Tarantino = Overrated??

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by pacificvibes

Why on earth would you bump a 6 month old thread just to say that you're still mad at him about the name he called you in December of LAST YEAR?!?!? Really dude?

Fake Artsy types are touchy... best not to poke at them too much.

Logan

[repete66211]

Originally Posted by J. J. Hunsecker

Personally, I love Reservoir Dogs, and like Jackie Brown. That's about it. I've hated every other project he's either written or directed. The two films I've mentioned by him are the only ones that seem to have genuine human emotions and responses in them. The rest are self-indulgent, campy, empty paeans to trash culture.

Bravo, well done.

[franklinpross]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Indeed.

SQUID?
Is jeff daniels on your GOOD ACTOR list yet?

[repete66211]

Originally Posted by awongshing

Before Pulp Fiction I don’t remember films not going in chronological order with the expectation that the audience would to be smart enough to put the time line in order.

A director named Quentin Tarantino did it two years earlier in a movie called Reservoir Dogs.

[upswiseass]

Death Proof is the only QT movie that I haven't rewatched thus far. I don't find his work overrated, and look forward to seeing Basterds this weekend. To each his own I guess.

[Pondosinatra]

He also produced? Co-wrote? a good movie a few years ago called Killing Zoe...it starred Tim Roth and Julie Delpy. It was about a bank heist gone wrong in Paris.

[katharsis]

I have to say that I really enjoy all of his works. Either directed or written by him. Sure, sometimes you might think he is overrated, or your expectations are set really high every time a new film gets released and you might end up walking out disappointed. Happened to me before... However after repeat viewings his films really grow on you! There is just so much detail put into it, that you have to watch it several times to really enjoy every little bit of it and yet you will never stop to finding new things, or crossovers to his other films.

It's great and he definitely started some kind of cult.

I also think that him and Robert Rodriguez brought back a niche of films and made them more mainstream (El Mariachi, Grindhouse even Inglourious Basterds or Hell Ride that was produced by QT).

Might be true that a lot of people new to his films will not enjoy some of his earlier works, as they are aging, but if you look at the time it was released (take Reservoir Dogs as an example) there was nothing else like it back then.

I truly hope he will continue to bring us new movies for many years to come!

[Coqui2k]

I think Tarantino is very talented, unlike Michael Bay

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Originally Posted by SonOfArathorn

Overrated? Not to me, I know enough about my own film making skills to know that neither I nor any of you people could do what he does. Yes unique doesn't mean good, but it means fresh, new, people will always like to see something fresh and new.
When he first came onto the scene his movies were like nothing else, when an entire genre is spawned because of you; you are not overrrated at all.

What genre has Taratino spawned? As far as I know, he's made pictures based on established genres from the past: Reservoir Dogs is like the heist films of the 40's and 50's; Pulp Fiction is a mishmash of old crime films he liked; Deathproof is his ode to low budget exploitation films of the early 70's; Kill Bill is a combo of Asian martial arts films and spaghetti westerns, etc.

I understand how you could find Tarantino's movies unique, but he also borrows heavily from older films. Reservoir Dogs uses the last 15 minutes of the Hong Kong film City on Fire (1987) for its plot, and the use of color pseudonyms from The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974). Pulp Fiction uses some bits of dialog from Charlie Varrick (1973) and the Sonny Chiba movie Karate Kiba (AKA The Bodyguard).

His "uniqueness" comes from how he puts his pastiches together.

[Coqui2k]

Originally Posted by J. J. Hunsecker

What genre has Taratino spawned? As far as I know, he's made pictures based on established genres from the past: Reservoir Dogs is like the heist films of the 40's and 50's; Pulp Fiction is a mishmash of old crime films he liked; Deathproof is his ode to low budget exploitation films of the early 70's; Kill Bill is a combo of Asian martial arts films and spaghetti westerns, etc.

I understand how you could find Tarantino's movies unique, but he also borrows heavily from older films. Reservoir Dogs uses the last 15 minutes of the Hong Kong film City on Fire (1987) for its plot, and the use of color pseudonyms from The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974). Pulp Fiction uses some bits of dialog from Charlie Varrick (1973) and the Sonny Chiba movie Karate Kiba (AKA The Bodyguard).

His "uniqueness" comes from how he puts his pastiches together.

His still a good director with talent unlike Michael Bay

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Originally Posted by awongshing

Before Pulp Fiction I don’t remember films not going in chronological order with the expectation that the audience would to be smart enough to put the time line in order. This is something that has been done in several films since Pulp Fiction.

A few that come to mind:

Citizen Kane (1941) -- some of the flashbacks are out of sequence, or jump through time, or we see the same events but through different perspectives depending on who is telling the story.

The Killing (1956) -- the time shifting occurs during the racetrack heist, where we see the same events from the point of view of the different robbers.

Images (1972) -- disjointed nonlinear storytelling due to the fact that the main character is insane.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Originally Posted by Coqui2k

His still a good director with talent unlike Michael Bay

I wasn't saying he was a poor director. As I mentioned before, I happen to like two of his movies. I was just pointing out that he didn't spawn genres, but instead renewed interest in older, dormant genres.

[Coqui2k]

Originally Posted by J. J. Hunsecker

I wasn't saying he was a poor director. As I mentioned before, I happen to like two of his movies. I was just pointing out that he didn't spawn genres, but instead renewed interest in older, dormant genres.

I agree with you

[awongshing]

Originally Posted by J. J. Hunsecker

A few that come to mind:

Citizen Kane (1941) -- some of the flashbacks are out of sequence, or jump through time, or we see the same events but through different perspectives depending on who is telling the story.

The Killing (1956) -- the time shifting occurs during the racetrack heist, where we see the same events from the point of view of the different robbers.

Images (1972) -- disjointed nonlinear storytelling due to the fact that the main character is insane.

The only one of these movies I've seen is Citizen Kane but it was LONG time ago. I know there are several flash backs. I made myself watch it when I was a teenager. I forced myself to watch it. i should watch it again I might enjoy it better now. Thanks for the good info.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by franklinpross

SQUID?
Is jeff daniels on you GOOD ACTOR list yet?

Great in Starman and Tron Crap in the Big Lebowski

[Sponge-worthy]

Originally Posted by Monkey

Great in Starman and Tron Crap in the Big Lebowski

Jeff Bridges maybe??

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I've been told numerous stories about Quentin, none of them good, by people who were very jealous of him and threatened by him. If half of the stories are true, then I can't say I respect Quentin as a man, but it is impossible to not respect his place in film history.

Really? C'mon, man, give me the gossip!

I know Tarantino's former writing partner, Roger Avary, said of Quentin, "I've realized that I can't hang out with him. I talk with him, and he just sucks stuff from me." That's the only bad thing I've heard about the man, though.

[hc666]

I love most of his movies but yeah he is overrated... he craps like the rest of us haha

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by J. J. Hunsecker

Really? C'mon, man, give me the gossip!

I know Tarantino's former writing partner, Roger Avary, said of Quentin, "I've realized that I can't hang out with him. I talk with him, and he just sucks stuff from me." That's the only bad thing I've heard about the man, though.

Well, the stuff I've heard is secondhand, by people who are jealous and resentful, and it wouldn't be productive for anyone to repeat here. As far as Mr. Avary goes, just know that essentially he feels Tarantino has stolen all the credit for Pulp Fiction and they've had a major falling out over it.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Well, the stuff I've heard is secondhand, by people who are jealous and resentful, and it wouldn't be productive for anyone to repeat here. As far as Mr. Avary goes, just know that essentially he feels Tarantino has stolen all the credit for Pulp Fiction and they've had a major falling out over it.

From what I've read, it seems like it is common knowledge that Tarantino based several scenes in Pulp Fiction on Avary's script "Pandemonium Reigns," including the bits about the gold watch, the rape scene in the pawn shop, Marvin's accidental shooting in the car, and the bullets missing Vince and Jules. Tarantino admitted as much in a Playboy interview. Avary was upset about not getting screenwriting credit, not the fact that Tarantino took his ideas and reworked them.

It may be a case of "success has many fathers while failure is always an orphan." Of course one would want some credit for one of the most acclaimed films of the last fifteen years. I'm sure if the movie had bombed or turned out poorly, we wouldn't hear about Avary's uncredited contributions.

Taratino has always been rather tight-lipped about acknowledging where he got some of his ideas, it seems in order to create the illusion that they were original. He's never admitted that City on Fire was used as the basis for Reservoir Dogs, for instance.

I understand that you don't want to air what amounts to hearsay on these public boards. If only there was a way to hear these rumors in private. Maybe if I could read, say, a message where no one else could see it. If only these forums had such a way!