Well, I usually watch Tarantino's movies with a benevolent smile on my face. Sort of "far from the best but far from the worst". I also think he's the only one who stand a chance to remake that movie decently. However, I wish he let it be. Too many things make this task almost impossible.
sorry man, but Tarantino is a good producer. He's not one of the average, lame, fake, full of shit producers that CONSUME hollywood movies. U might not like him personally... maybe he had no friends, no girls, or whatever u think, but the motherfucker can make a movie that stirs up criticism, and he never cowards from people who try to tell him off.
I like Tarantino, maybe not all his movies, but there's no denying he is fresh filmmaker that brings more to the table than most Hollywood talent. And how can you ont be looking forward to Quentin, Pitt and WWII? How can you not like Reservoir Dogs, True Romance, Pulp Fiction, Crimson Tide, Kill Bill (name another director who mixes anime in with live action?), even Death Proof was pretty cool at times. Every other hack would have used cgi for that car crash scene. I understand the common dislike for the man, but you can't deny his uniqueness, good or bad.
I liked Reservoir Dogs whan it popped up... I was 18, at this time. But I was bored watching Pulp Fiction.
All the movies he made since where worst and worst, for me.
So tell me what's the point in making expensive modern movies as dumb and cheap as the 30 years ago Z-flicks ?
People say to me that I "don't understand the humor" in T's movies. I can assure you it's not the case: I understand pretty well, but I find that kind of humor gross and pointless.
It's not political or criticism humor at all, it says nothing... and do not amuse me. By the way, I can't stand his "cool" gratuitous graphic violence, neither.
Carpenter is a fun guy, yeah ! Lots of Troma movies are fun too... Verhoeven is very fun, if you ask me.
But Quentin... what does he say in his flicks ? He depicts stupid characters we saw a million times, doing stupid things with no purpose... QT has just nothing to say except: "watching movies is cool to pass the time".
I'm sorry, it's not enough to me.
And sorry if I can't express myself well... my english sucks.
So the conflict is the underlying message(if any) that QT portrays in any of his films?
Well, in the case of Kill Bill vol. 2, its message is of how desensitization to death, violence, gore, and other graphic things, affects what is ultimately a simple soap opera drama. If you strip away the ninjas, katanas, action and assassins, it's really a very simple tale of a woman leaving a man for the sake of her unborn baby. This, domestically, is commonplace and not taken very seriously, but when you add the violent (and in some instances tragic) pasts of each character, what should have been a simple feud in the courts becomes a series of events that leaves many people dead and many families broken. Bill and the Bride are a grade-A example of Nature vs. Nuture, the immortal argument of how a person will grow up despite his/her environment. Example: if two brothers grow up in a terrible environment, in a terrible neighborhood, one may grow up to leave the environment and become a successful businessman, the other may stay at home and become a drug addict. You ask the first brother of this and he says "My mother was a hooker and my father was a gambler. Did you really expect me to stay there and let myself become like them?" Meanwhile the worse off brother would say "My mother was a hooker and my father was a gambler. Did you really expect me to turn out any other way than being like them?" Their child, B.B., also alludes to Nature vs. Nurture, in the first stages, as she is a little girl no older than 6 who is allowed to watch Shogun Assassins, and feels no emotion from killing her own pet fish, knowing perfectly what she had done.
This is, I believe, the underlying message behind Kill Bill Vol. 2, and part of the reason why I like that movie so much.
Now, QT has only made 6 films.. and most of them have just been entertainment flicks with no real depth to them, so I'm afraid that I can only defend one of the films, in terms of whether or not it is deeper than violence and shock-value That is what I feel.
Tarentino can make lame movies, he's just making a whole lot of trash because he likes the old school trash movies. Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs are both good movies though and he deserves the credit where its due.
You know What I hate more than his movies... People who use "The Tarantino" to tell everyone around them (and indirectly themselves) they're really cool and different than the rest of the lowlife action flick/hollywood comedy fans. It's ff-ing pretentious.
And it's even worse when you have 2 of em. Since they can't stop quoting to each other until they finished the complete dialog from every god forsaken movie.
I'm really on the verge of sucker punching them in the face.
on another topic. Any word on your new work being printed in English (or Dutch)? My understanding of the French language isn't that great I got the full HK 1.1 to 1.12 and Agape. Is there any way I can get some of your new stuff? Even if it's in French?
After years of being curious about that movie, once I finally got a chance to see it, while it was interesting, it didn't really live up to my expectations. Maybe if I'd seen it when I was younger I would have had a more positive reaction. My point is that I'm not so beholden to the movie that I'd be adverse to a remake, besides which, I generally have enjoyed Tarantino's work for the most part. But I can understand your point of view. I'd hate to see a movie I loved remade by a director I hated. From what I've read, it sounds like it's only talk at this stage, so I'd say there's a good chance it'll never come to fruition anyway.