Quentin Tarantino is 63 years old today. He was born on 27 March 1963.
I have criticized Tarantino in the past for plagiarism. But over time, I think I may have overstated the case. In particular, I recently lifted a line from The Happening for a screenplay I wrote. I didn’t need to do it. In fact, I think it should be seen as an inside joke. But that’s probably what he is thinking when he lifts lines from Charley Varrick and Eaten Alive.
I still think he overdoes it. And I think I am quite right when I say, “He makes a particular kind of art film that is clever and easily digestible by his upper-middle-class audience.” And ultimately, I’m more interested in hearing him talk about psychotronic film than actually watching his films. But he does make solid films. I think the quality varies. But he’s never made a bad film.
I like Quentin Tarantino most because of his support for psychotronic films. He was instrumental in getting Lucio Fulci’s The Beyond re-released. Now, I disagree with him slightly on this. Over the years, I’ve come to think that The Beyond is over-valued by fans. City of the Living Dead really is better. But it’s still great!
Hands down, Tarantino’s most psychotronic film is Death Proof. This is probably why people consider it one of his minor works — if not his worst. And sure, I have my problems with the film. It’s too talky. Of course, I don’t blame the man. He writes incredible dialogue. If I did too, I’d write more dialogue!
But what is more psychotronic than this? Make me hate a character; destroy him without mercy?! And I love that they don’t kill him. They turn him into the whiny little man he always has been. And it speaks well of Kurt Russell that he accepted this role.
Image cropped from Quentin Tarantino by pinguino k under CC BY 2.0.
QT can be a dick. He recently shit on actors Paul Dano and Matthew Lillard for not being “macho” enough — look who’s talking! Plus, while Lillard was wasted in a live-action “Scooby-Doo,” he was quite good in “SLC Punk,” a movie about the subculture in Salt Lake. Plus plus, it’s fugging tacky for a big-name director to take a s**t on some struggling actor! QT knows his movie history, he could easily have gotten his snark on by criticizing somebody long dead. (Poke at John Wayne if you want to poke at somebody for not being macho — Lillard wasn’t trying to. Wayne was and sucked at it.)
Plus plus plus, QT put Uma Thurman in some dangerous spots while shooting Kill Bill, and there’s no excuse for that today (there wasn’t much of an excuse when DeMille did it, either; I give more of a pass to low-budget indie filmmakers). One of the best things about Death Proof is the stuntwork is good and it’s (I believe) all safely done.
I remember reading about (I think) Django Unchained that QT said it had to end with a bloodbath because that’s what his fans expect. Well, writer/directors repeating themselves is boring. The bloodbath in Django was boring (except for the slavery revenge angle); the bloodbath in Hateful Eight was boring (the best scene was Sam Jackson stranding a dude in the cold). I guess the one in Hollywood at least surprised me; it was bloodbath via loyal dog. But it’s still not especially interesting.
His best movie was Jackie Brown, and as you pointed out years ago, it might be because QT didn’t write the characters. But he adapted them to his interests brilliantly! The other Elmore Leonard adaptations aren’t nearly as good.
It’s a great film because of Grier/Forster/Jackson/DeNiro, and more, and how often do we think of characters in QT movies as believable people rather than amusing caricatures? And it’s great because, while the violence stings — it stings HARD — it’s practically PG. The most upsetting violence happens with Sam Jackson killing someone in the very far distance. And the scariest shot is Jackson’s hair flowing over the back of a couch!
Jackie Brown is a certifiably great, wonderful film. But I will give you that Death Proof is the most psychotronic!
I think QT has a psychological problem and fame has made it far worse. And I LOVE both of those Scooby-Doo films. Of course, I have a thing for Velma, like all right-thinking people!
I didn’t care much for the slave and Nazi films. I did like the Kill Bill films although clearly it could have been a single film. I should revisit Jackie Brown. I really didn’t care that much for the Jackson part in the apartment. It was mostly just the aesthetics. I loved everything with Grier and Forster. I like them both very much. Both are psychotronic icons! I recently highlighted Coffy. And check out Forster in the Bert I Gordon film Satan’s Princess. He’s great in it!
Well of course Velma was cool. (She looks a lot like French director Agnes Varda, who I’ve been learning about lately… Varda was smart and rather cynical; so was Velma. Coincidence? Surely. But a fun one.)
I rewatched Jackie Brown a little while ago. I still love it. But you’re right, it’s totally Brown/Forster. (Jackson and De Niro are great, but what’s best is how much we love the good guys.) Forster tells a story about Brando being a twerp: https://librarydvdlove.substack.com/p/jackie-brown
I’m SURE fame warped QT’s head. It’s too bad, because I like how he appreciates old movies and underrated actors. That’s Hollywood for you, though. If QT doesn’t get classified as Hot Shit because of Pulp Fiction, we wouldn’t have the good parts in his later movies (and there were several). We’d never have gotten the genuinely wonderful Jackie Brown. OTOH: QT being classified as Hot Shit turned a guy who mighta been an occasional-then-repentant dick into a guy who would be a more frequent and never repentant dick.
I mean, why would you shit on Matthew Lillard? What on Earth has he ever done to annoy you? God only knows what’s wrong with QT, and God ain’t telling.
I’ll check that out! I always figured Brando was horrible but it was reading his autobiography that it was very clear. And that’s what he wrote about himself! He was clearly so full of himself that he thought everything he did was great. He treated people badly.
QT has claimed that he will stop making films and just write about film. I doubt that. I also wonder how good his film writing would be. I share a lot of his opinions but I’ve never heard him explain why these films are great. But I’m open to it.
I just read the quote. Great!