Quentin Tarantino

Discussion and info on people in film, ranging from directors to actors to cinematographers to writers.

Moderator: DarkImbecile

Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Quentin Tarantino

#1 Post by mfunk9786 » Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:43 am

Quentin Tarantino (1963 - )

Image

"I don't believe in elitism. I don't think the audience is this dumb person lower than me. I am the audience."

Filmography

Theatrical Features
Reservoir Dogs (1992)
Pulp Fiction (1994)
Jackie Brown (1997)
Kill Bill Volume I (2003)
Kill Bill Volume II (2004)
Death Proof (2007)
Inglourious Basterds (2009)
Django Unchained (2012)
The Hateful Eight (2015)
Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood (2019)

Shorts/Segments
My Best Friend's Birthday [short] (1987)
Four Rooms [segment: "The Man From Hollywood"] (1995)
Sin City [credited as "special guest director" for one scene] (2005)
Grindhouse [segment: "Death Proof"] (2007)

Television
ER [episode: "Motherhood"] (1995)
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation [episode: "Grave Danger"] (2005)

Web Resources
The Quentin Tarantino Archives
Excerpt from Virgin Noir on the making of Reservoir Dogs
"Quentin Tarantino: A 'Pulp' Hero" by Roger Ebert
On the set of Tarantino's Kill Bill by Susan Jakes
"Quentin's World" by Charles McGrath
Press Play Video Essay: "On the Q.T." (#1: Reservoir Dogs)
Press Play Video Essay: "On the Q.T." (#2: Pulp Fiction)
Press Play Video Essay: "On the Q.T." (#3: Jackie Brown)
Press Play Video Essay: "On the Q.T." (#4: Kill Bill)

Print Resources
Quentin Tarantino: The Man and His Movies by Jami Bernard
Quentin Tarantino: Interviews, Revised and Updated
Cahiers du Cinema Masters of Cinema Series: Quentin Tarantino by Joachim Lepastier

Forum Discussion
Grindhouse (Tarantino/Rodriguez, 2007)
Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)
Django Unchained (Quentin Tarantino, 2012)
The Hateful Eight (Quentin Tarantino, 2015)
Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood (Quentin Tarantino, 2019)

User avatar
Lino
"Without obsession, life is nothing"
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:18 am
Location: Sitting End
Contact:

#2 Post by Lino » Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:31 am

shirobamba wrote:
Annie Mall wrote:Tarantino likes Suzuki.
That's very obvious. But who, except Tarantino himself does think of Tarantino as an "important" film-maker?
Me. And Criterion.

Narshty
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: London, UK

#3 Post by Narshty » Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:32 am

shirobamba wrote:
Annie Mall wrote:Tarantino likes Suzuki.
That's very obvious. But who, except Tarantino himself does think of Tarantino as an "important" film-maker?
Oh, come off it.

User avatar
LightBulbFilm
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 5:11 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

#4 Post by LightBulbFilm » Mon Jan 30, 2006 9:08 am

That's very obvious. But who, except Tarantino himself does think of Tarantino as an "important" film-maker?
LOL!

User avatar
Toshiro De Niro
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 10:16 pm

#5 Post by Toshiro De Niro » Mon Jan 30, 2006 9:51 am

when all the envy to his success subside Tarantino will be remembered together with Spielberg, Scorsese, Kubrick, Truffaut and Bergman.

I loved Fighting Elegy and Youth of the Beast and fully support their presence in the collection. 2 very original films. I haven't seen the last two.

User avatar
shirobamba
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: Germany

#6 Post by shirobamba » Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:12 pm

Annie Mall wrote:Me. And Criterion.
Then you're the majority. And the majority is always right.

Now I'm off, Narshty!

User avatar
shirobamba
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: Germany

#7 Post by shirobamba » Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:30 pm

Toshiro De Niro wrote:when all the envy to his success subside Tarantino will be remembered together with Spielberg, Scorsese, Kubrick, Truffaut and Bergman.
(Sorry Narshty, it's too tempting) ... and Jackson and Stone. But please take off Bergman from your list! Since when is "success" an indication for artistic quality? Sorry, I'm an "old European".

User avatar
Steven H
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:30 pm
Location: NC

#8 Post by Steven H » Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:21 pm

This reminds me, is anyone else surprised that Tarantino hasn't pulled strings a la Anderson/Bay to get one of his films out on their label? He should do a remake of, I dunno, Andrei Rublev and get them to release it. God that sounds like fun! Tim Roth as Rublev.

Who winks at you through the camera more often, Suzuki or Tarantino? The latter, and there's also an occasional blown kiss.

User avatar
blindside8zao
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 4:31 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

#9 Post by blindside8zao » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:37 am

shirobamba wrote:
Toshiro De Niro wrote:when all the envy to his success subside Tarantino will be remembered together with Spielberg, Scorsese, Kubrick, Truffaut and Bergman.
But please take off Bergman from your list! Since when is "success" an indication for artistic quality?
I second that opinion.

User avatar
pzman84
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2004 4:05 pm

#10 Post by pzman84 » Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:01 am

It it makes money for Criterion so they can release more films by Ozu and Mizoguchi, then bring on the Suzuki!!!

User avatar
Daze
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:23 pm
Location: Austin, TX, USA

#11 Post by Daze » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:09 pm

Do the Suzukis make money for Criterion? I recall reading that their sales were disappointing. Tarantino's problem is that he doesn't make many movies. Pulp Fiction came out 12 years ago, and he's only put out three features since then (and that's counting Kill Bill as two). By comparison, Woody Allen and Spike Lee have made ten features apiece in that time.

User avatar
Andre Jurieu
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:38 pm
Location: Back in Milan (Ind.)

#12 Post by Andre Jurieu » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:30 pm

Daze wrote:Tarantino's problem is that he doesn't make many movies ... By comparison, Woody Allen and Spike Lee have made ten features apiece in that time.
Some would say that Allen's and Lee's problem is that they make too many movies (... and here comes the outrage).

User avatar
toiletduck!
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 5:43 pm
Location: The 'Go
Contact:

#13 Post by toiletduck! » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:31 pm

Daze wrote:Tarantino's problem is that he doesn't make many movies. Pulp Fiction came out 12 years ago, and he's only put out three features since then (and that's counting Kill Bill as two). By comparison, Woody Allen and Spike Lee have made ten features apiece in that time.
I, too, hate Terrence Malick. Uwe Boll, on the other hand, is really starting to pick up the pace. That boy's got promise!

Napoleon
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:55 am

#14 Post by Napoleon » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:36 pm

imiba wrote:when all the envy to his success subside Tarantino will be remembered together with Spielberg,Scorsese,Kubrick,Truffaut and Bergman.
With regards to the envy subsiding I think it is best to walk before you run!

User avatar
TechNoir
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 10:32 pm

#15 Post by TechNoir » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:49 pm

By comparison, Woody Allen and Spike Lee have made ten features apiece in that time.[/quote]

It certainly isn't about the number of films one puts out, but the quality of them. I am sure most would disagree with me, but i have gotten more out of Tarantino's work in the past twelve years than most of the output from Lee, and Allen.

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

#16 Post by cdnchris » Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:29 pm

toiletduck! wrote:I, too, hate Terrence Malick. Uwe Boll, on the other hand, is really starting to pick up the pace. That boy's got promise!
And he's made like 4 films in two years! And he's got more comin'!! The guy's a genius!!

User avatar
Daze
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:23 pm
Location: Austin, TX, USA

#17 Post by Daze » Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:30 pm

True, quantity isn't that big a deal in itself. My point is that, for a self-proclaimed movie fanatic who can write his own ticket in Hollywood, Tarantino isn't all that interested in making movies. He's squandering his talent and opportunities that most filmmakers would kill for.

As for quality, Jackie Brown was pretty poor.

User avatar
Andre Jurieu
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:38 pm
Location: Back in Milan (Ind.)

#18 Post by Andre Jurieu » Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:42 pm

Daze wrote:As for quality, Jackie Brown was pretty poor.
I disagree. The more I watch it, the more I appreciate its willingness to create a leisurely pace rather than dive into the hysterics of killing Bill. It creates much the same effect as Dazed and Confused, which I believe is one of Tarantino's favorites.

Anonymous

#19 Post by Anonymous » Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:49 pm

Andre Jurieu wrote:
Daze wrote:As for quality, Jackie Brown was pretty poor.
I disagree. The more I watch it, the more I appreciate its willingness to create a leisurely pace rather than dive into the hysterics of killing Bill. It creates much the same effect as Dazed and Confused, which I believe is one of Tarantino's favorites.
Agreed, everytime I watch Jackie Brown it grows on me more. I think its main problem is its not nearly as visceral or action filled as Tarantino's other films so a majority of the viewers are thrown off by innaccurate expectations.

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

#20 Post by cdnchris » Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:47 pm

Jackie Brown has actually always been my favourite Tarantino film. My dad and I seem to be the only people that feel that way, though. I've always figured others weren't big on it just because people were expecting a high energy film like Pulp Fiction (which everyone was still talking about) and they got a quieter character piece. But I still thought it was a blast and I enjoyed its slower pace more.

User avatar
shirobamba
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: Germany

#21 Post by shirobamba » Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:05 pm

For heaven's sake! The last thing I wanted, was to start a thread about Tarantino! That's how the wrong people get known, by PR. My own fault Mr. Admin. Next time I will keep my big mouth shut. Promised, Annie!

User avatar
Barmy
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 3:59 pm

#22 Post by Barmy » Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:19 pm

Why are there so many more Criterion Suzuki's than Criterion Tarantino's?

User avatar
Joe Buck
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: New York

#23 Post by Joe Buck » Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:02 am

I personally don't enjoy his work very much. Pulp Fiction was great, sure, but I don't feel this guy has made enough quality material to warrant his name being listed with those other greats. He seems like a talented guy but as far as I can tell he's only made 2 good movies (Dogs and Fiction). I saw Kill Bill 1 because of all the hype but thought it was all style and no substance, and didn't care enough to even bother to see Kill Bill 2. Self-indulgent crap, I thought. Yet the critics and fans raved about it.

His stuff just doesn't do anything for me. I am open to the fact that I may be wrong in my thinking, but that's just how I feel.

User avatar
nyasa
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:05 am
Location: UK

#24 Post by nyasa » Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:56 am

I'm not an especially big fan of Tarantino, but I do appreciate the fact that every frame he has ever shot is infused with his absolute love of movies (his taste in movies is another matter). In that respect - love of movies - he's comparable to Truffaut.

Also, I remember how fresh Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction appeared when they first came out. On the positive side, they helped to stimulate structural invention and zippy dialogue in mainstream Hollywood. On the downside, for a couple of years it seemed that just about every blockbuster was obliged to have characters digressing about fast food, or their favourite TV shows, or whatever...

User avatar
Len
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Finland

#25 Post by Len » Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:33 pm

I enjoy Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown quite a bit. Especially the last two are still great. Dunno why, but there's something about RD that has always thrown me off a little bit. The acting is great, the dialogue is pretty good (considering my dislike for the normal Tarantino-dialogue) and the structure of the story is excellent, but somehow as a whole, it doesn't do much for me. Jackie Brown on the other hand I liked alot, and my appreciation for the film only seems to increase on every viewing. It's pretty subtle (well, compared to his other work atleast), and despite a few obvious faults, it's superb.

Both Kill Bill films were pretty bad. Somewhat enjoyable, but almost everything in them had been done better before. If I want to see a bloody tale of gritty martial arts vengeance, I'll watch Vengeance by Chang Chen, which is an amazing film. Especially the poor quality of the action scenes in Kill Bill bothered me alot. Considering Tarantino's love and knowledge of Shaw films, I couldn't figure out why he shot and edited all the action scenes (the worst is the big restaurant fight in KB vol.1) like some mediocre MTV-director would. I'm guessing alot of the fast edits and close-ups were to make Uma look better, but maybe at that point they should've thought about using stunt doubles or something.

Post Reply