Cool idea. Looks like Pulp will be the retrospective film!
only 35 votes so far in total. don’t be so quick, putney 
oh shit the poll closed automatically june 30. that was my bad. everyone vote please. i don’t plan on closing this anytime soon
Oh I thought voting was almost over. We’ll see what happens then!
Wasn’t it supposed to close at the end of this month?
yeah that was my bad…
[quote=“Kinick”]
Wasn’t it supposed to close at the end of this month?
[/quote]
it was, but since not enough people really votes, i thought that was bs. so now it’s open till we reach like around 100 votes so it’s more representative. i also want to catch a few ideas on what to do with it
Gotha. Things seem pretty quiet however. People need a kick up the back side…
FDTD. I know a lot about the others.
For me, FDTD or TR would be better films to revisit than the more popular ones. Pulp Fiction has been examined from so many diff angles over the years. Dogs too. Id like to go back and look at the films that are a bit less recognized by the popular film community.
I say we put My Best Friends Birthday in the mix…
[quote=“ParaNicole”]
I say we put My Best Friends Birthday in the mix…
[/quote]
not a bad idea
Definitely FDTD! I haven’t seen this film for months… Pulp Fiction is my favourite and I believe RD is his best but we talk about them all the time! He didn’t direct it but he is in the movie! And actually his role is really cool! I love watching him, he’s totally hot!
Yeah, My Best Friends Birthday would be neat too. Id like to hear more about it and maybe look at how QTs first effort helped him learn about the craft. Something we havent discussed over and over would be nice.
Not that I’m preferring it to QT’s other masterpieces, but Pulp Fiction, to this day, remains the movie that gets and keeps his fans talking more than any other, as if the script’s dialogue continues long after the movie is over. So, it definitely has my vote.
Great plan re the retrospective idea, Id quite like to see something on Four Rooms (as I think its a little gem), specifically QTs man from hollywood section of course.
xb
[quote=“PutneySwope”]
For me, FDTD or TR would be better films to revisit than the more popular ones. Pulp Fiction has been examined from so many diff angles over the years. Dogs too. Id like to go back and look at the films that are a bit less recognized by the popular film community.
[/quote]
I agree.
Dear Sebastian, my experience in seeing QT films is not great; I suggest in this case to propose “Death proof” or “Four rooms”, that are the best films I’ve seen. Many greetings, G. Giuricin Grado ITALY 8) 8)
I voted for Reservoir dogs
[quote]
Ok, here are my thoughts:
It’s obvious that QT doesn’t have the vast filmography directors like Scorsese, Hitchcock, Ford and Spielberg boast. However, that is not to say that a retrospective cannot be written on a Tarantino-related film. It is of my assumption that Kill Bill and Death Proof are far too recent to be considered. They are relatively fresh in the minds of fans and the media and therefore it wouldn’t really feel like we are looking back on them. So that leaves us with an even limited number of options. Let’s state them now; Reservoir Dogs, True Romance, Pulp Fiction, Natural Born Killers, Four Rooms, From Dusk Till Dawn and Jackie Brown.
To break it down -
- Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown are on one table. All written and directed by QT, and therefore there would be PLENTY to discuss. This option is reasonable because you could approach either film from virtually any angle of discussion. If there is an aspect that has had a lack of focus since the films were made, this can be taken advantage of. It is perhaps relevant to point out that JB has often been overlooked in favour of his prior two efforts.
- True Romance, Natural Born Killers and From Dusk Till Dawn belong to another table. All of which were somehow written by QT. Here, although directorial aspects cannot be discussed (for the most part), an interesting discussion about the writing can be the main focus. Perhaps the relationship between QT’s original vision compared with that of the director’s can be discussed.
- Four Rooms and Natural Born Killers (again) are on another table. Here, there seems to be very little output from QT relatively speaking. Consequently, there isn’t as wide an area of discussion open to you. However, it is advantageous in that you could go into detail on a lesser aspect and really explore QT’s dynamic. In addition, there hasn’t been as much talk about these films from the fans. In the case of NBK, you would have to compare QT’s original script to that of Oliver Stone’s final product. The question is, how do these two films have a bearing on the future Quentin Tarantino as a filmmaker.
All three options would be appealing in some way. Of course within each option, you would have to concentrate on one film. At the end of the day, it is determinant on what you think would be the most interesting option to explore during this time. What is the flavour of the month, so-to-speak. It is worth bearing in mind that people can be told what is in fashion, you can make your own fashion and convince them it’s what they want!!
From another angle, on the one hand, RD, JB and PF have been discussed to a larger extent than TR, NBK, FR and FDTD and therefore a retrospective on these latter films would be a fresher idea. On the other hand, by choosing the former films, you are doing a retrospective on what is essentially a pure Quentin Tarantino work, with many potential aspects open to you.
I have mentioned “aspects” a few times. What are these aspects? Well I would consider the following:
Film Aspects
- General Direction (Actor movement + placement, camera placement, foreground, background, use of props)
- Camera movement (What? How? Why? Impact on scene)
- Directorial techniques (split screen, trunk shots, long shots, wide angle shots, overhead shots, why he uses them, what they mean)
- Acting (Bringing out the best. Common factor? Reference to past filmic characters. Choice of actor.)
- Characterisation (A common factor between characters? What techniques?)
- Story + Plot (What? Why? How? References, influences, similarities + differences, impact)
- Dialogue (Why those words? Common phrases? Rhythm, melodic, rhyme, alliteration, metaphors, use of syllables)
- Music (Parallel with visuals? Why those choices? Start/Stop moments, viewer impact, source music)
- Sound (References, influences, choice, impact)
- Colour (Tone? Feeling? Why?)
- Text (Opening credits, subtitles, screen text, end credits)
- Place in film history (influences, copy-cat work)
Director Aspects
- Progression
- Improvements
- Aesthetic
- Signature shots
- Choice of film
- Relation with his other films
Other Aspects
- What does it mean for QT, personally?
- Deleted scenes
- Unfilmed scenes
- Who else was involved, why, to what extent?
- Real life events/people having a bearing
Personally, I am very much interested in QT’s writing. I have on occasion posted my thoughts (essay-like sometimes, lol) regarding this aspect. I am into word play a lot, and I believe QT is a brilliant wordsmith. I don’t want to get too much into it, but there is definitely more to his writing than the average ear can hear (see what I did there?!). It’s a shame there hasn’t been much focus on this aspect of his ability, but it’s true that it’s quite a difficult one to explore. You really have to know your stuff. Therefore, the films I would most want a retrospective on would be one in which his writing (dialogue an all) could be extensively discussed. My preference would lie between RD, PF and TR as these were 100% written by QT. Specifically, my vote would go towards Pulp Fiction.
I hope I have helped you in some way. Good luck with your decision. I look forward to reading the retrospective.
[/quote]
from a nocturnal email from Ify