QT & Violence

General Quentin Tarantino talk
savage_henry
Hard Drinker
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: manchester

Re: QT - violence

Post by savage_henry » Mon May 09, 2005 5:04 pm

ok here it is, just found it! smart spokeswoman if u ask me



Bloody film sells bus ride scheme:

Gangster movie Reservoir Dogs is being used to promote a park-and-ride bus service. its cast line-up os recreated in the posters featuring bus drivers walking in dark suits, white shirts and black sunglasses.

The bloodthirsty 1992 film's slogan 'Lets go to work' is also used to encourage commuters to use the scheme, in Norwich.

'The film is also very funny and sends a message that violence is futile,' a council spokeswoman said. But protesters say it is inappropriate. 'There is an issue about assaults on bus drivers,' one added.

savage_henry
Hard Drinker
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: manchester

Re: QT - violence

Post by savage_henry » Mon May 09, 2005 5:05 pm

doh! just scrolled down your link, yeah its the same story  ::)

User avatar
OsuFan45
Kiddo
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 10:28 pm
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: QT - violence

Post by OsuFan45 » Mon May 09, 2005 8:11 pm

well i would have to agree with everyone on this topic but that green asshole just find a nice anti-Tarantiono site (that would be rare) and then u and everyone that is there can start sucking your guy's dicks while your talking about how QT is a bad film maker. ok? so.....
shut the Fuck up!  shut the Fuck up!
"Mabe I am not on the the list but i think my friend Georgey is."
"Are you trying to bribe me?"
"No sir "
"Just add a little King Tut right there."

The Return of the ReJects

RazorCharlie

Re: QT - violence

Post by RazorCharlie » Thu Jun 02, 2005 8:37 pm

I just read an article in the Orlando Weekly about some group that releases sanitized versions of DVDs and it mentions how they won't try to do a version of Pulp Fiction because there is too much to remove including, apparently, over 400 uses of the word Fuck, which I never really noticed. It should be somewhere on www.orlandoweekly.com

BMF_julues

Re: QT - violence

Post by BMF_julues » Sun Jun 05, 2005 9:19 pm

Well those people are fuckin idiots because PF only uses fuck 270 ish times. Now RD uses it 300 times, but both movies would fuckin suck if they took anything away from them. It's like taking the ball out of basketball, no one would give a fuck about it anymore. Did they ever fuckin think about the fact that tarantino actually says fuck a lot so why don't they just sensor him. See it's bull shit

User avatar
MiaRose
Basterd
Posts: 779
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Re: QT - violence

Post by MiaRose » Fri Jun 10, 2005 7:48 pm

Fuck's a great word. what's the big deal?
Image
"I'm not saying that we haven't, and I'm not saying that we have. We love each other, but we're almost too close now to be a couple. We had out life together on Kill Bill. It was like a marriage in every way." -Quentin

JackRabbitSlim

Re: QT - violence

Post by JackRabbitSlim » Tue Jun 14, 2005 1:53 am

in pulp fiction if you notice the violence isnt senseless it helps move the plot along(blowing marvins head off in the car) and killing the hillbillys are the most memorable "violent" parts of the movie and the katana part was never really showed, the camera always stayed just out of view of the sword slice and stab, and the Kill Bill movies are meant to be like that, they are homage to old kung fu movies and their over-the-top violence and blood spray.

IchLiebeQuentin

Re: QT - violence

Post by IchLiebeQuentin » Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:29 pm

I dono if anyone's said this, but Quentin said, in fewer words, you only get penalized for doing violance right, an amature doesn't get penalized for having too much violence because his violence doesn't mean anything. I think Quentin puts violence in the movie is to pull the scene forward and to get a reaction out of the moviegoers. Whether you thought it was senseless and unneccissary or you thought it was awesome and on the boundery of artistic, he got you to remember it. I think his violent scenes are brilliant. And as for them putting bad ideas in the heads of moviegoers, I think that's all a bunch of bullshit.

User avatar
Angel
Fucking Professional
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: QT - violence

Post by Angel » Thu Aug 18, 2005 12:12 pm

i dont get the problem with violence. What the fuck is so wrong about it anyway? Why do we even have censorship? Why is swearing, violence, sex, etc, considered so wrong? It is all fucking natural!!

The thing i have always thought about film is nothing is taboo in film! Nothing is not acceptable for film! Film is an artistic medium, let the artists do their thing!
Image

WeaselCo

Re: QT - violence

Post by WeaselCo » Thu Aug 18, 2005 11:31 pm

What do you mean let the artist do their thing!!! They must make it kid friendly so they can reach a bigger audience. Fuck art, money is king.

Toothpick_Vic_Vega

Re: QT - violence

Post by Toothpick_Vic_Vega » Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:07 pm

Some of the violence in Pulp Fiction had some over the top aspects, but I think the emotional impact of the violence was stronger in Pulp. In Kill Bill, its so unreal, you cant really feel any emotion towards it. I mean, guys getting their arms/legs/heads chopped off amd spraying fountains of blood everywhere is funny to me, not sickening.

I also find Tarantinos films are all highly artistic in their depiction of violence. Artistic meaning the way he shoots it and sets everything up. Tarantino is great because he can create films that celebtate lesser known/low budget cinema and he then makes it a big pop culture sensation for all audiences.

"You call it violence, I call it Action" - QT 

 
Last edited by Toothpick_Vic_Vega on Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Captain Koons

Re: QT=Love

Post by Captain Koons » Sat Nov 05, 2005 10:12 pm

Quentin can be violent, but since when is violence bad when done in tastful manner. Kill Bill was crazy gore, but he made it artsy and styalized. The black and white scene had the most bloodshed, and he did it in black and white avoiding some gore. Sure, blood is blood, but when not red it's less violent. That probally makes zero sense. Anyway, Quentin is a genius when it comes to fight scenes. I think the blood is relevant and goes either way. Kill Bill Vol. 2 less gore, much better. Pulp Fiction didnt have too much gore, though some intense scenes, especially with the Overdose, but Quentin is a master with limiting the violence when only the scene suits for it. Also, in Kill Bill he used anime and the scene works. But if he performed the scene with live actors, it would get the movie an NC-17. So he styalizes violent scenes to make them less provacative. Even though gore is gore.

User avatar
OsuFan45
Kiddo
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 10:28 pm
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: QT - violence

Post by OsuFan45 » Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:39 pm

and also its not like he could of made a Kill Bill as a kongfu movie with out having a ton of blood and gore.
"Mabe I am not on the the list but i think my friend Georgey is."
"Are you trying to bribe me?"
"No sir "
"Just add a little King Tut right there."

The Return of the ReJects

j_c

Re: QT - violence

Post by j_c » Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:41 pm

OsuFan45 wrote: kongfu
haha

User avatar
plunderbunnie
Fucking Professional
Posts: 1308
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 6:26 pm
Location: Canada

Re: QT - violence

Post by plunderbunnie » Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:48 pm

clown wrote: if you meant and not serious or not "normal"
then i have to disagree.

only kill bill was cartoonish
in every other movie the violence was realistic
I totally  agree.  Reservoir dogs, for instance, to me sticks out as showing real violence.  Instead of someone getting shot and then never seeing them again, you dont even see him get shot at first, but you see the after effects,  you have to watch him suffer. 
"It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Seth_Gecko
Fucking Professional
Posts: 3749
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:54 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: QT - violence

Post by Seth_Gecko » Thu Nov 24, 2005 7:01 pm

OsuFan45 wrote: and also its not like he could of made a Kill Bill as a kongfu movie with out having a ton of blood and gore.
is that diddy or donkey? or maybe king?
Image
Hey Paul! *Wields axe* Try getting a reservation at Dorsia now you fucking stupid bastard!

User avatar
Snake Eyes
Basterd
Posts: 895
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:45 am
Location: Land of OZ

Re: QT= Sick Fuck?

Post by Snake Eyes » Fri Nov 25, 2005 3:00 am

MiaMsPink wrote: a child (even as anime) witnessing her parents getting brutally murdered and then having underage sex with the killer just for revenge.....uh, more blood splattering and people getting their heads chopped off and getting sliced in half......lol when it comes down to it, you're seeing extreme violence! whether it is artistic or not really isn't the point.

~Sarah
Hahaha haha ha! I remember when i was Describing the scene to Angel as I saw it before him ( at the cinema, for some reason they never ask me for id but he couldn’t go..) anyway I think I said it like this..

Thousand Eyes – “ So after they kill her parents, she basically wants revenge and you hear the boss likes kids, so anyway she on top of him right and then she stabs the shit out him and there’s blood pissing everywhere!â€?  ;D

Angel - “ wait on top of him?  What do you mean she was on top of him!?â€?  ???

Thousand Eyes – “ …… uh….well you just have to see itâ€?  :-[
Image

User avatar
Angel
Fucking Professional
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: QT - violence

Post by Angel » Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:53 am

QT = sick fuck? i think not.

and thousands eyes, i dont remember saying "on top of him?"

it was more like "oh"
Image

User avatar
Snake Eyes
Basterd
Posts: 895
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:45 am
Location: Land of OZ

Re: QT - violence

Post by Snake Eyes » Sun Nov 27, 2005 7:20 am

Angel wrote: QT = sick fuck? i think not.

and thousands eyes, i dont remember saying "on top of him?"

it was more like "oh"
To the best of my recollection it was a reaction to my saying on top of him, it was still funny at the time
Image

DaMelta79

Re: QT - violence

Post by DaMelta79 » Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:30 pm

You've all made some good points here. I only saw Vol #1 and Vol#2 for the first time last night (believe it or not) and I thought the violence was used to different effect in each instance. okay not ALWAYS different (there are themes of course) but there were a huge variety of "styles" of violence ranging from our Kung Fu movie blood splatters to the perversion (or evil, if you ask me) of Buck as mentioned by some of you already. For me, not seeing anything Buck did but imagining it was more violent than waterfalls of blood. I guess you have to think "what is it about violence that defines it as essentially bad/upsetting". And then you also have to ask what value violence has in adding an element of humanity or executing a commentary on evil etc. I think most of us will agree that the "violence" adds something real to our experience that transcends the actual blood.

For instance, NOT seeing Sophies butchered body at the end of Vol#1 was more violent for me than seeing her flailing on the ground, blood flying...and that's aprtly because we think we know what the director is trying to say ie. IMAGINE it (if you dare). Interesting. Oh and for the record one of the only scenes I couldn't watch was Elle after her eye was ripped out. Not during, but after....arrrgghhh the pain !!!!

User avatar
Snake Eyes
Basterd
Posts: 895
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:45 am
Location: Land of OZ

Re: QT - violence

Post by Snake Eyes » Sun Dec 04, 2005 2:34 am

Everyones made good points Except for me that is.. heh
Image

User avatar
Angel
Fucking Professional
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: QT - violence

Post by Angel » Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:18 am

Kill bill was not a detrimentally violent film, the violence was comical and if you have watched chambara you'll know that the type of violence is not detrimental
Image

sonia_tarantino

Re: QT= Sick Fuck?

Post by sonia_tarantino » Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:03 pm

hm...somehow interesting:)    KB was poetic,inspiring-truly a work of art........................Reservoir dogs & Pulp fiction-trust me,they too are a work of art.Tarantino in his purest in every film he made.Every film is a part of different genre and they also require a different form,a different kind of violence.Sometimes it's more sadistic,ok.but that doesn't make him a sick fuck,that makes him a director.

Sock

Re: QT - violence

Post by Sock » Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:35 am

1. The blood/gore/stylized violence in Kill Bill is all just paying homage or simulating old grindhouse Kung-Fu films from the 60's and 70's and if you font realize that then you have no incite what so ever.

2. The over the top blood is used as a tool to take the realistic edge off of Kill Bill. If Kiddo hacked away at her victims realistically, there would be about five minutes spent on each of the Crazy 88s, and it would be much, MUCH more brutal. Kill Bill is not based on reality, it is based on other forms of entertainment! There is no realism in Kill Bill, there for the violence should not disturb you.

I think that if there was no form of violent entertainment, people would have an overload of aggression and there would be more violence. Violent movies don't inspire people to use; they work as reliever of that urge! Me and my friends watch more violent movies than anyone we know and we probably the least violent people you will ever meet. I have been in one fight, when I was in fifth grade.

StanrickKubley
Kiddo
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 8:18 am

Re: QT & Violence

Post by StanrickKubley » Sat Mar 04, 2006 5:56 pm

I have no idea if violence in movies carries over into the real world.  I don't think anybody knows.  Speaking for myself, I don't mind fictional violence, though I don't tolerate it in real life.

A huge misconception about Tarantino's violence is that Tarantino's characters are morally ambiguous, that the violence is simply for effect.  Well, I think it certainly is used because of its effect, but Tarantino's is an almost uniquely moralistic writer these days.  His characters follow the older code in which bad guys get what they deserve.

Think about it.  How many innocents get mowed down in The Matrix by the good guys?  How many poor suckers did Commando slaughter?  Riggs was a romantic 80's good guy, and he'd just as soon shoot a guy as ask him to pull over.  Now think about the one civilian we see get shot in Reservoir Dogs.  How much weight is given to that act of violence?  A ton, right?  And what happens to the shooter, Mr. Orange?  He pays the price, both the weight on his conscience and the bulletin his belly.

I think it was Truffaut who said that it's impossible to make an anti-war movie, because war is so exciting on screen.  However, Tarantino's violence is not inconsequential.  There is always a consequence.

User avatar
plunderbunnie
Fucking Professional
Posts: 1308
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 6:26 pm
Location: Canada

Re: QT & Violence

Post by plunderbunnie » Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:05 pm

I was actually really surrpised when watching from dusk til dawn, about the violence in the beginning, this might be because Quentin didnt direct it, but the violence seemed alot more brutal then in his own films.  The violence later on was much more comical and over the top, but initially I found it disturbing and not QT, but that may be because he wasent directing.  Besides that most of the violence in his films seems to play along with the plot, or be used as entertainment (i think we see this ALOT in kill bill).  In dogs and pulp, the violence exists because the players in the story lead violent lives, and thus violent things happen that are involved in the storys.  I find it far less violent then a blonde flick, where 7 random guys get shot stylistically by bond, and then kinda fall down and thats it.  You dont see them suffer.  In movies like RD, you have to see what happens to those people that bad shit does happen too.  I also hate violence in real life, but appricate it in cinema, because it exists, and movies should be honest.  In the same breathe i hate movies like the Bond flicks were its suave to kill 9 nameless guys real fast while saying some stupid catch phrase.  Anyways, thats just my opinion.
"It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions." - Mark Twain

thecrazy88

Re: QT & Violence

Post by thecrazy88 » Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:39 pm

plunderbunnie wrote: Nice avatar Max!!  ;D ;)
Vince is angry today. He thought that we would never see Snake Charmer again.
I knew better... ;)

User avatar
Bad Max
Fucking Professional
Posts: 5385
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 8:50 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: QT & Violence

Post by Bad Max » Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:42 pm

from now on im just gonna ignore him...
Image
The German will be sickened by us, the German will talk about us, and the German will fear us.

User avatar
Bad Max
Fucking Professional
Posts: 5385
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 8:50 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: QT & Violence

Post by Bad Max » Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:47 pm

thecrazy88 wrote: Vince is angry today. He thought that we would never see Snake Charmer again.
I knew better... ;)
Im sorry  :'(
Image
The German will be sickened by us, the German will talk about us, and the German will fear us.

thecrazy88

Re: QT & Violence

Post by thecrazy88 » Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:47 pm

Bad Max wrote: Im sorry  :'(
I could never be mad at you honey :-*

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest