Quentin Tarantino

[domino harvey]

according to my co-workers, Tarantino directed Hostel I and II, along with Wolf Creek and something called Chinese Express-- but that's a foreign movie in another language so they returned it to Blockbuster, because if they wanted to read they'd buy a book. Except I don't think they'd buy a book.

[toiletduck!]

Wait a second, are you telling me that the majority of film school students aren't terribly interested in the form as an artistic expression?

Well, shit. There goes Hollywood's good name.

-Toilet Dcuk

[Michael]

Veteran actress Sophia Loren has reportedly hit back, "How dare he talk about Italian cinema when he doesn't know anything about American cinema?"

Bravissima to Sophia! Before Tarantino dumped his diarrhea on the Italian cinema of today, he should have worried about the current state of the damn cinema of his own country first.

[DrewReiber]

As evidenced by the resounding failure of Grindhouse at the box office, Tarantino's impact on contemporary American cinema is minimal at best.

I think you're underestimating the failure of marketing in this instance. Most people I talked to leading up to Grindhouse's release had no idea it was out, some didn't even know what it was. The same for the Rodriguez fans too. I'm talking about their primary demographic here.

I think the importance of Tarantino as a filmmaker is extremely overstated probably no more so than by the man himself.

I hardly know a soul in college, film school or not, who doesn't own Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction on DVD. A good chunk of the students' productions are directly influenced by Dogs, Fiction and Boondock Saints. Even by the time I graduated, we had one major capstone (thesis film) that was clearly an homage to Tarantino's gangster works.

Perhaps you have a better grasp at what "the kids" are into these days, but I would argue Paul Thomas Anderson, David Fincher, and Wes Anderson are serving as more popular and cinematic influences on today's generation than Tarantino.

I think you overvalue the thinking of today's filmmaking generation. It's far easier for today's youth to be drawn toward mindlessly hostile characters who kill each other over simplistic concepts such as wealth or power.

I have seen students, in my year too, who have been impacted by the directors you mentioned (myself included). However, I've probably only met one student whose work was specifically calling to Paul Thomas Anderson and Altman. The number of students who are even aware of the connection between Anderson and Altman I can count on one hand. Fincher has many fans, but his influence seems to be limited to superficial music video stylings.

Wes Anderson is an obvious choice, but most students only gravitate towards his work for the theraputic qualities of the family melodrama. They only seem to identify with the elements they believe resemble their own personal or familial problems, absorbing little more than his easy to mimic transitions and odd characters. I've also seen a number of empty film festival entries traveling the country that fit this description. I would prefer to see young filmmakers attempt to understand Anderson's film aesthetics and French-Italian influences, but most of them think he's useless outside of his Tenenbaum achievements. On average, I would argue that his fans are not at all interested in his methods but rather how they might produce similar films to Tenenbaum so that they can increase their transparent, personal escapism. I find that disturbing.

Let's be honest - the influence Tarantino had, was at its peak circa Pulp Fiction and it spawned its largely lacklustre imitators for a few years, had Hollywood finally take a serious look at independent film and that was about it.

Yes, let's be honest. I think you need to visit a film school gathering and talk to the students. Kill Bill was a favorite and that was just 3 years ago. I still feel you're grossly misinterpreting the failure of Grindhouse.

Kill Bill was successful, yes, but it hardly sparked any cinematic ripoffs or started any trends.

Only because it harkens to exploitation and the studios don't know how to reappropriate that yet. Otherwise, I've seen exploitational knockoffs on home video and from overseas, among the number of awkward, uncomfortable homages in films and television pandering to the generation we're speaking of.

I find the popularity of things like Wild Hogs or Scary Movie to be more detrimental to American cinema than anything Tarantino has done.

I find Tarantino's promotion of American Idol and the remake of Dawn of the Dead as American culture to be enjoyed is more detrimental than anything you have mentioned. I've had 19 year old students walk up to me and go, "Hey, we gotta go back to the apartment because Tarantino is going to be on Idol tonight! No, I can't miss this!" Wild Hogs is just some dreck that uneducated families go see because it has all their favorite, aging stars in one package. Otherwise, I have yet to see anyone going to film schools to make Scary Movie.

If anyone has an experience contrary to mine, or complimenting the examples I've made, please illustrate.

[Antoine Doinel]

Otherwise, I have yet to see anyone going to film schools to make Scary Movie.

The director of Wild Hogs graduated from USC School of Cinema-Television.

And not every film school student is setting out to make their Citizen Kane either. And by your own admission, they are probably going to be making a bunch of faux-Snatch films.

[lord_clyde]

according to my co-workers, Tarantino directed Hostel I and II, along with Wolf Creek and something called Chinese Express-- but that's a foreign movie in another language so they returned it to Blockbuster, because if they wanted to read they'd buy a book. Except I don't think they'd buy a book.

Nice. I actually had someone ask me what Tarantino was thinking when he directed 'Switchblade Sisters' the other day.

[lord_clyde]

I first heard about Reservoir Dogs in film class. I remember reading a script a student wanted me to help him with and I thought 'Ha ha, this dialogue is so fucking funny! He doesn't want to be Mr. Pink!' So as far as Tarantino inspiring a new generation of hacks, you would be right.

[filmnoir1]

I am pleased to see that my meager post earlier today has incited so much discussion about Tarantino and his influence on cinema today. While I agree with many of the posts which point out that he is a genre filmmaker, I have to admit that I disagree with the idea that he is simply romanticizing aspects of culture. In fact I would argue he attempts to construct himself as a "brother" when in fact he is a relatively wealthy white kid from the suburbs. So to call his actions laudable or excuse them seems facile because he can "slum it" because he had the resources with which to enact these childish fantasies while other people have to live a life of the streets because of economics.

I am also pleased to hear someone speak out against the other forces/films which are skewing the views of young people in America today. I am sick of hearing about Star Wars, Tarantino, and the idea that independent film was born in the 90s. What I was arguing in my earlier post is that Americans lack a historical framework from which they can approach their understanding of culture, politics, gender and economics and this is one of the primary reasons I believe we are stuck in Iraq. Too many people have forgotten the harsh realities of Vietnam and the 1970s.

Returning to Tarantino I see where he is making a biker film, can someone say Easy Rider on steroids most likely. It is time that Tarantino matures both mentally and filmically as Spielberg has done, otherwise he is simply continuing his masterbatory exercise of making films that satisfy his own needs without considering those of the culture at large.

[Harold Gervais]

It is time that Tarantino matures both mentally and filmically as Spielberg has done, otherwise he is simply continuing his masterbatory exercise of making films that satisfy his own needs without considering those of the culture at large.

I would argue that the only obligation a director has is to see his/her vision put on screen in as a complete fashion as he/she is able to achieve. Serving a larger culture at large, whatever that defines as today, should not be a consideration. Art is what you do for yourself. How that work fits in contextually & historically, if it indeed fits in anywhere, is best left for others & history to decide. A director/writer/composer should not be concerned one bit with how he/she thinks others may or may not react to a specific work because the second a creative person does that is the second all kinds of traps & hurdles are put into place that don't need to be there. The work needs to exist on its own terms and it needs to be approached that way.

And I fail to see how is it Tarantino's fault if people are too lazy to realize that he didn't direct films the films he champions such as Iron Monkey, Switchblade Sisters or Chungking Express. I've personally never been so confused that I believed "presents" meant the same thing as "directed by." Look I'm not the biggest Tarantino fan in the world, I like a lot of his work but you are not going to get me into a discussion of how he is the greatest thing ever but I would be lying if I said that his work, and the work of his Rolling Thunder Pictures didn't open new doors for me to explore and for that he has my thanks. He is very much a product of what he has seen & experienced over the years. Tarantino has the means & the control to make his version of certain themes, styles & genres and he takes advantage of that. I personally find most of it entertaining, if generally slight but that is okay because a lot of what influenced those works were very often entertaining, if slight as well. Most directors would kill to recieve the kind of media acceptance Tarantino has and I would be willing to bet that everyone of them would use that acceptance & status to make the films they want to make, not to make the films they think other people think they should be making.

[exte]

I totally agree with Harold. And what's so bad if kids who are 18 and 20 years old only know Quentin yet? I think it's only the beginning if they're serious about studying filmmaking. They shouldn't have to be well versed in Ozu just to get into these institutions, imo. And there was once a time when only Blockbuster existed for most blue collar/middle class neighborhoods. Not everyone has a Kim's to their disposal. And I think with the help of the internet, people can and will be able to look deeper into film history much easier, and with greater guidance, perhaps... Maybe I'm full of it, I don't know.

[Antoine Doinel]

I am also pleased to hear someone speak out against the other forces/films which are skewing the views of young people in America today. I am sick of hearing about Star Wars, Tarantino, and the idea that independent film was born in the 90s.

Of course independent cinema wasn't born in the 90s, but the popularity, and awards success of Pulp Fiction made it much easier for independent projects to find financing and distribution.

[rs98762001]

Tarantino's initial impact is beyond question. But there has not been a single film of any worth, either directed or influenced by him, in the last ten years.

[DrewReiber]

Of course independent cinema wasn't born in the 90s, but the popularity, and awards success of Pulp Fiction made it much easier for independent projects to find financing and distribution.

It's true that Pulp Fiction helped independent filmmaking rise during that time, but people are also still calling Pulp Fiction an independent film. That's makes it an even bigger misconception.

The director of Wild Hogs graduated from USC School of Cinema-Television.

That has nothing to do with what I said. I was specifically referencing the Scary Movie formula for referential pop culture "humor". The legalities and cost of the genre, as well as it's a-minute-later-it's-dated humor, makes it too pointless a niche to carve as a film student.

Embarrassing messes like Wild Hogs are simply star vehicles where you only need to be a hack, because the marketing and distribution takes care of the rest. Offensive desperate junk like this can be tracked back to forever, and much like Scary Movie, do not provide much for emulation because they are entirely contigent upon a set number of circumstances provided by the studio system.

I think your problem with these films have far more to do with the current American monopoly over production and distribution. The only connection to film schools is the tiny relationship that some studios hold with LA-based universities that serve as a place to harvest "shooters" to do the dirty work. You just need to be at the right place at the right time. I think that's a discussion that sits entirely outside the larger issues I'm addressing in regards to the general film school environment.

And not every film school student is setting out to make their Citizen Kane either. And by your own admission, they are probably going to be making a bunch of faux-Snatch films.

I wouldn't expect or need them to be Citizen Kane either. I would just like to see more unique voices, and less cookie cutter attempts to replicate the most obvious in commercial filmmaking. It reminds me of a conversation I had with George Romero once, where he talked about how film festivals were disappointing because that's what most of the directors aspired to be.

And what's so bad if kids who are 18 and 20 years old only know Quentin yet?

Because 9 times out of 10 they're not interested in anything else. I've had to fight tooth and nail with people to get them stop calling anything that uses 70's stock footage "just like a Tarantino movie". Some came around, but it took years. I think Tarantino absolutely wants people to discover these films for themselves, but his actual work does not foster any desire to do so. His aesthetics seem more pleased with recreating his experiences of watching the movies than progressing the designs or subtext of the films themselves.

They shouldn't have to be well versed in Ozu just to get into these institutions, imo.

Of course not! I sure as Hell wasn't, but then I made every effort to get better about studying film. A third or less of the students accepted each year ever learned to appreciate films older than they are, while most of them are completely dilusional about what they're going to do "in the movies". A number of those people only get into filmmaking to push their emotional problems onto others through the reward of attention-getting.

As I mentioned before, some of them do it just to create a fantasy construct that only they can understand and thus use as a form of escapism similar to watching transparent melodrama. These are not people who wish to make use of form or even understand it, they simply need the same positive reinforcement they were used to getting from friends and family before they left high school. Here.

Check out Sacred Agent Man and The Light. Whenever this guy shows up at school, he feels he has to do backflips to impress everyone while also dominating any conversation he had nothing to do with in the first place. He's a ticking time bomb and the detonator has Jesus' face on it. This guy is *in* the film program too. He's definitely one of the worst cases and refuses to do assignments that involve "gays" because he "can't be involved with people who are going to Hell". Enjoy the videos.

And there was once a time when only Blockbuster existed for most blue collar/middle class neighborhoods. Not everyone has a Kim's to their disposal. And I think with the help of the internet, people can and will be able to look deeper into film history much easier, and with greater guidance, perhaps... Maybe I'm full of it, I don't know.

You're not full of it, it's just that you have to remember that not everyone holds the interest to delve outside of what is familiar. I remember when my history class screened W.R. Mysteries of the Organism and all of a sudden people started excusing themselves one by one. This friend of mine actually stuck her head behind my back to avert her eyes from the sex and nudity. These were adults.

Yes, we absolutely have an unprecedented amount of access to film that has never existed in it's history, yet people are far less motivated than ever to *think*. We're on a Criterion forum and the sad fact is we simply do not represent the majority of the film enthusiast community. Film fans have the option to be more experienced in film but not only do they turn down this extraordinary opportunity, they actively reject it even when they're at school to learn about it. I dealt with this for the 5 years I was studying there, and the faculty... I'm sure it will have been (or will be) however long they teach there. It's just reallly frustrating and sad.

[Antoine Doinel]

It reminds me of a conversation I had with George Romero once, where he talked about how film festivals were disappointing because that's what most of the directors aspired to be.

....from a director who has been pretty much recycled his one original theme into the ground for decades.

[DrewReiber]

....from a director who has been pretty much recycled his one original theme into the ground for decades.

[Floyd]

Did anyone see that show Iconoclasts on Sundance where it paired the wonderful Fiona Apple with Quentin Tarantino? I suppose she knows him because PT Anderson and Tarantino are pals. The whole show was virtually Fiona sitting there in silence while Tarantino talked about himself and how everything he does relates to sexual climaxes.

If you considered him self absorbed this show certainly wouldn't change that thought. The oddest part was Tarantino in a sleeveless shirt watching Fiona Apple play. It was a bit creepy.

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

Never seen it, but searched for it on YouTube.

That should be all of them.

Edit: Besides the sleeveless shirt being creppy, he has a huge painting of himself behind him. Creepier.

[malcolm1980]

I'm a fan of Fiona Apple's music plus Quentin Tarantino's pretty much the reason why I'm posting in this site. He started it all when I saw Pulp Fiction. LOL.

So thanks for that post.

[lord_clyde]

I'm a fan of Fiona Apple's music plus Quentin Tarantino's pretty much the reason why I'm posting in this site. He started it all when I saw Pulp Fiction. LOL.

Yeah, me too. I give the guy shit but way back in the day when I was just getting serious about film and looking desperately for "masterpieces" I turned to the AFI top 100 and started from the bottom. I reached Pulp Fiction and stopped, because I had no time to watch the rest of the list - I was watching Pulp Fiction four or five times a day.

[Cinesimilitude]

Pulp Fiction was a Catalyst for me, not a milestone. It opened my mind to new ways of seeing movies, and new kinds of movies. I went directly to Reservoir Dogs which I loved even more (It's Still my favorite Tarantino film). I loved Harvey Keitel in that movie, and when I saw a list of some of his favorite movies in some magazine that I can't remember the title to, Cinema Paradiso was high on the list. It was the first foreign film I saw, and it spawned my love for all things Italian. When I was looking at foreign film info online, I discovered that George Lucas' Star Wars (the films that ignited my passion at the age of 7) took elements from Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress. I bought my first criterion and the rest is history.

[Narshty]

The BBC's excellent Omnibus documentary on Tarantino made just as Pulp Fiction was opening in the UK.

Nice to hear that, SDM. There's no shame in one's starting points to exploring different kinds of movies.

[exte]

Fucking awesome!

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

He's the reason I discovered Criterion, kinda. Well, 8 1/2 was my first one, a gift from my brother who only knew the soundtrack (classical music buff), and I really, really wanted Rushmore (unaware of it's Criterion status), but I heard about the movie Bande a Parte because of his production company. Got my first paycheck at my first job (Quizno's) and picked up Band of Outsiders. I quickly realized it was a part of a grander collection.

Thanks to Tarantino, I'm watching as many movies as I am. Now, I can't really hate the guy for that, and thank him.

[teddyleevin]

The BBC's excellent Omnibus documentary on Tarantino made just as Pulp Fiction was opening in the UK.

Nice to hear that, SDM. There's no shame in one's starting points to exploring different kinds of movies.

Very nice! I recognized Gilliam's voice before he appeared. Its always great to see him. This is a great find!

[exte]

I never, ever saw anything that had Gilliam and Tarantino in the same picture, talking about the same thing. The fact that Gilliam was his champion from the beginning just blows my mind. Talk about validity!

And I can't thank Quentin enough for introducing me to Chungking Express. I absolutely adore that movie, and can't recommend it enough...