in 2002 and last year. His other features include the "Kill Bill" films, "Jackie Brown" and "Reservoir Dogs."
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Lilly on March 18, 2005, 08:44:05 PM
Gots to correct you Lilly... the show premiered in 2000, which is what that year there means, and episode 5.23 (season 5, episode 23) is the season finale for CSI's current season.  ;) So that's just the listing for the episode he is going to direct.

Oops. ::)  Thanks for putting me straight, Brendan. :)  No doubt you can tell I never watch CSI. (http://home.swfla.rr.com/mattreigns/boardgrin.gif)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on May 19, 2005, 06:12:51 PM
Did anyone happen to catch the two hour CSI season finale directed by Tarrantino tonight? It started at 8pm which I just found out about two days ago since it's a two hour long episode.  :( I'll have to catch it at 11pm on the West Coast channels.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: The Schofield Kid on May 19, 2005, 11:17:38 PM
Please give a spoiler notice if you did see it,as here in Australia it probably won't be shown for months.Thanks. O0
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: The Schofield Kid on June 21, 2005, 04:46:01 AM
Saw Kill Bill Vol.1 tonight for the very first time and I was disappointed with it.If this was supposed to be part homage to the kung fu flicks,give me Jackie Chan any day.The violence was very cartoonish which may have been what Tarantino was trying to accomplish but it just didn't do it for me.After limbs get chopped off we see fountains of blood.Why? I remember saying in another post earlier this year somewhere on the board that these types of action films appealed to me 10-15 years ago,but now after sitting through one I just sit back and ask what's the whole point.Tarantino certainly is a unique film maker and I did like Pulp Fiction which is now over 10 years old so if I watched that again now, I may feel the same way with that film as Kill Bill.
I've seen some here say that Vol.2 is better,I'll see that one day but won't be rushing out to get it.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: little_bill on June 22, 2005, 02:19:50 PM
tgy. it is supposed to be one whole film, do yourself a favour and see vol2 while one is still fresh in the mind. it makes more sense then.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 25, 2005, 09:52:54 AM
Good advice from little_bill. See Vol. 2 and let us know what you think then, tgy.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: gimpy on June 27, 2005, 12:42:32 AM
Quentin Tarantino is currently working on his new film: Inglorious Bastards.

http://www.everythingtarantino.com/inglorious_bastards/
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on June 27, 2005, 09:07:45 AM
Quentin Tarantino is currently working on his new film: Inglorious Bastards.

http://www.everythingtarantino.com/inglorious_bastards/

Yeah... "working on". He's been toying around with this one for years. Much like the Kill Bill's I'll believe it when I'm in the theatre watching it. But as for rumoured cast members they include: Bruce Willis, Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Eddie Muprhy. Apparently Michael Madsen is confirmed though along with Adam Sandler.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: The Schofield Kid on October 29, 2005, 05:29:10 AM
tgy. it is supposed to be one whole film, do yourself a favour and see vol2 while one is still fresh in the mind. it makes more sense then.

Finally got to see Kill Bill Vol.2 tonight.I know it's been a few months since I saw Vol.1,but I still remember how disappointed I was after seeing that,I really thought Vol.2 would be a vast improvement.It wasn't.Apart from the fight scene between Uma and Darryl Hannah,I found it very slow moving and not that interesting.
So if I had to choose between the two,I'd say Vol.1 is slightly better than Vol.2. and of the 5 Tarantino films:

1- Pulp Fiction
2- Jackie Brown
3- Reservoir Dogs
4- Kill Bill Vol.1
5- Kill Bill Vol.2
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: The Schofield Kid on November 15, 2005, 02:53:15 AM
Attention all Aussie viewers.Last Season's final 2 hour episode of C.S.I. directed by Tarantino is "finally" being shown this Sunday night at 8.30p.m on Channel 9.Although we are getting it in two parts and will have to wait another week for part 2. >:(
Please give a spoiler notice if you did see it,as here in Australia it probably won't be shown for months.Thanks. O0

Sunday will be exactly SIX months to the day since I posted that. >:(
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: The Schofield Kid on November 15, 2005, 09:57:59 PM
Although we are getting it in two parts and will have to wait another week for part 2. >:(

Actually,in today's paper it says we have to wait until next year to see part 2. >:( >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: The Schofield Kid on February 15, 2006, 04:18:07 AM
We're finally going to see the second part of CSI directed by Tarantino this Sunday in Australia.I hope all this waiting is going to be worth it. >:(
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: little_bill on February 15, 2006, 10:20:15 AM
you should enjoy it tgy, them network guys are bastards for doing that to you.  >:(
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Americanbeauty on February 17, 2006, 02:05:25 PM
The season finale rocked. You'll love it, tgy  8)

The whole cast delivered great performances, especially Gary Dourdan and George Eads.
Another cool CSI episode.

*SPOILER* Tgy, don't read the following, because it's in the second episode.

Quote
Loved the black and white sequence -Nick's autopsy scene. Black Humor. So funny. So Tarantino :D



EDIT: Cooool  8) Thanks, little_bill!
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: little_bill on February 17, 2006, 04:29:57 PM
The season finale rocked. You'll love it, tgy  8)

The whole cast delivered great performances, especially Gary Dourdan and George Eads.
Another cool CSI episode.

*SPOILER* Tgy, don't read the following, because it's in the second episode.*
  :D


AB if you want to put a spoiler in try and use the quotes button above the smilies and then change the text colour to black to match the background, that way the spoiler can only be read if highlighted
Quote
just like this see
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on February 17, 2006, 06:42:22 PM
Those of us on the Mocha color scheme can see it though.  ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: The Schofield Kid on February 20, 2006, 03:52:43 AM
The wait was worth it.A great episode that got the heart racing.Really well done by Tarantino.That autopsy scene was funny AB,although at first I thought that he was dead after reading last year there was trouble on the set so I thought the writers had come up with a way to get rid of him.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: little_bill on February 20, 2006, 05:49:40 AM
Those of us on the Mocha color scheme can see it though.  ;)

You will be assimilated. Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own. Resistance is futile.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Brendan on February 27, 2006, 08:18:25 PM
We're finally going to see the second part of CSI directed by Tarantino this Sunday in Australia.I hope all this waiting is going to be worth it. >:(

Poor tgy. You had to wait a year to see the second part while I'm watching the whole thing right now in rerun.  ;D Crazy Aussie TV.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on January 08, 2013, 08:43:08 AM
Here's how I would rank his movies, having just rewatched Pulp Fiction (for the first time in a while, I might add) and Jackie Brown. I do think it's almost silly that Pulp Fiction is automatically rated his greatest movie, just because of its raw, youthful (and perhaps juvenile) energy, and the perfect timing of it release. Certainly it's the movie that put him on the map and it's become iconic, and it's certainly his most influential...but it has its flaws and has aged badly, I think.  So...

Jackie Brown
Inglourious Basterds
Pulp Fiction
Kill Bill
(combined)
Reservoir Dogs
Django Unchained
Death Proof


And True Romance I would put somewhere just after Jackie Brown....
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 03, 2016, 12:55:36 AM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d4/The_Hateful_Eight.jpg)

It finally happened... I didn't like a Quentin Tarantino movie. It's surprising because I didn't just like all his previous movies, I LOVED them. But The Hateful Eight was over-long, wordier than it should have been, and almost boring -- then the gruesomeness of it was too much.  The thing is, Tarantino is known for all of those things -- long, talky, gruesome, but never boring. Quentin needs to find himself a more talented editor to replace Sally Menke, who died after Inglorious Basterds. Django Unchained was great, but I remember watching it and thinking of how much tighter and better it could have been if Sally worked on it. But The Hateful Eight is in another league. No one is holding Tarantino back, and the man needs to be held back a bit.

This was a major disappointment. I'd been looking forward to it, and almost got to the theater for it, but things kept getting in the way. I don't think I could have sat in a theater seat and watched that straight through. Thumbs down on this one.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on June 03, 2016, 03:06:06 PM
I loathe Quentin Tarantino movies, Matt. They are way too gory and pretentious for their own good. They're also really exploitative.

You know what's funny Matt? You know what REALLY makes me sick to my stomach? I don't know how your taste in movies can be so flawed! You like Clint Eastwood movies, so you're obviously a good judge of what makes a solid film, but you also like Quentin Tarantino, and even worse, Adam Sandler movies. I just can't figure you out! ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 03, 2016, 03:22:02 PM
dafuque?  :D

Sorry AKA.... I guess I'm just a complicated man.

I don't think they're pretentious, though maybe The Hateful Eight was, a bit. The gore in the Kill Bill movies was purposefully unrealistic, like anime. So, it couldn't be considered really gory, I don't think.  And all the rest were just perfectly perfect. :)

As for Adam Sandler... you got me there. I know I shouldn't like some of his stuff, but he makes me laugh. And that's all I'm there for... not really thinking, just for laughing.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 03, 2016, 03:23:41 PM
And nobody.... I MEAN NOBODY... puts ketchup on a hot dog.  ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on June 04, 2016, 04:19:16 AM
I loathe Quentin Tarantino movies, Matt. They are way too gory and pretentious for their own good. They're also really exploitative.

You know what's funny Matt? You know what REALLY makes me sick to my stomach? I don't know how your taste in movies can be so flawed! You like Clint Eastwood movies, so you're obviously a good judge of what makes a solid film, but you also like Quentin Tarantino, and even worse, Adam Sandler movies. I just can't figure you out! ;)

You do know Eastwood supported Pulp Fiction when he was on the jury at Cannes when it premiered, right?
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on June 04, 2016, 04:22:56 AM

It finally happened... I didn't like a Quentin Tarantino movie. It's surprising because I didn't just like all his previous movies, I LOVED them. But The Hateful Eight was over-long, wordier than it should have been, and almost boring -- then the gruesomeness of it was too much.  The thing is, Tarantino is known for all of those things -- long, talky, gruesome, but never boring. Quentin needs to find himself a more talented editor to replace Sally Menke, who died after Inglorious Basterds. Django Unchained was great, but I remember watching it and thinking of how much tighter and better it could have been if Sally worked on it. But The Hateful Eight is in another league. No one is holding Tarantino back, and the man needs to be held back a bit.

This was a major disappointment. I'd been looking forward to it, and almost got to the theater for it, but things kept getting in the way. I don't think I could have sat in a theater seat and watched that straight through. Thumbs down on this one.

I mostly agree with you, I felt the movie was flat and self-indulgent. But I will say the two hours and forty minute runtime didn't feel long at all. I liked it better than Django Unchained, which I thought was a mess, and I could barely pay attention to it on a second viewing.  I haven't tried giving The Hateful Eight a second viewing.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on June 04, 2016, 04:26:37 AM
And nobody.... I MEAN NOBODY... puts ketchup on a hot dog.  ;)

Better than putting flippin' cheese whiz on a Philly cheese steak.  :D That should be a crime. (Sorry, I just recently learned that was a real thing. How could anybody...?)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 04, 2016, 10:22:39 AM
Better than putting flippin' cheese whiz on a Philly cheese steak.  :D That should be a crime. (Sorry, I just recently learned that was a real thing. How could anybody...?)

I'm with you on that. I read these so-called articles now and then with a title "You know you're from Philly when...." and there's a list of 30 odd things, and they almost always include this little thing about Cheese Whiz on cheesesteaks. (and they say we ordered them "Wid Whiz" (uhhhhh never happened with anyone I know).   I went to the best Cheesesteak places in Philly (and South Jersey, which had places to rival the best in Philly), and no one that I know ever used Cheese Whiz (and would never say "wid whiz"). Provolone or American, though in many places you choose your cheese. When I make mine, it's American.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: KC on June 04, 2016, 11:48:11 AM
Wait, there's American, er, actual cheese? ???
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 04, 2016, 12:28:12 PM
Not the stuff that's vegetable shortening and comes in plastic sheets, but the American that they slice fresh at the deli. It might be processed cheese, but it's gooooood and perfect on cheesesteaks.

Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 04, 2016, 02:40:58 PM
I mostly agree with you, I felt the movie was flat and self-indulgent. But I will say the two hours and forty minute runtime didn't feel long at all. I liked it better than Django Unchained, which I thought was a mess, and I could barely pay attention to it on a second viewing.  I haven't tried giving The Hateful Eight a second viewing.

And yet, even though I was disappointed and gave it a thumbs-down, I still think it has some great things about it. 

Quentin is a great screenwriter, and this script is no different. The cinematography/lighting and direction are great! They shot this on 70mm, and look at it - the outdoor scenes remind me of Pale Rider. The inside scenes are dark, but lit well enough to see everything, and that lighting and the snow coming in through the ceiling -- I remember watching it and thinking "Damn, he's good" (Quentin):

(http://i.imgur.com/fIS470P.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/rQCjcrO.jpg)

The acting is always great in a Tarantino movie, because he IS a great director. Look at all the careers he's revitalized in his films -- Samuel L. Jackson was already a big name, but he became a legend in the Tarantino movies. This time it was Jennifer Jason Leigh's turn, but my god, she'd better pick her next role carefully because she may have been good in this, but maybe the ugliest performance of a beautiful actress ever (and yes, I remember Charlize Theron as Monster).  I won't post a picture -- no spoilers here. 

I do have to wonder if Samuel L's monologue in this movie (and there are flashback scenes that GBU fans will recognize as a stylish homage to the desert scenes) didn't make the 3rd act of the film harder to cope with. It was already overly gruesome, and my god that monologue didn't help stomach those scenes.

But, in true Tarantino form, there was also some comedy. Tthe scenes where they bolt the door closed are great for a little bit of levity in an otherwise heavy film.  So maybe I was a little overly critical, but it still wasn't nearly as good as his other films, and I bet it would have been up there with the rest with a better editor to cut through some of the excess.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on June 04, 2016, 05:20:40 PM
You do know Eastwood supported Pulp Fiction when he was on the jury at Cannes when it premiered, right?

I completely get why you'd think this, since he was on the jury when "Pulp Fiction" won, but he actually did not vote for "Pulp Fiction" at Cannes.

Quote
On the jury here when 'Pulp Fiction' won, somebody said 'Oh, Clint Eastwood was on the jury, so he voted for the American film.' But my sensibilities are European, here is where my success started. Actually, Zhang Yimou's 'To Live' was my favorite piece, but most of the European jurors seemed to like 'Pulp Fiction,"' he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/23/arts/23iht-dupont.1.13119662.html
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on June 04, 2016, 06:59:08 PM
Nonetheless, AKA, he was president of the jury.  ::) Possibly the only other film from that year I've seen is Three Colors: Red, and it's a great film. I've not seen To Live.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 05, 2016, 10:54:34 AM
I haven't rated the Tarantino films in a long time, and some of the order has changed, so here it is today:

1.   Pulp Fiction
2.   Kill Bill, Vol I & II
3.   Reservoir Dogs
4.   Django Unchained
5.   Jackie Brown
6.   Inglorious Basterds
7.   Death Proof
8.   The Hateful Eight

The Hateful Eight opens with the words "The Eighth Film by Quentin Tarantino".  Rather than sounding completely pretentious, the reason he's counting is because he plans on retiring from directing movies after ten films.  I saw an interview recently where he explained that sometimes directors just have too many projects, so they aren't as particular with their choices -- and they just move on to the next one. He wants to be limited to only doing ten so that each of those ten is perfect, and to remain highly critical of the films he chooses to direct.  I can't seem to find that interview now, but in this article is a video where he explains that he plans to retire after ten films and move on to writing novels and directing for theater:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/quentin-tarantino-im-going-make-847476
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on June 05, 2016, 01:42:31 PM
He must be counting the Kill Bill movies as one, because there is also Death Proof. And it is definitely not perfect, if Tarantino wants to imagine all his films as such.

Jackie Brown
is still my favorite of his. Followed by Pulp Fiction and Inglourious Basterds.

Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 05, 2016, 02:01:44 PM
That's a good point -- I forgot Death Proof. Maybe this means if he does a Kill Bill 3 it won't count either. :)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on June 05, 2016, 03:28:14 PM
Nonetheless, AKA, he was president of the jury.  ::) Possibly the only other film from that year I've seen is Three Colors: Red, and it's a great film. I've not seen To Live.

In my opinion, your statement was inaccurate so I am just correcting the record. Clint did not support "Pulp Fiction" at Cannes, and from his comments, it sounds like he didn't even like it that much since he said "The Europeans seemed to like it" rather than that he thought it was a strong movie. Although it is possible that he may enjoy Tarantino movies, I am skeptical that he does since Clint doesn't make gratuitously violent movies and his style is subdued. Tarantino makes very flashy movies that are extremely violent, so for that reason, I doubt Clint is a big fan of Quentin Tarantino. A lot of people love his movies though, and that's all right with me. I was just giving Matt a little jazz since we are friends. Everyone has different tastes. That's what makes this board interesting.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Conan on June 05, 2016, 03:53:16 PM
I'm a fan of Tarantino.   Not sure if "Four Rooms" counts...The only one of his flicks that I really didn't like was "Jackie Brown".  "Pulp Fiction" is a classic, so many movies tried to rip off its style back in the 90s and even now.

My list:

1.   Pulp Fiction
2.   Kill Bill I and II
3.   Inglorious Basterds
4.   Reservoir Dogs
5.   Django Unchained
6.   The Hateful Eight
7.   Death Proof
8.   Jackie Brown
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: KC on June 05, 2016, 05:28:00 PM
In my opinion, your statement was inaccurate so I am just correcting the record. Clint did not support "Pulp Fiction" at Cannes, and from his comments, it sounds like he didn't even like it that much since he said "The Europeans seemed to like it" rather than that he thought it was a strong movie. Although it is possible that he may enjoy Tarantino movies, I am skeptical that he does since Clint doesn't make gratuitously violent movies and his style is subdued. Tarantino makes very flashy movies that are extremely violent, so for that reason, I doubt Clint is a big fan of Quentin Tarantino. A lot of people love his movies though, and that's all right with me. I was just giving Matt a little jazz since we are friends. Everyone has different tastes. That's what makes this board interesting.

I agree, AKA. Eastwood clearly did NOT support Pulp Fiction, and his position as president of the jury has nothing to do with it.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on June 05, 2016, 06:34:09 PM
I was reading a book about Wes Craven a long time ago, and remember a part where it mentioned Craven didn't like Tarantino's use of violence in his movies, mentioning Reservoir Dogs specifically. I enjoy a couple of Tarantino's movies, that one included, but it's interesting to think of how the violence is portrayed in various movies. (I've also read Tarantino say that he would have liked to have directed Scream because he didn't like the way it was directed :D). Tarantino's use of violence is over the top and comical at times, and I can see why not everyone would like that (I would rank Craven as a favorite filmmaker of mine, so you can imagine which stance on film violence I prefer). I remember writing on here about how uninteresting Kill Bill Vol 1 was to me, and how the violence in that movie didn't make me feel anything. The violence was... boring.

Outside of Jackie Brown, I can't think of many of his movies that I'd want to watch many times again (not that I've seen that one many times, but it's the one I'd most like to see again). And there's several I haven't seen yet that I'd check out sometime, like Inglorious Basterds, Django Unchained, and The Hateful Eight.

But honestly, most of the time I'd just rather check out the original movies that he's paying homage to. ;)

So I like the guy, but I couldn't be described as a big fan.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: KC on June 05, 2016, 07:18:06 PM
But honestly, most of the time I'd just rather check out the original movies that he's paying homage to. ;)

That's the point with Tarantino, as far as I can see. He doesn't make movies ... he makes meta-movies. Movies about movies.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 05, 2016, 07:50:47 PM
I don't really agree. There isn't all that much that's truly original anymore, anyway. As long as his movies are great entertainment (and they are), and have great acting, directing, screenplay, soundtrack, etc., then why NOT watch them?

Kill Bill is the only one of his movies where the film that he played homage was (in my mind) better than Tarantino's, and that's only because the original is my favorite movie of all time -- The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. But, then again... Kill Bill is also a 10/10 for me for films, and absolutely 100% worthwhile. So what if GBU is better, it's not a remake... it's a totally different film! Why not watch and enjoy both?
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 05, 2016, 08:09:34 PM
I need to watch Jackie Brown again ... it's been over ten years, and I'm guessing at its placement on my list.

I hope Quentin changes his mind, but since he's had this "ten movies" in his mind for a while now, and has been numbering them along the way, and has spoken about it in multiple interviews, he seems serious about it. He's still young and I hope if he does take some time away to do novels and work on stage, he'll return to films.

I'm already hoping he'll return, when he hasn't departed yet.   ::)



Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 05, 2016, 08:20:56 PM
I remember writing on here about how uninteresting Kill Bill Vol 1 was to me, and how the violence in that movie didn't make me feel anything. The violence was... boring.

I'm sure I can find a post where I said this same thing 10-12 years ago, but the violence in Kill Bill wasn't meant to be violent. It was an homage to anime and the great martial arts films of the 70's. When O-Ren decapitates one of the men with her short sword, it's a fountain, which isn't supposed to really be comical, but it's not supposed to be gory - it's like anime. It was purposefully unrealistic so that the amount of death in that film (and there was a lot) wouldn't be too much to stomach.  So, the fact that you weren't upset by the violence... (do you know where I'm going with this).... is because of how good Quentin is.

On the other hand... did you feel anything for The Bride when she was buried alive and trying to get out of the coffin? That was powerful as hell. That was lasting, and I now actually want to be cremated because I never want to be in a box in the ground. The way that was filmed, the claustrophobic feeling of it was inCREDible.

The movie was powerful in so many ways, but the violence wasn't supposed to feel violent. It was FUN... it was supposed to be fun, and thrilling, exciting, and feel kickass, but it wasn't going for gore and slasher thrills.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 05, 2016, 08:29:05 PM
I'm starting to feel like doing a Pulp Fiction, or some other Q.T. film movie night.  O0
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on June 05, 2016, 08:54:55 PM
I don't mind fun, action-oriented violence either. That was the issue with Volume 1 for me--at the time when I watched it, and this has been a while back, I didn't feel anything at all for it. I liked Volume 2, in fact.

I saw Grindhouse at the theater, and enjoyed both Death Proof and Planet Terror. And Pulp Fiction is another I'd like to see again. Like I said, I've enjoyed his work, but not nearly as enthusiastically as a lot of others.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on June 07, 2016, 12:32:21 AM
I just watched Jackie Brown again, and I moved it up a few notches. Really great movie.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on June 07, 2016, 02:41:32 AM
I just watched Jackie Brown again, and I moved it up a few notches. Really great movie.

The thing about Jackie Brown is it gets better with each viewing. I never saw it in the cinema (because I hadn't really heard great things about it), but I did buy it on video when it came out, and the first time I watched it I didn't think too much of it. I ended up watching it twice more before the week was up and I never looked back. At some point it became my favorite Tarantino movie, and man, I've seen it a bunch of times. I seem to recall on one of the special features of the DVD Tarantino saying this was his hang out movie, meaning you watch it the first time to get the plot, but then afterward you can just watch it to hang out with these characters. And that's very true, i think, though I'd hardly want to hang out with any of them in real life, but it's a lot of fun in the movie realm.

I've long ago burned out on Pulp Fiction, but never have with Jackie.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on June 07, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
I really enjoyed Jackie Brown, I think it's easily one of Tarentino's best if not the best movie he's made tho I've enjoyed pretty much all of them along the way apart from the Kill Bills which bored the hell outta me...
I do agree that in recent times he could've done with tighter editing or someone on board advising him to cut back at times...

Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on August 24, 2019, 08:43:15 PM
After rewatching all of these films again, here's how I'm ranking them today:

1. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Kill Bill (Vol 1 & 2)
4. Reservoir Dogs
5. Inglourious Basterds
6. Jackie Brown
7. Django Unchained
8. The Hateful Eight
9. Death Proof
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: KC on August 24, 2019, 09:37:19 PM
You've really made me want to see Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. Unfortunately it's no longer playing very close to me, and I don't think I'll get a chance to see it in the next week anyway. Maybe Labor Day, if it's still around.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on August 25, 2019, 11:59:12 AM
I really hate Quentin Tarantino and his movies. I enjoyed parts of "Django Unchained," since it was kind of like a spaghetti western, and I enjoyed Ennio Morricone's score. But, once it turned into a blood bath, I hated it. Quentin Tarantino also frequently tends to make the same movie over and over again. Most of his movies are revenge fantasies, and a lot of them exploit historical events in really crude ways. Lots of unnecessary swearing, racial slurs, blood and gore. He does that over and over again. There is also absolutely no reason that his films need to have so much extreme violence, blood, and gore. There is no purpose to it, and it's not any more entertaining than it would have been if it had half as less of that. The stories would be exactly the same. Also, although I don't think that any one single individual can be held responsible for this, and Hollywood in general is not the main driver, if there was any director that has contributed to the glamorization of violence that has desensitized many young American males to the consequences of violence, and romanticized aggression, it's Quentin Tarantino. He has arguably been part of creating a culture that has led to more mass violence and shootings. In my opinion, no other director working today has so consistently glamorized extreme violence in our society.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on August 25, 2019, 01:51:36 PM
Well, obviously Quentin Tarantino isn't your cup of tea. But, I'm not on board with your opinion that violence in movies creates violence in society. At least, not in the format we see in Tarantino films. These films are fantasy. They aren't even trying to mimic reality. If a film was going to be influential, I think it would have to be a more insidious message than what you get in these films. I like a shoot-'em-up violent film that's made well more than most people, I'll admit. But, I also have the most extreme anti-gun stance of anyone I know. I'm in probably the bottom half of one percent of people in this country that want ALL guns banned, and confiscated. But, I know that isn't going to ever happen. So you can see the difference. Entertainment is one thing, and reality is another.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on August 25, 2019, 03:58:01 PM
Well, since you are such a big fan, what purpose do you think the extreme violence serves? If the movie had half as much blood spirting everywhere and limbs being chopped off, and it had the same basic storyline and production values, wouldn't you enjoy it just as much? Or, am I wrong? Does he really need to go that far?

I don't think violence in movies creates violence in society. The Japanese play lots of ultra-violent video games too, just like Americans, and they don't have the mass violence we do (they also have extremely restrictive gun laws, to your point).  However, Japan also has a very homogenous society, with very little diversity, and a lot of social cohesion. The United States has none of that, and that can make a huge difference.

I do think that socially isolated, lonely young men who are often outcasts do tend to dissociate themselves from the consequences of their heinous actions. Some of them do play violent video games, and likely also gravitate to excessively violent movies. I think it's part of what fosters a more callous, more depersonalized personality, and those are exactly the kinds of people who later sometimes develop violent tendencies. I think it can make a difference in those who are susceptible to it, and probably doesn't in those who are not. It's a multi-factorial problem, but since we can't really predict in advance who is susceptible from who is not, it's a prudent thing to explore and be concerned about.

 
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on August 25, 2019, 07:01:01 PM
Well, since you are such a big fan, what purpose do you think the extreme violence serves? If the movie had half as much blood spirting everywhere and limbs being chopped off, and it had the same basic storyline and production values, wouldn't you enjoy it just as much? Or, am I wrong? Does he really need to go that far?

It serves to entertain. And I don't feel the violence is "extreme". I think you're thinking of Kill Bill with the scene where The Bride takes on the Crazy 88 with one Hattori Hanzo sword, since that's probably where the most "blood spirting" happens in a Tarantino film:

(https://i.imgur.com/5j7H0ex.jpg)

But it's done in an over-the-top style. It never feels real. It's like it's right out of the pages of a comic book. The characters are like comic book heroes and villains. When a limb is cut off anywhere in the film, the blood shoots high into the air like a fire hydrant to make it even less realistic. There are little jokes interspersed with the action. I can't imagine watching the scene and concentrating on the violence instead of thoroughly enjoying it.

But, if we look at a scene in Pulp Fiction, the violence feels more real.  Tarantino's talents come into play by making you want the hero to destroy the villain(s).  When Bruce Willis is going through the pawn shop to find a weapon to use on the piece of $#!t rapists, who's not rooting when he picks up the sword and heads down to the cellar.

(https://i.imgur.com/dxwyaFX.jpg)

Is that supposed to feel "too violent"?  It's entertainment. Anything less, and I'm not going to enjoy it as much. 

This discussion reminds me of an interview I saw with Tarantino where a woman reporter criticized the lack of lines for Margot Robbie in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (as if he's a sexist director, which is one of the craziest thing I've ever seen when he makes his women characters the hero of the film more times than not). He told the journalist that as the writer, he has the creative ability to decide exactly how many lines a character needs to have, and therefore, she has exactly the right amount of lines.  Now I'm just paraphrasing, but that's pretty close to the way he said it. In the same sense, as the writer and director, he chooses the right amount of violence. It's awesome entertainment.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on August 25, 2019, 07:55:47 PM
I'm currently re watching Kill Bill, just finished 1 gonna watch 2 today.. I never really got the Kill Bill films to be honest and I'm enjoying them more second time around all these years later...

Totally agree with your views in violence in his movies Matt..

I'm still reeling from how much I enjoyed OUATiH. I'm gonna say it.
I've enjoyed this the most of all his films and can't wait to see it again..
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: The Schofield Kid on August 28, 2019, 01:48:17 AM
So, all going to plan, I’m going to see Once Upon A Time In Hollywood on Monday. Just saw the run time of 161 minutes!! Going in with little expectations so we’ll see.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on August 28, 2019, 03:28:28 AM
After rewatching all of these films again, here's how I'm ranking them today:

1. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Kill Bill (Vol 1 & 2)
4. Reservoir Dogs
5. Inglourious Basterds
6. Jackie Brown
7. Django Unchained
8. The Hateful Eight
9. Death Proof

Whoa, really? I have to say I'm looking forward to this movie more than just about any movie this century, but I will have to wait until the blu-ray comes out. I just can't see setting aside four hours for it (factoring in drive time and all).

Also, like you, Matt, I don't rank his last two westerns very highly. I liked The Hateful Eight more than Django Unchained, but even it felt too much like Tarantino trying to out-Tarantino himself. Inglourious Basterds was great though and I've seen it many times. Still, Jackie Brown is my favorite.

And where would you rank True Romance? I still rank that way up there.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on August 28, 2019, 01:52:30 PM
Whoa, really? I have to say I'm looking forward to this movie more than just about any movie this century, but I will have to wait until the blu-ray comes out. I just can't see setting aside four hours for it (factoring in drive time and all).

No, do it! It's worth the four hours.  I just saw it again at the Imax theater, and it wasn't nearly as fun strictly because it was a very empty theater. This is a cinema movie. It should be seen in the theater, and preferably surrounded by others who are really enjoying the movie. See if you can make it this weekend at like a 7:00 showing where it would have the most people. Since it's a long one, I'd seek out a theater with recliners and if you have food service, make it dinner/drinks and a movie. It's really worth it. You won't be sorry and feel it's time wasted. Reading reviews, I can tell that having a little knowledge of Manson and the family before the film really makes it that much more enjoyable. Since we're close in age and grew up Beatles fans, I'm sure you fit in with those who have that knowledge and will really enjoy it.


Quote
Also, like you, Matt, I don't rank his last two westerns very highly. I liked The Hateful Eight more than Django Unchained, but even it felt too much like Tarantino trying to out-Tarantino himself. Inglourious Basterds was great though and I've seen it many times. Still, Jackie Brown is my favorite.

And where would you rank True Romance? I still rank that way up there.

Yeah, I agree with you on that. I was actually watching The Hateful Eight this time around and thinking "holy crap this is wordy" and I've never thought that from Tarantino. And then the violence didn't work as well for me because he didn't make me dislike the characters enough that were on the receiving end of the violence.  Death Proof has lost some of the initial charm I felt when I first watched it, and is one where it doesn't improve with extra viewings. Django Unchained -- a really good, almost great movie, but doesn't live up to the high standards I have for Tarantino with the 6 films above it on my list. Losing his editor Sally Menke probably had a lot to do with Dhango Unchained and The Hateful Eight having the wrong feel. But, he definitely got it right back on track with Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.

I haven't seen True Romance in years. I'll watch it again and see where it ranks. I remember really liking it, but couldn't tell you anything about it until I see it again.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on August 28, 2019, 02:17:07 PM
I think of the films he's made that I've seen, which is definitely not all of them, I liked "Jackie Brown" the best. It was among the least violent, and it also had Robert Deniro  ;D
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on August 28, 2019, 04:38:18 PM
Also, Tony Scott directed "True Romance," not Quentin Tarantino, so it's not really a "Quentin Tarantino" film. He just wrote it. I think the director has a much stronger influence over the end product than the screenwriter does. The thing I remember most about it was the somewhat whimsical, quite memorable score by Hans Zimmer.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on August 29, 2019, 02:30:22 AM
Also, Tony Scott directed "True Romance," not Quentin Tarantino, so it's not really a "Quentin Tarantino" film. He just wrote it. I think the director has a much stronger influence over the end product than the screenwriter does. The thing I remember most about it was the somewhat whimsical, quite memorable score by Hans Zimmer.

I assume you're just talking out loud since we know Tarantino didn't direct True Romance, but it is absolutely a Tarantino film, in the same way Being John Malcovich is a Charlie Kaufman film. It's the first film I saw by Tarantino and I loved it so much I was already looking forward to Pulp Fiction well before it was released. That's how impressed I was by the writing. Although Reservoir Dogs had been out for a little while, I wouldn't see it until after I'd seen Pulp Fiction. Natural Born Killers is not a Tarantino film, given he's disowned the film, though the original script is available for sale. The score for True Romance is great, but it owes a huge debt to the film Badlands.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on August 29, 2019, 11:45:58 PM
Having a think about this.. I'll go

Once Upon A Time in Hollywood
Reservoir Dogs
Pulp Fiction
Jackie Brown
Kill Bill 1&2
Inglorious Basterds
Django
The Hateful Eight
Death proof 
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: The Schofield Kid on September 09, 2019, 04:08:21 PM
Tarantino Steals From Other Movies (https://www.facebook.com/insider/videos/362569287734426/UzpfSTEwMDAwMTM4ODIzNjE1OTpWSzoyODI0NDg2ODk0MjUxOTEy/?query=Quentin%20Tarantino&epa=SEARCH_BOX)  :o  :o  :o
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on September 09, 2019, 09:32:23 PM
Tarantino Steals From Other Movies (https://www.facebook.com/insider/videos/362569287734426/UzpfSTEwMDAwMTM4ODIzNjE1OTpWSzoyODI0NDg2ODk0MjUxOTEy/?query=Quentin%20Tarantino&epa=SEARCH_BOX)  :o  :o  :o

It's pretty funny that Tarantino partially steals the quote from Picasso "Good artists copy. Great artists steal". 

That was a good clip.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on September 12, 2019, 02:47:56 PM
May I ask AKA... If you don't like violence in films how did you ever get into Clint Eastwood ? ;)
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on September 12, 2019, 08:12:05 PM
May I ask AKA... If you don't like violence in films how did you ever get into Clint Eastwood ? ;)

Gant, this is a good and fair question. I think for me, the violence in Clint's films first of all always served the story. It was not the defining feature of the film. Clint always played character driven characters and directed character driven stories. His movies were never about the spectacle of filmmaking or how far he could push the envelope before he went too far. Quentin Tarantino's movie are all about the spectacle to me. The story is only there to serve the style which underpins them. It's a vehicle for the indulgence of Tarantino's revenge fantasy obsession. Tarantino's films are self-indulgent. Clint's films aren't. Tarantino continues to direct movies that thematically center on revenge fantasies. I'd love to be his psychiatrist, so that I could learn why. In addition, the level of violence in Tarantino's films is oppressive to me. I can't think of a single Clint Eastwood film that you could objectively say that about. 

Secondly, the nature of the violence is much tamer in even Clint's most violent film than it is in Quentin Tarantino's tamest movie. Quentin Tarantino's movies have a level of blood and gore and gratuitously styled violence that Clint never had in his films. There is simply no comparison whatsoever, in my opinion, between Clint and Quentin Tarantino. I also feel like Quentin Tarantino often exploits historical events in very crude ways ways that serve as a vehicle for his overly stylized, gratuitously violent films. I don't think you can say the same about Clint. To me, they are very different directors and filmmakers. I agree that Tarantino is a talented director. I just wish that he used those talents in a different way. His films celebrate, glorify, and trivialize the very worst of human nature to me. Clint never reveled in man's darkest impulses. He reflected upon them, he may have sometimes depicted them, but he never took any glee in doing so. Quentin Tarantino does, and to me, that's disturbing.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on September 12, 2019, 08:37:25 PM
I actually agree with most of what AKA wrote above when comparing Tarantino to Clint, but I don't come to the same conclusions - but individual points are well made.

Gant, Doug, SK and anyone else who might be reading who has seen both directors' works -- how would you compare these two very different directors?
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: KC on September 12, 2019, 09:25:38 PM
Gant, this is a good and fair question. I think for me, the violence in Clint's films first of all always served the story. It was not the defining feature of the film. Clint always played character driven characters and directed character driven stories. His movies were never about the spectacle of filmmaking or how far he could push the envelope before he went too far. Quentin Tarantino's movie are all about the spectacle to me. The story is only there to serve the style which underpins them. It's a vehicle for the indulgence of Tarantino's revenge fantasy obsession. Tarantino's films are self-indulgent. Clint's films aren't. Tarantino continues to direct movies that thematically center on revenge fantasies. I'd love to be his psychiatrist, so that I could learn why. In addition, the level of violence in Tarantino's films is oppressive to me. I can't think of a single Clint Eastwood film that you could objectively say that about. 

Secondly, the nature of the violence is much tamer in even Clint's most violent film than it is in Quentin Tarantino's tamest movie. Quentin Tarantino's movies have a level of blood and gore and gratuitously styled violence that Clint never had in his films. There is simply no comparison whatsoever, in my opinion, between Clint and Quentin Tarantino. I also feel like Quentin Tarantino often exploits historical events in very crude ways ways that serve as a vehicle for his overly stylized, gratuitously violent films. I don't think you can say the same about Clint. To me, they are very different directors and filmmakers. I agree that Tarantino is a talented director. I just wish that he used those talents in a different way. His films celebrate, glorify, and trivialize the very worst of human nature to me. Clint never reveled in man's darkest impulses. He reflected upon them, he may have sometimes depicted them, but he never took any glee in doing so. Quentin Tarantino does, and to me, that's disturbing.
AKA, I think this is a brilliant post. You put your finger right on the difference between Tarantino and Eastwood. I've never heard anyone express that so well.

I must admit I haven't seen nearly all of Tarantino's work, but AKA pretty much lays out the reasons why I've never felt obliged to do so.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on September 12, 2019, 10:29:04 PM
Very well answered AKA.. I was kinda kidding but your response has made me think about the comparisons.
When I was young Clints films were often thought of as extremely violent and were almost always R rated. Sudden Impact etc..

I'm gonna dwell on this comparison some more..

Just as a side thought... Did Clint vote for Pulp Fiction at Cannes some years back ?

 
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: AKA23 on September 13, 2019, 05:22:24 AM
Very well answered AKA.. I was kinda kidding but your response has made me think about the comparisons.
When I was young Clints films were often thought of as extremely violent and were almost always R rated. Sudden Impact etc..

I'm gonna dwell on this comparison some more..

Just as a side thought... Did Clint vote for Pulp Fiction at Cannes some years back ?

I remember him saying in an interview that he did not.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on October 23, 2019, 12:19:29 AM
Matt, may I ask what it is about Ounce Upon a Time in Hollywood that you like so much? I did get to see it and I'm just not getting the love. So it's a love letter to 1969 Hollywood, but what else is it? It spends over 2 hours on character development leading up to the climatic scene that frankly feels really silly. I did like it, but it feels like Tarantino threw out all sense of conventional pacing, and there's zero plot, and really not much of a story. I'll watch it again and maybe it'll click with me on a second viewing.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on October 26, 2019, 09:31:22 AM
Matt, may I ask what it is about Ounce Upon a Time in Hollywood that you like so much? I did get to see it and I'm just not getting the love. So it's a love letter to 1969 Hollywood, but what else is it? It spends over 2 hours on character development leading up to the climatic scene that frankly feels really silly. I did like it, but it feels like Tarantino threw out all sense of conventional pacing, and there's zero plot, and really not much of a story. I'll watch it again and maybe it'll click with me on a second viewing.


Sure. :)  The "love letter to 1969 Hollywood" is something I read in almost every review of this movie, and it's true, but I don't care about that. What I loved is the character development and the story, so we're 180 degrees away from each other on these points because I do love the plot (there is one) and I loved loved the ending, which I didn't think felt silly at all.

SPOILERS BELOW:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Like Inglourious Basterds the ending is an alternate reality of a true event:  the Manson murders, which leaves Sharon Tate and her baby safe and well (along with her house guests and we can assume the LaBianca's the next night). The reason I've said this movie is so much more satisfying if you really knew a lot about these killings is because there is such a sadness for how that beautiful woman was killed, and her legacy just as a murder victim in one of the most gruesome killings of all time, it just makes her such a tragic figure. So as the story progressed closer to that fateful day, and you're expecting this angelic sweet woman to be brutally killed (8 months pregnant) the tension was building all along to that night. And then, he changed the outcome, and it felt amazing -- a surge of adrenaline and as much euphoria as I think it's possible to feel in a movie theater watching a fictional film. So, I loved the plot -- I loved the acting. I loved the character development. I loved the set, the dialogue (not too heavy this time), and everything about it.  I'm surprised you didn't because I know you've enjoyed some of his films, and I think this is his best. The violence is not too much in this one. I thought the film was very balanced for Tarantino -- not heavy in any area, which I can criticize Tarantino for in his other films. So I rate it 10/10.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on October 27, 2019, 11:37:27 PM
Totally agree, it gave us another perspective on Sharon Tate, it was a celebration of her beauty and talent. I loved the scenes with her in the cinema watching her own film with an audience..

Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on October 28, 2019, 10:17:51 AM
And mixed in with all that drama and heaviness as we head toward the night of the killings, we have some hilarious scenes. My favorite is the Bruce Lee fight scene with Cliff.  "Let me just say, nobody beat the $#!t out of Bruce." This was laugh-out-loud funny, and another scene where those who are familiar with the real people being portrayed in the film get paid off in spades, because he was dead-on as Bruce Lee.  Also loved the scene with Rick Dalton talking to his young co-star before they shoot their scene together. And the bit at the end where Cliff is trying to remember Tex Watson's name "No it was dumber than that".

"I'm as real as a donut, Motherf***er"

 ;D

To me, it was one of the most "kick-ass" fun and entertaining films I've seen.

To touch on more about that awesome ending: Rick Dalton going back for the blow torch scene, and then describing it to Jay Sebring afterwards! "Like the one in 14 Fists of McCluskey"?  "That exact one -- I still had it, sitting in the garage!"   ;D ;D ;D  Hilarious stuff.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on October 28, 2019, 11:06:25 PM
Yeah, I loved all those scenes you describe.. Lots of real laugh out loud moments..
A freind of mine' car was used in some scenes. I liked how all the car engines were high in the mix, reminded me a little of Bullitt...

Kick ass and entertaining absolutely..
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on October 29, 2019, 10:23:15 AM
Gant, how did your friend's car get in the movie?
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on October 29, 2019, 03:38:22 PM
And mixed in with all that drama and heaviness as we head toward the night of the killings, we have some hilarious scenes. My favorite is the Bruce Lee fight scene with Cliff.  "Let me just say, nobody beat the $#!t out of Bruce." This was laugh-out-loud funny, and another scene where those who are familiar with the real people being portrayed in the film get paid off in spades, because he was dead-on as Bruce Lee. 

I actually found the portrayal of Bruce Lee extremely obnoxious and offensive. Bruce was cocky but he wasn't an a$$hole. He wouldn't have engaged with Cliff on the set of The Green Hornet. He was often being challenged and he wasn't so easily goaded into a confrontation. There's no record he ever said anything like "My hands are lethal weapons," which is there just so Cliff can make his comeback line cutting down Bruce. Tarantino thinks he's heard Bruce say he could beat Cassius Clay, but that's not what Bruce ever would have said, not like some arrogant punk, anyway. Bruce might have said his one chance given the huge disparity in size would be to go for the knees and cripple Ali, but that's how Bruce's mind worked, always thinking about one could win a fight with opponents who would be extremely tough to beat. Which is a far cry different than what's in the movie. As well Cassius Clay changed his name to Muhammad Ali a good five years before that scene would have taken place, so why have Bruce continue to call him by his former name? Did Bruce go around calling Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (a real life student of Bruce's) Lew Alcinder? I seriously doubt Bruce was that big of a jerk or bigot.

As for the fight itself. Tarantino said it's silly to ask if Cliff, a fictional character, could beat Bruce, but while Cliff might be fictional, Bruce is not. Tarantino tells us Cliff is a former Green Beret, but we don't know that in the movie, unless I missed that part (and so what, being a former green beret doesn't automatically make you a top level martial artist). What we do know is he's a washed-up stuntman, who drinks too much, smokes too much, is about twenty years older, and lives like a bum. And Cliff engages in three fights, two of which we're clearly supposed to root for him and laugh at the ineptitude of the Manson followers. The scene with Bruce is also clearly set up so we laugh at his opponent, which this time is Bruce Lee. I expect better from Tarantino, who I presume is a fan of Bruce Lee, but man, does he seem to relish knocking down Bruce. The scene serves no other purpose. We don't need to know Cliff is a tough guy, we learn that at Spahn Ranch.

I'm pretty sure most the members of this board would be annoyed if not angry if Clint Eastwood were to be portrayed in such an offensive, condescending manner long after he's dead just to get a few laughs. And it's far worse when you do it to a member of a minority who's seen as a hero to many, many Chinese, students of martial arts, and others. Sorry for the rant, but the scene has continued to anger me.

Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on October 29, 2019, 06:00:30 PM
Sorry for the rant, but the scene has continued to anger me.

I'm a fan of Bruce Lee, and I thought it was a hysterical scene.  But, I can see your point about the character acting like a little punk in the fight scene with Cliff.  But, since he really was a bit of a braggart and cocky as hell, it didn't seem so outlandish a portrayal to me. The "lethal weapons" line was definitely played for laughs. For what it's worth, The Green Hornet was filmed in '66 - '67. The scenes they're showing are flashbacks, so it was only 2 years post name change for Ali, who at the time wasn't fighting, was stripped of all his titles, and was under arrest for evading the draft. So even though Ali's reputation was at an all-time low at that time, I don't think Tarantino had Bruce calling him Cassius Clay for any other reason than to make the scene feel set back in a very much earlier time period.

Outside of The Green Hornet scene, they do show Bruce training Sharon Tate for her martial arts scene, which he really did do. I thought it was cool having those bits with Sharon in the film, tying him in with the story. I read he was at the Tate/Polanski house the afternoon of the murders, and was invited to stay and hang out with everyone that night.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Christopher on October 29, 2019, 09:06:36 PM
I haven't seen the movie but read about this scene after it came out. I know Lee's family didn't like the portrayal. The connection between Lee and Sharon Tate was new to me--I'd never heard that until this movie came out.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on October 29, 2019, 11:39:06 PM
Christopher... My freinds got a vintage car ( I forgot the make ) and lives in LA.
I'm not sure how he was contacted by the film makers. I'll find out.. I think the car makes a brief appearance
in a highway scene..
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Gant on October 29, 2019, 11:50:22 PM
Wow, there's an alternative Universe plot... Imagine if Bruce Lee had stayed that night. Would he have made a difference to the outcome, along with Steve McQueen who was supposedly invited over ?

Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Matt on October 30, 2019, 09:47:47 AM
Wow, there's an alternative Universe plot... Imagine if Bruce Lee had stayed that night. Would he have made a difference to the outcome, along with Steve McQueen who was supposedly invited over ?

It definitely gives you something to think about. At least one of the Manson followers had a gun that night (Steve Parent was shot outside the house before they went inside). But, I have also wondered if Lee would have been able to change history if he was there, or if we would have lost him earlier than we did.
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on October 31, 2019, 02:13:25 AM
I'm a fan of Bruce Lee, and I thought it was a hysterical scene.  But, I can see your point about the character acting like a little punk in the fight scene with Cliff.  But, since he really was a bit of a braggart and cocky as hell, it didn't seem so outlandish a portrayal to me.

See, but my point was he had swagger, he had tons of swagger, and it made him cool as hell, but he was not a braggart, who's someone who makes a lot of empty boasts. That scene just makes him look ridiculous. Compare that condescending portrayal with real life Bruce Lee, like in this interview, or any interview:

https://www.youtube.com/v/Ze_hfMw8JFg
Title: Re: Quentin Tarantino
Post by: Doug on October 31, 2019, 02:17:28 AM
Wow, there's an alternative Universe plot... Imagine if Bruce Lee had stayed that night. Would he have made a difference to the outcome, along with Steve McQueen who was supposedly invited over ?

Interestingly, Polanski actually came to suspect Bruce Lee as the killer, because I guess Polanski went a little crazy and started looking at all their friends as possible suspects, and a pair of glasses had been left behind at the scene and Bruce had lost his glasses, and when Polanski went with Bruce to get a new pair of glasses he realized Bruce wore a different prescription and gave up that idea. (So I've read.)