The Quentin Tarantino Archives logo

My opinion on Tarantino's Films


#1

Hmmm, i dont know how to say this but i think QT could do better than Pulp fiction. It was the last movie i saw out of the four. I was expecting something a bit more powerful. I still see Reservoir Dogs as being his best work. Dont get me wrong but i loved Pulp Fiction, and im gonna watch it again this weekend and maybe i’ll see a little more into it. Reservoir dogs had a much greater impact on me after i saw it. It affected me more than any film i had ever seen. I think the reason i didnt get that great an impression of Pulp Fiction is because i had heard it was the “greatest movie ever made”. i was a little dissapointed. but thats my problem. I just recently watched Jackie Brown again because i had seen it when it first came out and i was pretty young and i didnt get all of the story. That was a good movie. And Kill Bill was great especially realism when the Bride first Wakes up. that part is insanely real and disturbing. I love his movies but i just hope that this isnt going to be the best we see from him. i dont care how much time it takes but i think that he can easily surpass the greatness of his other films.


#2

:o he could do better then Pulp Fiction?



Well…it’s your own opinion ofcourse but…Pulp Fiction was great.


#3

Well see, this is contructive criticism, unlike that wanker Msolid.







How many times have you see Pulp Fiction? Even though it doesn’t age as well as say, Jackie Brown, I still think Pulp is his best work, almost close to near perfection. And that’s pretty much the opinion of everybody. Not saying that your opinion sucks, but maybe you need to watch Pulp a coupla more times to really appreciate its unfathomable depth and multilayered plot structure. Reservoir Dogs isn’t even in the same league as Pulp. Watch it again and see if you feel the same way or not… :slight_smile:


#4

pulp fiction was f****** fantastic !! well its your own view and opinion but still pulp was bloody great !!


#5

[quote]And Kill Bill was great especially realism when the Bride first Wakes up. that part is insanely real and disturbing. [/quote]



You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about. This part wasn’t real at all. Nobody can wake from such a long coma and be normal within a couple of days - this only happens in movies. Most of the coma patients never fully recover at all.


#6

hense!! FILM


#7

wowsers, there’s some digging up of old topics going on here. like that :_) hehe



what I think its fantastic is, that Tarantino hasn’t dipped into shit yet. People may be divided over Four Rooms, which is argueable a mess, but all HIS films are great, no matter if one likes the one more than the other, but let’s face it, Tarantino hasn’t made his “spy kids 3d” yet, and as long as he doesn’t do that, he rocks


#8

i agree lets hope kill bill vol.3 isnt like some old crappy sequel like the nightmares on elm streets and it beter not be called kill bill 3 cos hes dead it should be called like kill bee naa too corny what you think it should be called??


#9

I don’t think he’s ever gonna make it.

I hope we’ll hear more about Grind House soon and then Inglorious Bastards. And I still hope he does a Spaghetti Western and maybe something like a Mario Bava-style Sci-Fi…


#10

i think he might attempt a script and i would love to read it and i hope he does a speaghettie western too


#11

Tarantino films have come a long way i dont mean in terms of being classic because that’s a debatable topic , but the fact that the quality of Tarantino’s films increase isnt solely due to tarantino’s evolution as a director :-</E>


#12

[quote=“The Seb”]
wowsers, there’s some digging up of old topics going on here. like that :_) hehe



what I think its fantastic is, that Tarantino hasn’t dipped into shit yet. People may be divided over Four Rooms, which is argueable a mess, but all HIS films are great, no matter if one likes the one more than the other, but let’s face it, Tarantino hasn’t made his “spy kids 3d” yet, and as long as he doesn’t do that, he rocks
[/quote]

Haha, or his The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl (Rodriguez has made more than one stinker, so it maybe appropriate to use another director as an example of how he/she can make a shit film amongst the other greats :stuck_out_tongue:

[quote=“Sentra”]
Hmmm, i dont know how to say this but i think QT could do better than Pulp fiction. It was the last movie i saw out of the four. I was expecting something a bit more powerful. I still see Reservoir Dogs as being his best work. Dont get me wrong but i loved Pulp Fiction, and im gonna watch it again this weekend and maybe i’ll see a little more into it. Reservoir dogs had a much greater impact on me after i saw it. It affected me more than any film i had ever seen. I think the reason i didnt get that great an impression of Pulp Fiction is because i had heard it was the “greatest movie ever made”. i was a little dissapointed. but thats my problem. I just recently watched Jackie Brown again because i had seen it when it first came out and i was pretty young and i didnt get all of the story. That was a good movie. And Kill Bill was great especially realism when the Bride first Wakes up. that part is insanely real and disturbing. I love his movies but i just hope that this isnt going to be the best we see from him. i dont care how much time it takes but i think that he can easily surpass the greatness of his other films.
[/quote]

I agree with you that Tarantino can do something better than Pulp Fiction, however it is quite unlikely that he will ever top it. I’m afraid I agree with those who say that the fame has got to his head a little. Being a bit big-headed is ok, but QT seems to have his head up his arse (this coming from one his BIGGEST fans!!). It’s almost as if he has gotten so much praise for his first 3 films that he believes he has ALREADY made it into the big league (where Scorsese, Hitchcock, Leone etc. are all at) and feels he can just fuck about with his movies now and not try to prove himself (because in his eyes, he has already proven that). He feels he has proven himself so he doesn’t need to make another true masterpiece, but can go about making films a lot of people won’t like, which he will definately like. Hence, that is why we have got Kill Bill. It almost seems as though he is wasting his talent. He could be making masterpieces but instead wastes time advertising other people’s films, appearing on shitty TV programs and only talking about what he MAY do. That isn’t good enough and I think he needs to deliver more, soon.



Yes, he hasn’t disappointed us yet, everything he has done, even recent work such as the CSI episode have been promising, but he really needs to get up off his arse and get to work on his WWII epic. I’m not too chuffed about the Grind House idea, mainly because I would like IB first.



Kill Bill was brilliant, it was a masterpiece but it isn’t in the same league as PF. It seems that QT was very experimental with KB, doing everything he had wanted to do in the way he wanted to do them. But it isn’t a complete film in the way PF is, KB still has it’s flaws. I mean way more people hate on Kill Bill than on Pulp Fiction.



I think QT hasn’t proven himself as one of the greats just yet. He has everything, he just doesn’t go that extra distance and deliver more films to us. It takes him absolutely ages to make just one film. I would like to see at least another 5 films from him, only then will we be able to see if he is one of the greatest.



For me, Pulp Fiction is his definite masterpiece. I loved it much more than Reservoir Dogs. Pulp Fiction to me, is the greatest film ever. I have yet to see anything that will surpass it.



I also don’t like the KB: Vol. 3 idea or the Vega Brothers idea. He needs to hurry up and move on to other things. I would also want to see his definite Spaghetti Western.


#13

What makes QT so great in my eyes and what separates him from other film-makers is that he’s got the balls to experiment with each movie he makes. He began his career in the crime genre, moved on to kung-fu exploitation, is now set to direct a horror movie and is then planning to do his war epic. Something like that takes guts and I congratulate him for that. Hell you can’t even compare one movie with another cause they’re different from each other and if someone says Pulp is better than Kill Bill, well sorry to say but that’s an idiotic statement. It’s like saying Snatch is better than Enter the Dragon. Now take other film-makers. Guy Ritchie. He had a misfire with Swept Away and is now re-hashing his older stuff time and time again. Take Kevin Smith. Same thing (even if he has always been overrated as hell in my eyes in the first place). Take Oliver Stone. ALL of his movies center around politics to some degree. Hell, take even Hitchcock, one of the absolute greats, he’s re-hashed the same formula countless times in his films. I could go on and on. This is not however the case with QT. He always wants to expand his horizons, try out some new stuff. And that takes time. It’s like he’s beginning his career over again with every new film he makes, and I don’t blame him if he takes his time because he does not want to dissapoint. He can direct two crime movies a year if he wants to, because he’s the fucking master in that genre by now. But he doesn’t. He knows his fans are craving for something different, and I have nothing but respect for him cause of that.


#14

Well I wouldn’t go so far as to say he experiments with each movie. RD, PF and JB were all crime films, therefore they can all be compared. One of the criticisms people had of him was that he stays in his ‘safety zone’ so-to-speak. He made 3 films in the same genre and they were similar, not the same, but similar. He obviously did something about that with Kill Bill. Good for him. So out of the 4 he has made, 3 of them are in the same genre, I wouldn’t say that’s experimentation. Sure he experiments in other ways, but not in the type of film he actually makes.



I also disagree and feel you CAN compare Kill Bill to Pulp Fiction mainly because they were both made by the same guy. I can then compare them and say something like “The dialogue in PF is much better than in KB. I think it is wittier and more interesting” or “I think QT’s directorial skill during KB is way more advanced than what he showed us in PF. His use of imaginative, interesting camera angles and movements really add to the excitement of watching the film. Sadly, the camera movement and placement of the camera is pretty borring and quite repetitive, this doesn not make for exciting viewing” I could go on and on.



Also, I would give the title of greatest film-makers who have the balls to experiment with each movie to the Coen brothers. They have made 11 films and I can honestly say that no 2 of their films are same or even remotely similar. They are all totally different, and they are all great in their own way. That to me is fucking genius. They haven’t slipped up yet, don’t give me that shit about The Ladykillers and Intolerable Cruelty being shit, they are great fun for what they are.



He can direct 2 crime movies in a year, but I can tell you that he will never do that. That just isn’t his nature. QT is a lazy bastard and likes to do so many other things before making his next film. But that’s not my beef, he justified why he takes so long to make a film, and I appreciate what he said (it was in an interview).


#15

[quote=“Ify”]
Well I wouldn’t go so far as to say he experiments with each movie. RD, PF and JB were all crime films, therefore they can all be compared. One of the criticisms people had of him was that he stays in his ‘safety zone’ so-to-speak. He made 3 films in the same genre and they were similar, not the same, but similar. He obviously did something about that with Kill Bill. Good for him. So out of the 4 he has made, 3 of them are in the same genre, I wouldn’t say that’s experimentation. Sure he experiments in other ways, but not in the type of film he actually makes.


[/quote]

That’s exactly my point. His first three movies were all part of the crime genre. What was the time-span between these three films? 3 films in 5 years, which is quite an accomplishment. After Jackie Brown came out (which has VERY LITTLE in common with Pulp and Dogs, but it’s still a crime film), he felt he wanted to do something different. He felt he proved his worth in the crime genre, it was time to move on. Kill Bill and his next two movies seem all distinctively different from each other, which I like. If that means I have to wait longer, then so be it. I’d rather watch Inglorious Bastards in five years time then the Vega Bros. next year. And let’s be totally fair with the Q. Kill Bill, as is Inglorious Bastards, was a MASSIVE script. It takes time to write a 222 page script and go on to direct two distinct voulmes. Add to that the fact that Uma’s pregnancy delayed the project even further. Now it seems only yesterday that Vol. 2 came outand Grindhouse is coming out in 9 months time, so it’s not that bad. I know the feeling though. I used to think like you, always impatiently waiting for QT’s next project as if my life depended on it. But I come to realise now that quality should precide over quantity.


[quote] also disagree and feel you CAN compare Kill Bill to Pulp Fiction mainly because they were both made by the same guy. I can then compare them and say something like “The dialogue in PF is much better than in KB. I think it is wittier and more interesting” or “I think QT’s directorial skill during KB is way more advanced than what he showed us in PF. His use of imaginative, interesting camera angles and movements really add to the excitement of watching the film. Sadly, the camera movement and placement of the camera is pretty borring and quite repetitive, this doesn not make for exciting viewing” I could go on and on.[/quote]

Gotta disagree with that. If you’re gonna compare dialogue, compare it within the same genre. You can compare the dialogue of Pulp with that of Dogs and say it is better or worse. But Kill Bill is a different story. You can’t say the Kill Bill dialogue was worse because it felt corny. That’s what it was supposed to be in the first place. You can say something like “I prefer Pulp’s dialogue to Kill Bill because the Pulp dialogue dealt with real people in real-life situations and I’m not a big fan of campy situations and conversations like the ones found in Kill Bill”. But to say “Pulp’s dialogue is BETTER”, well that’s an objective statement which sounds quite pretentious to say the least.



I agree about the Coens though. I regard them as innovators the way Quentin is. Even though I think Intolerable Cruelty was quite average (don’t flame me for it :wink:) It felt quite impersonal, like someone else other than Joel had directed it. But that’s just me.


#16

[quote=“Scarface”]
That’s exactly my point. His first three movies were all part of the crime genre. What was the time-span between these three films? 3 films in 5 years, which is quite an accomplishment. After Jackie Brown came out (which has VERY LITTLE in common with Pulp and Dogs, but it’s still a crime film), he felt he wanted to do something different. He felt he proved his worth in the crime genre, it was time to move on. Kill Bill and his next two movies seem all distinctively different from each other, which I like. If that means I have to wait longer, then so be it. I’d rather watch Inglorious Bastards in five years time then the Vega Bros. next year. And let’s be totally fair with the Q. Kill Bill, as is Inglorious Bastards, was a MASSIVE script. It takes time to write a 222 page script and go on to direct two distinct voulmes. Add to that the fact that Uma’s pregnancy delayed the project even further. Now it seems only yesterday that Vol. 2 came outand Grindhouse is coming out in 9 months time, so it’s not that bad. I know the feeling though. I used to think like you, always impatiently waiting for QT’s next project as if my life depended on it. But I come to realise now that quality should precide over quantity.





Gotta disagree with that. If you’re gonna compare dialogue, compare it within the same genre. You can compare the dialogue of Pulp with that of Dogs and say it is better or worse. But Kill Bill is a different story. You can’t say the Kill Bill dialogue was worse because it felt corny. That’s what it was supposed to be in the first place. You can say something like “I prefer Pulp’s dialogue to Kill Bill because the Pulp dialogue dealt with real people in real-life situations and I’m not a big fan of campy situations and conversations like the ones found in Kill Bill”. But to say “Pulp’s dialogue is BETTER”, well that’s an objective statement which sounds quite pretentious to say the least.



I agree about the Coens though. I regard them as innovators the way Quentin is. Even though I think Intolerable Cruelty was quite average (don’t flame me for it :wink:) It felt quite impersonal, like someone else other than Joel had directed it. But that’s just me.
[/quote]

Kill Bill and his next two movies do seem to be distinctively different from each other, this is very promising indeed andhopefully will shut up some of the haters. The other thing is, I agree that I would be willing to wait for his next epic but I don’t like the idea of making something smaller first. I mean the idea of Grind House is not exactly my cup of tea. I’d much rather he do his OWN thing, and make his OWN movie, namely Inglorious Bastards. What I don’t want is for him to get involved in other, lesser pieces of work. To be fair he has written 3 scripts, and that means he has done shit loads of writing. However, I think it is pointless to then put that aside and work on Grind House, he should stick with it. Maybe it’s a case of him not ‘feeling’ it yet. Afterall, he has said that he has to feel 100% dedicated to his films, he has to fall in love with it and marry it, so-to-speak. Maybe he feels he doesn’t feel strongly enough for IB at the moment.



No doubt, I’d watch any movie before the Vega Brothers one. I think it is a stupid idea and like any other masterpieces, Pulp Fiction and Reservoir dogs should be left to stand by themselves.



The other thing is, I don’t take too kindly to you ASSUMING that my life depends on QT’s next big film. I myself CAN wait for his films, but it is the idea of him going around doing other shitty stuff before his next big film that bothers me. No other director it seems, seems to do that. Furthermore, as he has said he will only keep making movies for another 15 years, well that would only mean another 3 films, you cannot make so few films and expect to be with the big boys of film.



No where did I say his dialogue was in Kill Bill was corny. But the idea of only having the right to compare two pieces only if they part of the same genre is quite idiotic. Also, there are crime aspects in Kill Bill, does that mean it’s ok for us to compare the dialogue which are from the crime aspects of Kill Bill to the dialogue in Pulp Fiction? For instance, by your logic, it is right to compare the dialogue in the Wedding Chapel scene and the O-Ren gaining power scenes with the dialogue from Pulp Fiction/Reservoir Dogs/The Godfather etc.



I have absolutely no problem in you thinking Intolerable Cruelty was average, my beef is with those that say it’s shit. It is pretty average when you take into accound the quality that preceeded that film from the Coen’s. Maybe why you felt it was impersonal (and why I also did) was because they tried to make a mainstream film, using mainstream actors. It clearly didn’t work as well as they had hoped but at least they are trying to go somewhere they hadn’t been (a feat you are quite fond of)


#17

[quote=“Ify”]
The other thing is, I don’t take too kindly to you ASSUMING that my life depends on QT’s next big film. I[/quote]

Yo, I didn’t mean that statement to be disrespectful or anything. I was actually talking more about myself there. But anyway, about the dialogue thing, I think it’s best to agree to disagree. All I was saying is that as QT himself always likes to point out, Pulp and Kill Bill exist in different universes , and that will affect the type of dialogue to use in the film. A real-life character like Vincent Vega will talk differently than a comic book character like Pai Mei. It doesn’t matter that there’s crime involved in Kill Bill too…we’re talking about a comic book universe here. You’re not gonna expect to find the dialogue of The Godfather in films like Professional Golgo 13, even if they both deal with crime. That’s all I wanted to say.


#18

Pulp fiction is so deep. There are just thousands of small details that add to Pulp Fiction but only really exist in the background. It is one of best repeatable-viewing films ever concieved. It just never gets old. It is film history.



All of Tarantino’s films are pretty different though, there isn’t one main formula or style.



Reservoir Dogs was more violent and lingered on the violence. Jackie Brown was a thorough character study. Kill Bill was a homage to just about everything.


#19

[quote=“Angel”]
Kill Bill was a homage to just about everything.
[/quote]

yeah, when we’ll gonna be pulling the ULTIMATE KILL BILL REFERENCES GUIDE next month on the wiki, we’ll notice how many influences that film has. this film is like an encyclopedia, man!