Hi,
So a while I saw Tarantino’s quite blunt and rude response to a journalist who asked simply why Margot Robbie was not involved more, and whether her character was just to signify the importance of the murders at the time. Despite the fact I am a great admirer of his work (as everyone else here is), I cannot help but be angered by how arrogant he was with his blunt response of “I reject your hypothesis”. I am most likely going to get lots of hate and backlash for this, but it simply baffles me that a man who lots of people claim is such a great fan of film, whether Italian War or 70s blaxploitation, he refuses to answer a question like this. I also hear his next film after OUATIH will be his last, which potentially supports my point, which is that Tarantino’s success has gone to his head, naturally, and he definitely does not have that same burning passion and essence to make films as he once did. Again, I am not sitting from a high chair, I am a mere 16 year old who adores Tarantino’s work, as well as films such as Rolling Thunder (my Favourite), as well as Coffy, Super Fly and countless other exploitation films who merely wants to see other people’s perspective on the subject.
maybe he’s tired of people who haven’t seen the film expecting things from it that they don’t know of which they assumed certain things that were never true in the first place. What I mean is: a question like that is an unspoken accusation that there’s not “enough” Margot Robbie in it, as if anyone or him had claimed otherwise at some other point in time. Just because some folks assume it to be a movie about Sharon Tate, doesn’t mean it has to be…
why “naturally”? for one he hasn’t sworn never to make a movie after ten, he just said he doesn’t want to fizzle out like some other directors do at a later stage in their career, and why can’t he hold this opinion without being called arrogant? 
Hey Sebastian,
I like your opinion. Firstly, the journalist who asked him this had seen the film, as it was the Q and A following a presentation of the full film. The journalist also was clear that she was aware the film was not supposed to be about Sharon Tate’s murder, hence why It confuses me why he refused to answer this question. Secondly, about the ten films, I saw a video with him, Ridley Scott, Danny Boyle and several other directors in which he clearly states he has ‘grown tired of it’, which confused Ridley Scott as well. I was not calling him arrogant for this point, though I do think his fame and money has gotten to his head in which he uses the same recurring trait of using dialogue which has one motif to it of film knowledge of that time, the only two of his films in which this wasn’t present was Jackie Brown, with a brief mention of the popularity of the Colt 45 (due to John Woo’s The Killer) and Django Unchained. Of course like yourself Sebastian, I absolutely love his work, but cannot help but be frustrated by his recent behaviour from a man who has influenced several of my own screenplays.
I just think that’s a vast overreaction… he’s his own person with his own opinions, attitudes, preferences and moods. So what if he doesnt wanna make movies until he’s 90…
1 Like
Fair point, but I still think he’s lost a lot of that energy
