Quentin Tarantino

[A Tempted Christ]

QT ideally should have taken the time to factcheck his own manuscript.

That seems to be the major problem artists face when they want to write a book. I remember Bob Dylan saying he didn't have a problem with writing future volumes of Chronicles and it was actually the rereading and editing that was holding them back from being published.

[colinr0380]

To play devil's advocate though, and whilst it would be nice for a thorough fact checking by a third party, I might argue that you don't really go to Tarantino for hard facts (his recent films prove that!) but enthusiasm and his particular voice that overrides truth with memories of how it felt to him, and should have been in his perfect world. And this is from someone who had to put the book aside in annoyance for the evening when I got to the sentence where he summarily dismisses The Unbearable Lightness of Being as "The Unbearable Boredom of Watching"!

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

And this is from someone who had to put the book aside in annoyance for the evening when I got to the sentence where he summarily dismisses The Unbearable Lightness of Being as "The Unbearable Boredom of Watching"!

I totally understand that this is film criticism specifically filtered through Tarantino, so I’m not expecting academic fact checking. A lot of the best information is anecdotal! But your specific reference above shows that he taps into his worst instincts with this book. When he references his own films, he clearly thinks incredibly highly of them, but is willing to go as far as bland jokes like that to criticize other films. The worst part is when he’s complaining about a Los Angeles based critic (who DOES sound bad) and refers to him as a “fat ass” twice as a joke. It unfortunately doesn’t land.

I have a very high opinion of Tarantino as a writer/director. I also think his films have aged superbly as unlike a lot of his contemporaries, he was ahead with thinking about race and gender in his work specifically because of the hodge-podge working class culture he grew up in and the sorts of odd movies he digested (this includes the transgressive elements in his films too which still make people uncomfortable today). But I just don’t think that’s necessarily transferable to another type of work and seeing how little oversight he has with this book sort of sways him into being sloppy. I think making a book that’s film criticism by way of biography is a good idea, but it doesn’t quite work here.

The better alternative to this book is his podcast Video Archives. I don’t listen to film podcasts, but decided to listen when it first came out. I hate the commercials Tarantino does with his goofy voice, but hearing him and Roger Avary reflect on the past while also talking about these older movies is more enjoyable, partly because he has Avary and his daughter, Gala, to bounce off of. It’s also clear that due to Tarantino’s level in the industry, he has direct connections to people most podcasters would never have. I was shocked when discussing Mikey and Nicky, he talks about calling up Elaine May with a list of questions.

[Maltic]

A few years ago, he made an appearance on Eli Roth's podcast about the history of horror films, a hugely enjoyable "lightning round". Importantly, when films he wasn't enthusiastic about came up - e.g. the Corman/Price Poe films (he preferred Val Guest Price) - he tended to move on quickly instead of rationalizing...

[ford]

I was shocked when discussing Mikey and Nicky, he talks about calling up Elaine May with a list of questions.

That was a very cool moment. Great podcast. Really enjoyed their one on The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes as well.

[tolbs1010]

And this is from someone who had to put the book aside in annoyance for the evening when I got to the sentence where he summarily dismisses The Unbearable Lightness of Being as "The Unbearable Boredom of Watching"!

This makes me want to read his book. I wish more filmmakers would share unfiltered opinions about other films/filmmakers, whether in an extensive critique or brief, pithy comments like this one. When one of the most popular Directors working in the medium is willing to talk honestly about what he likes and doesn't like, people take notice and have a chance to debate with that opinion. It's entertaining whether I agree with the opinion or not. Film needs any kind of buzz, discussion, and debate it can get at this point.

I happen to agree with Tarantino's comment in this case, and I say that as someone who enjoyed Kundera's book and is generally a fan of Philip Kaufman's films. The film IS kind of a bore. It doesn't find a way to enliven the philosophical underpinnings that are the heart of the book. The characters' personal and political quandaries are flat. It is also one of only two examples I can recall of Daniel Day-Lewis being miscast (The Age Of Innocence being the other).

[colinr0380]

I would agree that it is nice to see filmmakers being forthright with their opinions. However that brief mention really just felt like an update of his Enchanted April slam from back at the time when Reservoir Dogs was in competition with it, with as much consideration towards choosing the target as in the previous comment. I was willing to take Tarantino's word on how boring Enchanted April was (especially now that it has vanished into obscurity) but with Unbearable Lightness of Being I draw the line! Although I do like to think that in that dismissal Tarantino is revealing something key to his philosophical outlook: for him you can have all the dialogue you want as long as it is actually leading somewhere (usually to a big cathartically bloody massacre), whereas Unbearable Lightness of Being is much more reticent (more mature?) about that, where the invasion comes but you don't murder all the invaders in a grand cinematically suicidal gesture but instead become rootless refugees with the memory of home and those you had to leave behind still strong inside you. And I could definitely see Tarantino being upset by the way that the film completely elides the final tragic deaths of the main couple to focus on the reaction of Sabina in the US to receiving the news of their fatal accident. I have not read the source novel but, as a film, Unbearable Lightness of Being feels almost diametrically opposed to everything about Tarantino.

[dwk]

Funnily enough, on one of the Video Archives podcasts Tarantino refused to comment on what he thought about Mank. Saying he was not going to comment on a peer's film. I assume this meanr he didn't care for it, but wasn't going to say that publicly.

[domino harvey]

Isn't he friends with PTA? PTA's spoken repeatedly about how he refuses to badmouth other films publicly and chastised his friend John Krasinski for doing so. Tarantino is so much his own brand that he doesn't really need to follow the rules, though, especially since everyone in the industry already hates him for his wiiiiiild ego trip on the Oscar circuit for OUATIH where he behaved as though he'd already won the screenplay Oscar

[Maltic]

The Unbearable Lightness of Being was released 35 years ago though, to be fair, and Kaufman long since retired.

QT is a weird guy with weird opinions, which is fine (although funnily enough, sometimes he isn't as weird as he thinks he is). Take Scorsese, I love him too obviously, but at times can be a little bland and safe. I'm not sure I've heard him shit on a film except Marvel, or even praise a film that wasn't what you might call, in good taste. Esoteric stuff, sure, but usually safe.

[hearthesilence]

Tarantino definitely was friends with Anderson at one time, but the only anecdotes I can recall are from Fiona Apple, and they came at a very unflattering time in Anderson's life. It's possible their relationship has evolved as they have individually overtime. (They've all mellowed out in their personal lives to various degrees, but I imagine Anderson moreso since he's now raising a family.)

Scorsese has always been better about not criticizing his peers. He was open about that policy early on whereas Tarantino was kind of the opposite. (Tarantino was certainly vocal about how much he disliked Kelly Reichardt's films, which is probably why she's been less hesitant to express her own opinions on his films.)

[domino harvey]

I feel like we were talking about this somewhere else on the board, because Chabrol also publicly stated in interviews later in life that he no longer had any interest in talking about directors or films he didn't like (including those long dead already)

[yoloswegmaster]

I wouldn't be surprised if he the reason he didn't publically trash Mank is because he is friends with Fincher. Either that or he doesn't want to get on the bad side of the Mank-heads (or "Mankers" as we like to be called).

[therewillbeblus]

Tarantino definitely was friends with Anderson at one time, but the only anecdotes I can recall are from Fiona Apple, and they came at a very unflattering time in Anderson's life. It's possible their relationship has evolved as they have individually overtime. (They've all mellowed out in their personal lives to various degrees, but I imagine Anderson moreso since he's now raising a family.)

They've interviewed each other about their respective films quite recently in videos that clearly indicate not only mutual respect but a reciprocal friendship, and I've heard accounts that they still spend time together, at least right before Tarantino got married and had a kid. Life happens and friendships change, but they've had a documented relationship well beyond the youthful coke days Apple resurfaced recently to diagnose being around their irritating banter as the BS "reason she got sober" or whatever

[Penti Mento]

Tarantino was certainly vocal about how much he disliked Kelly Reichardt's films, which is probably why she's been less hesitant to express her own opinions on his films.

I was not aware of this, but it makes sense. She's over educated, and in fact teaches, whereas he is one of the more well known autodidacts in any medium. They both make or have made genre films, though the accuracy or depth of that assignation varies for each filmmaker and depending on the project. I find her and her work typical of academia, self-regarding and schematic, and his work after (and before, somewhat) Jackie Brown to be a frustrating admixture of amusing but puerile. I'm guessing she has a more thorough understanding of real history, from primary sources, and he, despite claims of reading this or that source, has garnered most of his history from films or other pop culture, and I could see how these two diametric approaches to subject matter rub each other the wrong way. I find her films like watching paint dry while being lectured at, and his historical "correctives" nothing more than escapism and a chance to "insert" himself in the record as a good guy. That last is a very strange approach and I'm struggling to think of another artist so obsessed with that sort of thinking.

As for his book, I found it awful to the last word, for many reasons already given here, slipshod (non-existent) editing and proofing, by the numbers obvious choices of films to discuss (would much rather have seen him talk about classic musicals, silent films, something very contemporary, old documentaries, etc.) and for the most part entirely expected takes on those films. I couldn't decide if the personal interjections were revealing or embarrassing, and those digressions seemed more false the further along I read. This is little better than Harry Knowles.

[nicolas]

Jackie Brown, Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 4K UHD editions (all separate releases) have been listed at the first retailer. Credit to Pieter V at Br.com for finding this.

[eerik]

Jackie Brown, Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 4K UHD editions (all separate releases) have been listed at the first retailer. Credit to Pieter V at Br.com for finding this.

All three coming from Lionsgate and not from Paramount/Miramax. :-k

Edit: nevermind, looks like this move was announced already a year ago

[therewillbeblus]

Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 4K UHD editions (all separate releases)

Hopefully they do a combo pack down the line so we're not paying double for one movie

[nicolas]

Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 4K UHD editions (all separate releases)

Hopefully they do a combo pack down the line so we're not paying double for one movie

I can imagine they're doing this as a retailer-exclusive Steelbook. They'll be exploiting these titles as best as possible.

[domino harvey]

Tarantino is doing some kind of arrogance world tour so I have been regularly exposed to excerpts of his unchecked ego against my will. However, I thought this self-assessment was interesting:

“‘Kill Bill’ is the movie I was born to make”
“‘Inglourious Basterds’ is my masterpiece”
“‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’ is my fave”

[pistolwink]

His levels of self-regard are so off the charts, it'd be more convenient if he weren't such a talented filmmaker.

[hearthesilence]

I'm pretty sure I've posted this before - likely after I saw him talk about himself to Charlie Rose while promoting Inglourious Basterds - but whenever he discusses his work, he talks like he's his own biggest fan, and it's pretty much why I've avoided his interviews since then.

[hearthesilence]

Charlie Rose has transcripts for everything online so yeah, probably that one:

Charlie Rose: But you sat down here and you and I were talking about how much we both love Uma Thurman, and you said you think "Kill Bill" is maybe your best movie.

Quentin Tarantino: Well, it's like -- well, it's definitely my most personal movie. I mean, forever when people would ask me what my favorite film is of mine, I almost felt like sacrilege to say anything but "Reservoir Dogs," because it just changed my life. And there will never be that again, you know. And I actually think it's kind of a perfect movie for what it is, and actually it has been 17 years so I can actually say that now without sounding like I'm self-aggrandizing myself. It's just what it is. But I watched "Kill Bill Volume 2" just about a month ago, I think maybe spurred on because of David Carradine dying. And I screened a print at my house and watched it, just by myself. And at that moment, it was -- actually became my favorite movie I've ever done. I actually enjoyed it so much. And you know, when I was like joking before about that masterpiece line when it comes to this, would I like this to be my masterpiece? Yes, I would like each new movie to be my masterpiece. And this one has got a lot behind it. But truthfully, as far as me judging it, it would be -- I would need at least three years of distance to actually really see where it would fit in my oeuvre.

I also remember the uncomfortable look Tarantino had when he listened to Rose read a negative review:

Charlie Rose: All right, a couple of criticisms. One, actually you once were on this program with some critics, who had a nice interesting discussion about film. This is David Denby of "The New Yorker." "Inglourious Basterds is not boring, but it's ridiculously and appallingly insensitive. A Louisville slugger applied to the head of anyone who has ever taken the Nazis, the war or the resistance seriously. Not that Tarantino intends any malice towards such earnest people. The Nazis for him are merely available movie troops, articulate monsters with a talent for sadism. By making the Americans cruel too, he escapes the customary division of good and evil along national lines, but he escapes any sense of moral accountability as well. In a Tarantino movie, everyone commits atrocities. Like all the director's work after "Jackie Brown," the movie becomes pure sensation."

Quentin Tarantino: Now, OK, but one thing, OK. It's hard to talk about that criticism about yourself without sounding defensive. All right? But the thing about it is, you could actually say that exact same sentence and put a positive spin on it, and that would be actually a positive thing, all right? Because it is a method. I actually do have a thing where I don't -- I actually make it a point not to apply morality to my -- I am not Quentin being this moral judge on my characters any more than an actor can really terrifically be a moral judge.

[Zot!]

We’re just catching up with this now? He’s always been totally insufferable AND suprisingly talented. I haven’t even liked anything since Kill Bill, but will continue to acknowledge his knowledge and competence at his craft.

[tolbs1010]

I've always enjoyed his chutzpah. It's refreshing compared to the studied modesty of many filmmakers in interviews or Q&As. He gives actual opinions instead of guarded non-answers.