UPDATE: I've just confirmed that Quentin Tarantino is talking to Brad Pitt to star... And Harvey Weinstein will produce it with Lawrence Bender...
EXCLUSIVE: Quentin Tarantino has just gone out with his long-anticipated script about World War II. I hear it's gone out to Universal, Warner Bros, Paramount, and Sony. Not only is Lawrence Bender attached to produce Inglorious Bastards, but here's the weird thing sources are telling me: Harvey Weinstein also will be producing as well but not financing it though his The Weinstein Co wants to distribute it domestically to pocket the fee. This certainly adds fuel to those rumors that The Weinstein Co is having movie money woes. 
After all, one of the ways that The Weinstein Co attracted investors was by hyping its creative connection to the Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill 1 & 2 writer/director who has long made a lot of money for a lot of people. But will Harv's investors profit from the connection? Let's not forget that The Weinstein Co produced and financed Quentin's last pic Grindhouse/Death Proof that tanked at the box office because of Weinstein's own admission that he erred in releasing it in the U.S. market as half of a too-long 3-hour, 12-minute double-feature. (UPDATE: QT and Harvey Weinstein lunched very visibly at Ago on Melrose today. Just in case anyone thought they weren't working together...)
This latest Tarantino epic, originally for Miramax and originally set for 2001, has been so long in the works that some people thought it might never see the light of day. Tarantino himself has described it as a Spaghetti Western meets World II film that's an homage to 1967's The Dirty Dozen and its derivative, the more extreme 1978 Italian movie Quel Maledetto Treno Blindato (released in the U.S. under the title Inglorious Bastards) about a group of soldiers on their way to be executed who get the chance of a reprieve. Tarantino's script comes out just as the Enzo G. Castellari inspiration is heading to DVD. In a BBC documentary done around the time of Pulp Fiction's release, Tarantino said that he always wanted to do a "guys on a mission" film. As usual, there's a lot of secrecy surrounding this Quentin project sent out by William Morris.
This will be a rental for me. No more interest in his stuff.
Comment by Clayton — July 8, 2008 @ 10:11 am
I heard that the script is so long they’re going to have to split it into two movies like Kill Bill, which makes me nervous. Tarantino has talent, but not much self-control, and Harvey Weinstein seems intent on indulging him like a favourite child, and I’m having visions of what could be a super-cool movie turning into Grindhouse with Tommy Guns and SS stormtroopers.
I hope it turns out better, but it might be wishful nostalgia for the days when Tarantino was the wunderkind and not the enfant terrible.
Comment by Furious D — July 8, 2008 @ 10:17 am
In a book Tarantino was described as a “One Trick Pony by a female producer”…leading to her co-author and fellow producer, an older man, being attacked by Tarantino at a restaurant. Tarantino has had his chances, but absent the co-writing talents of Roger Avery and certain respected producers…his post Avery works, appear less than spectacular…seemingly proving that female producer correct.
It is time for Hollywood to find its new Tarantino…whom ever that may be. The package won’t be the same, nor the accolades and achievements…but unique within said accomplishments. We must realize for every generation, there are talented people that go discovered, like Spielberg and Tarantino, but many who do not, because when Hollywood finds one wunderkind, one toast of the town…they tend to stick with them to the exclusion of others. Nothing wrong with loyalty, I appreciate it and encourage it…all I’m saying is spread around the opportunities.
Tarantino is not Hollywood’s great last hope, there are many out there I am sure…but very few will ever get the break needed to open the door by all of the Inglorious Bastards running Hollywood!!!
Comment by Media Messiah — July 8, 2008 @ 11:56 am
14:57 ….14:58….14:59- I think his 15 minutes may be up. since Pulp this guys hasn’t delivered the goods (unless you consider Kill Bill great! I don’t) His dialogue has been terrible in his films and lets face it- the best parts of Pulp were the Boxer and that was written by Avary….. He reminds me of the guy who hit the 3 pointer to win a game in high school and somehow got a scholarship
Comment by Jugdish — July 8, 2008 @ 12:07 pm
So Clayton…if you’re not interested in his stuff, why would you even rent it? And, why would you comment on it on a message board? And why would you read about a post about it? And, do you think renting as opposed to buying a ticket somehow hurts his marketability? It all shows up on a ledger somewhere…
Comment by NSW — July 8, 2008 @ 12:11 pm
Grindhouse was unwatchable.
Comment by Tony B — July 8, 2008 @ 12:13 pm
Grindhouse was a lot of fun, but this will be nothing like it. I really do not understand the haters out there. Quentin has never made a bad movie!
Also Quentin was quoted more recently as saying that this will be approx. the same length as Pulp Fiction, not two movies.
Comment by JHART — July 8, 2008 @ 12:16 pm
I’m confused. Isn’t this a remake of a 70s film?
Not sure why this taken so long to go into production…
Quentin writes great dialogue but I think he’s officially out of ideas.
Comment by Layne — July 8, 2008 @ 12:19 pm
I have no interest in seeing this psychotic’s fantasies on film.
Comment by Paul — July 8, 2008 @ 12:20 pm
does anyone watch this idiot’s movies anymore? he’s a washout and should have called his career after kill bill. let’s hope harv finances it so they both go broke.
Comment by isy marcus — July 8, 2008 @ 12:24 pm
Hey, I hope that Quentin IS indulged by the powers that be.
Yes, I agree, that “Grindhouse” should have been released as two separate movies (sitting through the first part, “Planet Terror” so exhausted me that I couldn’t sit still for “Death Proof”) but we always have DVDs. And I learned to appreciate both of those two halfs of “Grindhouse” from happening upon their quadzillion rebroadcasts over HBO’s dozen channels while surfing.
The studios don’t have a clue what makes Quentin tick and if they get any creative control over editing or dictating of time length of his pictures they will just interfere with what makes him great.
Please don’t ever “leash” Quentin as it will be a sign of the Apocalypse.
Comment by Tony Kondaks — July 8, 2008 @ 12:27 pm
I agree with Layne. The guy is incapable of original work. Everything is derivative and an “homage”. Enough already! Make a film without having to watch others for inspiration.
Comment by Mike — July 8, 2008 @ 12:28 pm
The movies Tarantino makes are bad/low budget movies from the 70s blown up to big-budget size with a lot of self-indulgence and pop culture references.
The stories lack characters for whom you can care and seem more focused on coming up with the most clever dialogue.
Comment by ScottBTampa — July 8, 2008 @ 12:32 pm
Hmm, well I strongly disagree with some of the other comments. I rate KILL BILL as high as PULP FICTION (although not for cultural impact of course), I loved GRINDHOUSE (both halves: good trash fun) and have been looking FWD to INGLORIOUS BASTARDS for years. Can’t wait for casting news.
Comment by Mark Parsons — July 8, 2008 @ 12:32 pm
Clayton,
Then why rent it???
Comment by Crazy Dude — July 8, 2008 @ 12:34 pm
“an homage to 1967’s The Dirty Dozen and its derivatives with a story about a group of soldiers on their way to be executed who get the chance of a reprieve”??????
Geez, this is so bad, it’s unbelieveable.
Bring back “Glen or Glenda”, with Q in the title role. I’d like to see him in a thong!
Comment by Olden Atwoody — July 8, 2008 @ 12:36 pm
The problem with Quentin is that he never tries to be original anymore, all of his work since Pulp Fiction has been homage after homage after homage. Make an original picture agin man
Comment by Anonymous — July 8, 2008 @ 12:36 pm
The bloom is definitely off the Tarantino rose. I doubt he will be given carte blanche to indulge his Dirty Dozen homage. Also is he going to score a WWII flick with seventies tunes, could be done but not sure it should be.
Pavel Penguin food critic for The Ancient Times
Comment by Pavel Penguin — July 8, 2008 @ 12:41 pm
I love Q’s movies and can’t wait to see the war flick. You Q haters forget Reservoir Dogs, True Romance, Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill Vols. 1 and 2, Jackie Brown. These are all classics.
Comment by Roysan — July 8, 2008 @ 12:42 pm
QT has never made a bad movie, Death Proof was excellent on a stand alone basis and I appreciated the DVD cut much more than the theatrical release.
Jackie Brown was no snoozefest either, a great movie.
I look forward to all his movies and an offbeat WWII movie with cues from the Dirty Dozen movie sounds good to me!
Comment by Chris N — July 8, 2008 @ 12:47 pm
Jesus Mike,
EVERY film is derivative to some degree. Buy a brain. Yeah, Kill Bill is derivative of Kung Fu movies. But you know what? Most people (including myself) never watched those crappy foreign Kung Fu movies. So Kill Bill was entertaining for those that appreciated the homage… AND was something new for those that never watched the originals. Not everyone is blessed with your all knowing insight into all genres of moviemaking.
“The guy is incapable of original work.” Jeez… did you really say that? It would be like saying you’re incapable of original thought because you “agree with Layne.” Actually… I’m leaning in that direction. So let’s find out. Did you see ALL his movies and THEN decide he was unoriginal. Or, in keeping with your “opinion,” you HAVEN’T seen all his movies and you’re just SAYING he’s unoriginal. Which is it? ‘Cause either way, you’re snowing somebody. Probably yourself.
Are you going to be dissing Speilberg, Lucas and Coppola in other forums for THEIR homages and unoriginality? (Indiana Jones? Pfft! Done in the ’40s. NEXT!)
Not liking Tarantino is one thing. Many don’t and it’s pretty easy to see why… he makes DIFFERENT kinds of movies. But to suggest he’s “incapable of original work” only shows that you’re an idiot that can’t even properly express your opinions. Or lack thereof.
Comment by Sam — July 8, 2008 @ 12:48 pm
This should be classic—
1- No one wants war movies right now
2- Can you see Robinov giving Tarantino final cut? I cannot.
3- Can you see Paramount or Sony actually working with Harvey voluntarily? I cannot.
4- They aren’t rumors- Weinstein is out of the film biz.
5- I have to call shenanigans on the Bender of it all- he and Tarantino had a very acrimonious split three years ago.
6- My guess is that after some embarassing studio passes (why not send it to Searchlight?) Relativity uses their funds to make it and loses their shirts.
Comment by FairyTaleListener — July 8, 2008 @ 12:49 pm
Pulp was great. Jackie Brown was very good as well. Dogs was fair but highly overrated except for Keitel and Roth. I started Kill Bill 1 and had enough. Same stylized formula everytime. He’s simply past his prime as a filmmaker and the dialogue has gotten really bad the last number of years. I agree with the above, without Avery he is not too much anymore. Unless something that looks spectacular comes out in the next 5 years or so, I’m done with him.
Comment by Matt — July 8, 2008 @ 12:51 pm
His stuff does pull from various other sources for inspiration, but it is always original. You’ve never seen another Resevoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction or Kill Bill… they borrow some ideas but all artists are inspired in some way… he is inspired by movie making in general. He takes risks and has some misses, but overall we should all be thankful he’s out there doing his thing if you enjoy being entertained.
Comment by Trenz — July 8, 2008 @ 12:55 pm
Pulp was his peak, but you have to give Kill Bills their credit. Grindhouse was an interesting project but not great. The man has talent but I agree it is time for a new ingenue. Let’s be honest, with all the period pics due to start polluting the scene, we don’t need Tarantino to throw in a quirky, talky, drawn out, WWII pick–and that is really the only thing he knows how to do.
Comment by ModernMoviegoer — July 8, 2008 @ 12:56 pm
I can’t imagine what kind of films the people posting comments here enjoy, but Quentin’s are top rate as far as I’m concerned. Kill Bill was the best movie I’ve seen since the 90s, at least the best American one.
Comment by Vos — July 8, 2008 @ 12:57 pm
boy, i detect alot of jealousy here. quentin is not half of a roger avery writing team. he wrote true romance and reservoir dogs solo and for that i dont believe his talent can be questioned. and i really enjoyed kill bill vol one.
i will agree with some what of you guys say about quentin needing someone to keep him in check. on pulp fiction, he had roger avary. on true romance, he had tony scott. i found kill bill vol 2 to be insanely boring and detected too much of the writer’s voice in the character of bill; also, the tone did a 180 to that of a reflective western as opposed to the frenetic anime and kung fu vol 1. death proof was just really, really boring. a plot that didnt go anywhere, dialogue that didnt matter or was interesting on its own.
im excited to see inglorious bastards though. i think when he taps into asian and european movie influences for his movies is when he’s at his best.
Comment by Dennis — July 8, 2008 @ 1:01 pm
The man is a “freak”!
Comment by KansasGirl — July 8, 2008 @ 1:03 pm
Pulp Ficton was a good movie. His others…pretty stupid. Tarantino is a one hit wonder.
Comment by john — July 8, 2008 @ 1:05 pm
I like Tarantino. Yeah he rips stuff off–but at least he admits it. He’s made a few movies I don’t like (Jackie Brown, Death Proof)–but he’s got a pretty decent record IMHO. I just hope he’s ripping off a better source this time!
Comment by quitebuttery — July 8, 2008 @ 1:08 pm
Nikki, it’s not a matter of “some believe” that Tarantino’s movie is “inspired by” the Italian one. It is without question BASED on the original. Quel Maledetto Treno Blindato was released as, you guessed it, Inglorious Bastards in the U.S., and that’s what it will be called when it hits DVD soon.
Comment by Can't Take it Anymore — July 8, 2008 @ 1:10 pm
As I wrote in my blog post in response to this news, I think this is a positive development that might bear a big opportunity for the development of this movie.
Comment by Sebastian H. — July 8, 2008 @ 1:10 pm
This is why it’s unfortunate when The Drudge Report links to Nikki’s site. You get a lot of right wing, red state, conservative republicans opining when they normally wouldn’t even come here. Don’t get me wrong, I fit many of those criteria myself but some stereotypes are around for a reason.
Someone above asked “why all the haters?” Isn’t it obvious? Would there be so many complaints had Tarantino’s career took the route Avery’s did?
Comment by FuMikechu — July 8, 2008 @ 1:17 pm
Some of the best films in the history of movies have been derivations from other works, so that cut-n-dried argument–which implies such flicks are automatically somehow lesser–is a load of crap.
I think the Roger Avary argument would hold up a little better but, you know, the guy wrote SILENT HILL. And the rest of his flicks aren’t anything with a personality or skill comparable to Tarantino’s best work.
Anyway, people have been talking this kind of smack about Tarantino since Reservoir Dogs, claiming he was forgotten after Pulp Fiction, seeming to conveniently forget that Jackie Brown is regarded as a masterpiece in a lot of respectable quarters, that Kill Bill 1&2 were very successful, and he can still attract top talent and can probably do whatever he wants with his films from this point forward. Bitter fanboys should stop quoting jealous screeds penned over a decade ago by forgotten 3rd-rate producers because nobody even cares about that feud anymore.
Comment by Justin — July 8, 2008 @ 1:17 pm
Tarantino’s work is boring, and disgusting all at the same time
Comment by hoco — July 8, 2008 @ 1:19 pm
Wasn’t the first manuscript featuring Natural Born Killers, Reservoir Dogs, and Pulp Fiction all written with someone else? Wasn’t that someone else removed from all projects by Tarantino? Has Tarantino done anything even remotely entertaining outside of these three movies, where his input is questionable at best? Maybe Fat Harvey should apologize to the real talent behind Tarantino’s fame, and get him to write some scripts instead of pretending this video store douche has any talent.
Comment by the truth — July 8, 2008 @ 1:22 pm
Sorry guys I have to disagree. The man is talented.
I initially gave up hope in him after the lackluster “Kill Bill Volume 2″. Volume 1 was excellent and action packed. But 2 was just unnecessary and could have been put in 1.
But Grindhouse was brilliant. At least his movie, “Death Proof” was. His movie felt like a real Grindhouse movie. Robert’s movie was corny, cheesy, and ridiculously stupid.
“Death Proof” had good acting. And while people complained that it had “too much talking” I think that for a slasher film about a guy who kills folks with his car, it had good character development. It is a very underrated and well made movie.
I think Weinstein should rethink a “Grindhouse” sequel. Maybe make it an HBO Original Movie series that premieres with an new installment every Halloween season.
Comment by Bruno — July 8, 2008 @ 1:25 pm
Why don’t you guys go make a movie and stop blogging from your computers hating on Tarantino like a bunch of losers.
Comment by britton — July 8, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
Sample Dialogue
Hero — You Nazi bastard, prepare to be killed by this bullet.
Nazi — You only assume I’m a Nazi because I wear this clothing, but maybe I just like the way it feels. Maybe I’m pretending to be a Nazi so I can save my family. I don’t presume you’re the good guy just because you dress in certain articles of clothing that claim that you are on the right side of this struggle.
Hero — I’m not prejudging. You’re boss, sold you out, when I had him tangling over the ledge while giving him a foot massage. And not only is he hot for me, but he’s also a traitor to his people.
Nazi — Thank you for the tasty story.
Comment by Matt — July 8, 2008 @ 1:33 pm
Keep throwing around words like ‘derivative’ because you think it makes you sound above it all. The fact is Tarantino pours his talent and love of movies into whatever he does and makes eminently entertaining films. If only there were more ‘one-tick ponies’ like him around there wouldn’t be so many instantly-forgettable, filmmaking-by-committee time-wasters made.
Comment by Steve — July 8, 2008 @ 1:36 pm
Tarantino was, is and always will be among the true cinematic geniuses of Hollywood. These know-nothing cretins whose experience in film making goes no further than making shadow puppets on the wall in front of a flashlight have no idea of what they’re saying, their babbling is nothing but mental flatulence.
Tarantino is not without flaws, he would be the first to admit that, but even Babe Ruth had less than perfect seasons, but the fans who remember him aren’t troubled by his imperfections, they remember the ‘Bambino’, just as 100 years from now the ‘Tarantino’ will be remembered with the same awe and respect.
Don’t like his films? Don’t go see them. Simple as that. Tarantino has made his mark in the history books and nothing that any little weasel has to say is going to change that.
Comment by John Greenbrier — July 8, 2008 @ 1:36 pm
originality in film making is in vision
none of you haters can deny that he and pta have that
of course sometimes not everybody sees what everybody sees…..
meaning there’s gotta be room for you haters to hate
capiche
Comment by Alex — July 8, 2008 @ 1:43 pm
Whoa. A lot of haters on this post stream.
Ease up. Tarantino is an original if nothing else.
And you have to admit that Kill Bill, Vols. I & II are a masterpiece. Tarantino is a reflection of his generation and our times. He has assimilated information (a voluminous knowledge of film and pop culture) and put it into the blender of his mind and crafted original works that are part pastiche and part fragments of the input reflected back.
Take Kill Bill, Vol. I, for example: The interplay of his use of visuals, narrative clipping, especially the music, genre-bending and blending, and a serious wink along the way and you get brilliant entertainment that is knowing without being snarky.
He is a true craftsman, and even if his stuff is not to your taste, you cannot take that away from him.
Comment by radii — July 8, 2008 @ 1:46 pm
Enzo G. Castellari is one of my heroes and I am delighted to see his name used in conjunction with a story about this film project. Enzo, if you’re reading, god bless you and your family, sir. Your movies are a treasure to the human condition!!
Comment by Squonkamatic — July 8, 2008 @ 1:48 pm
Q never made a bad movie! You guys probably like the hollywood dribble. Talk about making the same movies over and over.
Comment by mark — July 8, 2008 @ 1:56 pm
Actually, the dialogue would probably be more along the lines of…
INT. TRANSPORT PLANE. NIGHT.
CORPORAL COOPER
She’s standing at a street lantern, for fuck’s sake.
PRIVATE RYAN
Doesn’t make her a whore.
CORPORAL COOPER
Makes her a whore, son. You tell me when you saw a good girl standing at a street lantern, in the middle of the fucking night.
PRIVATE RYAN
She’s waiting.
COOPER SIGHS.
CORPORAL COOPER
For her fucking John, that is.
CAPTAIN JACK.
Fritz.
CORPORAL COOPER
Wha?
CAPTAIN JACK
She’s German. Can’t be a John.
PRIVATE RYAN
Or a Tom or Harry.
CORPORAL COOPER
But sure as hell a Dick.
The others GET IT. They LAUGH.
CORPORAL COOPER
Fucking Lily Marleen.
From the FRONT of the PLANE, MAJOR SAMSON makes his way into the BACK. He’s a BIG MAN. ALREADY dressed for the JUMP.
MAJOR SAMSON
Sure as hell wouldn’t fuck any of you. Most whiny bunch of pussies I ever seen. Come on, Ladies! Come ON! You want to fuck with somebody? You can fuck with the SS, and they better be singing afterwards, you get me?
OUTSIDE, we can see that the PLANE has CROSSED into GERMANY. The ANTI AIRCRAFT CANNONS start POUNDING at EMPTY SKY. The PLANE ROCKS.
CORPORAL COOPER
Fucking Bastard.
PRIVATE RYAN
Bet he never fucked anybody.
Comment by Thomas Gerhardt — July 8, 2008 @ 2:00 pm
“Don’t like his films? Don’t go see them. Simple as that.”
I suspect that more and more people are going to take this advice.
Comment by Max Schadenfreude — July 8, 2008 @ 2:02 pm
Indulgence, Derivative, and Homage have just begun to induce vomit in me and seemingly already have with most of you.
Comment by David — July 8, 2008 @ 2:04 pm
Man, y’all should be ashamed to call yourself film nerds. Anyone who voices an opinion on a film they ’started’ but never finished should be slapped. For that matter, anyone who starts a film but doesn’t finish it should be shot. Anyone who is a film buff but ‘gets restless’ during a long film…LAME. I just came here from a non-film site link, but man, I’ll never be back. For the record; I sat through Grindhouse twice in the theater and LOVED it! The whole POINT was homage; to accuse him of ‘not having an original idea’ means you completely, totally missed the point.
Comment by None Given — July 8, 2008 @ 2:05 pm
Why is everyone on here stating that Tarantino is unoriginal? All originality has been exhausted. Pretty much any form of literature or film from the past century has taken its ideas from ancient mythologies.
Comment by Liz — July 8, 2008 @ 2:05 pm
I’m mixed on Tarantino. Didn’t like Pulp Fiction, although it did have some hilarious dark humor. Jackie Brown was fascinating, and Kill Bill was decent. Lots of gore and profanity, though, and for that reason I’ve never watched Reservoir Dogs. Might someday.
As far as stuff Tarantino has been involved in, I watched Hostel and did not like it. Just too gory for me.
I admire Tarantino’s off-beat ways, especially since it seems these days that to see a really good movie, you have to venture into indie land. Most movies today are too boring and too predictable.
Comment by Rick — July 8, 2008 @ 2:07 pm
I agree that Tarantino’s dialogue has slipped in quality since his early scripts — among which I would include TRUE ROMANCE, which he wrote without Avary, but didn’t direct. I also agree that his lately sprawling work could use an editor.
However, I by no means agree that he is out of ideas, unoriginal, or without talent. I think these particular charges are misguided.
Look: ALL work is derivative of, based on, or inspired by other work. Homer’s ILIAD inspired Ariosto’s ORLANDO FURIOSO, which, in turn, inspired both JRR Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, both of ‘em medieval literature scholars who absorbed works of that period like Tarantino absorbed 1970s grindhouse and French New Wave cinema. When you’re reading Tolkien, you’re reading a synthesis of influences ranging from Old English poems like “The Wanderer” to Spenser’s FAERIE QUEENE, ORLANDO FURIOSO, JERUSALEM DELIVERED, and THE ILIAD.
The Bard himself, William Shakespeare, drew heavily on other sources (and sometimes plagiarized from) previous works: TAMING OF THE SHREW is an update of several earlier plays, including George Gascoigne’s SUPPOSES, from which it steals characters and an entire subplot. HAMLET imitates THE SPANISH TRAGEDY. Today, Spielberg admits to rewatching movies like LAWRENCE OF ARABIA before making new films, and cites those films as significant influences on his own work. I recall that when Spielberg made CATCH ME IF YOU CAN, he said in some of his interviews that he’d always wanted to make a James Bond film, and when he couldn’t make one of those, he made RAIDERS — a blend of Bond and Lawrence of Arabia.
Even if you think Tarantino is weaker than those auteurs and authors I just named, it’s hard to escape the central point of those examples: Even the best folks imitate — a lot. In fact, I tend to agree with critics who argue that the best writers and film-makers are the best imitators — the ones who imitate good things well, and blend them into original syntheses. Along the way, they add original touches, but they’re essentially collaborating with a host of predecessors.
Tarantino is getting an unduly bad rap about his originality on message boards just because he cites his sources. Most writers and directors don’t. A guy shouldn’t get tarred and feather because he’s willing to give credit to his influences. His work is at least as original as most of the other work I see, including the avante-garde, independent stuff.
If you want to complain that he’s become too comfortable, and that he needs to rewrite and edit more, I’m with you. Agree completely. If you want to accuse him of being unoriginal, I will grind my teeth, listen politely, and think unflattering things about you.
Comment by Graham — July 8, 2008 @ 2:08 pm
Mr. Tarantino is starting to remind me of Michael Cimino after The Deer Hunter. Like Cimino, he’s convinced that he’s an auteur and anything he does will be brilliant. Maybe Kill Bill was his Heaven’s Gate. Cimino took down United Artists and maybe Tarantino will swing a similar axe to Weinstein’s company. I thought the first half of Deathproof was grade B but after Michael Parks had his 2 minute sequence it came to a screeching halt.
Comment by Dana — July 8, 2008 @ 2:08 pm
His next movie should be a children’s film: “When Quent Jmped the Shark”.
Comment by Doc Watson — July 8, 2008 @ 2:09 pm
Tarantino is a hard core fan of film in all genres. Plain and simple. Its obvious in his work (and from his interviews) that he makes movies that he would want to watch and that other people who love watching all kinds of movies would want to watch. If you watched the early “Avery” stuff and loved it and hoping for more and more of the same, you’ll always be disappointed because he doesn’t have a style. He’s like the Bruce Lee of writing/directing. The film style of no style.
Comment by Chase Roper — July 8, 2008 @ 2:12 pm
Considering everyone knows what an out of control egomaniacal asshole (with zero talent) Harvey Weinstein is, who the hell would be stupid enough to do business with him? I’ll laugh if Tarantino can’t get financing for this due to Harvey grabbing onto his coat tails.
Comment by Crystal Diane Stevens — July 8, 2008 @ 2:21 pm
The guy is a genius. You all watch his movies. If you hated him so much, you would stay away.
The only thing Quentin ever did wrong was his partnership with Robert Rodriguez who is one of the worst storytellers working in motion pictures today. Rodriguez should not be allowed to do anything other than post production on a movie. He shouldn’t even be mentioned int he same breath as Quentin.
The Death Proof unrated cut is excellent. I’ve seen so many times now because it’s one of my wife’s favorite movies. It grows on me more and more. It’s a worthy part of his filmography.
Quentin creates a fantasy world and I like visiting it. It’s a great escape.
My only gripe is he hasn’t made more films. I feel the same about PTA in that regard, but then I’m thankful that neither of them are studio hacks knocking out the latest Dodgeball ripoff or Seann William Scott movie.
I’ll wait as long as it takes for them to release their films because I know they put nothing but love into their work.
You say you don’t like Quentin’s films? I counter that you do. What you really don’t like is that you’re not him.
Comment by Joe — July 8, 2008 @ 2:22 pm
I agree with most of the criticisms posted here.
However, I’d still rather watch Grindhouse than 90% of what’s out there.
Comment by SFWriter777 — July 8, 2008 @ 2:24 pm
When is this guys 15 minutes up? He’s a horrible actor, he’s ugly, and worst of all, his movies SUCK. Time to like this italian POS go. . .be gone, punk.
Comment by Al Hitchcock — July 8, 2008 @ 2:31 pm
At the end of the day Q gets to do what he loves best . . . make movies he’s interested in seeing. To crucify a guy whose whole life is cinema for drawing on his vast knowledge of film is a bit - f***** up.
Comment by Easy — July 8, 2008 @ 2:37 pm
Thomas,
Trying to promote your writing and your website? That is some serious shilling your doing.
Comment by me — July 8, 2008 @ 2:37 pm
What a bunch of douches! I hope some of these comments aren’t being posted by filmmaker wannabes hatin on the man. Tarantino’s body of work is really good and he will be making film for a long time to come. So stop fuckin wetting the bed and make your own way in if you can.
mf d
Comment by Deezo — July 8, 2008 @ 2:38 pm
Correction: In my earlier post, I remarked as an aside that Tarantino wrote TRUE ROMANCE without Avary. In writing that particular statement, it looks like I erred. I now see from IMDB.com that Avary was an uncredited script doctor on this and several earlier Tarantino works.
In my earlier post, I’d remarked that late-Tarantino has talent — which is why I defended him — but badly needs an editor.
Apparently, Roger Avary is that editor.
Comment by Graham — July 8, 2008 @ 2:40 pm
Kicking ASS
Tarantino’s movies are obviously not made for everyone. He knows what he likes in film, draws from it, and continues to make movies that ultimately entertain him.
Luckily, we have the same taste in movies.
Keep up the quest to make -your- favorite movie Quentin. I’m positive it will be mine too.
For those of you dropping the “no talent..” “unoriginal…”, -get back to your computer solitaire and go see Hancock a fourth time.
Comment by stevenalamode — July 8, 2008 @ 2:41 pm
“Considering everyone knows what an out of control egomaniacal asshole (with zero talent) Harvey Weinstein is, who the hell would be stupid enough to do business with him? ”
From the fact that he has produced around 200 movies, I’d say a lot of people are willing to work with him. From the snarky, smarmy comments littering this board today, I’d say that Harvey is definitely not the only out of control egomaniacal asshole with no talent.
Comment by me — July 8, 2008 @ 2:44 pm
He’s never made a truly original film. They were all written with someone else, adaptations of other source material, or else an “homage”/ripoff of lesser known movies.
Most of his work is based on other movies, not on real life & real experiences, so consequently they have a sheen of immaturity & shallowness. IMHO, JACKIE BROWN is his most mature work & that was based on a book by Elmore Leonard.
But I wouldn’t mind QT ripping off other filmmakers & authors so much if his movies weren’t so long & boring.
ZZZZZZ….
Comment by LR — July 8, 2008 @ 2:49 pm
I would totally watch that movie, Thomas Gerhardt.
Comment by Buddydave — July 8, 2008 @ 3:03 pm
Well, I LOVED Grindhouse. For some reason, the kids didn’t want to see it. My students, who love horror and violence, had no interest in it. I don’t get it. Even if it was because of the drive-in style, it was still the same type of stuff they go to every week already. And anyone who complains about the length can turn in their hobbit feet. If it’s good, it doesn’t matter how long it is, and the full 3-plus hours made Grindhouse an event. The most fun I’d had in a long time. But, then, I spent many a weekend at the drive-in with a pizza, a six-pack and friends who all loved schlocky movies.
Comment by stagebandman — July 8, 2008 @ 3:04 pm
Tarantino has at least been honest about who has influenced him. Spielberg tried to dress up that mega-mess A.I. as a kind of directorial favour to ‘his pal’ Kubrick who ‘always wanted to do it but sadly couldn’t complete it.’ What a load of crap. Spielberg did it because Kubrick is something he could never be…autonomous, iconoclastic and utterly committed to his ‘art’. Steve loves to make the bucks but the only way he can appear in the same sentence as Kubrick was by osmosis.
Tarantino has gone overboard in both style and production, but I have every confidence he will learn. ‘Jackie Brown’ is movie magic all by itself, and Pulp Fiction was a breath of fresh air. As for Grindhouse, Death Proof was interesting, while Planet Terror (or whatever the hell it was called) stank.
Comment by Stormcrow — July 8, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
I get really annoyed at some on this thread when they try and justify Tarantino’s increasingly derivative style because, as they put it, “there’s no originality out there, so everything’s derivative. There! See, Tarantino admits he rips stuff off. That makes him a genius. He’s “ironic”". Uh, no.
It’s a pretty lame excuse for Tarantino apologists.
Reservoir Dogs is his best film, followed by Pulp Fiction (which is overrated, though not terrible). Kill Bill is an overlong mess, and Grindhouse is a tribute to crappy movies (and at 3 hours, no less). Tarantino is totally overrated, and this WWII film will be a disaster. It will be an out of control production.
QT is going to bankrupt Harvey Weinstein.
Comment by The Man from London — July 8, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
Uh, actually “me”, I don’t really need shilling (which is such a stupid Hollywood word), because my own writing will be in the stores next year, without help from commenting on web sites.
This was just a little fun thing to do for about three minutes as I am taking a break from my own writing.
I like Quentin’s movies for the most part. Well, except Grindhouse, where even the longer version of Death Proof didn’t do anything for me (although I did like the re-insertion of the Sheriff and Son No. Something, which kind of connects it to Kill Bill).
And yes, I am going to see this one, too, in the hope it will be as good as Where Eagles Dare and minus the bad, bad helicopter.
Anyway, it wasn’t intended to whore myself out nor to offend anybody. I wasn’t aware that some folks are so anal that they would try to immediately shit a diamond.
And, uh, at least I sign any comment I do with my real name. Not to shill, but simply because one should do that, always. You know, it’s kind of polite, and since I don’t post a lot anywhere, I think one should treat others in message boards with at least the same politeness as being in the same room.
Comment by Thomas Gerhardt — July 8, 2008 @ 3:16 pm
Trashing QT? Are you folks high on crack? If you don’t like him or his over the top style, OK then thats fine everyone has an opinion. But no talent? Have you seen True Romance, Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Kill Bill, Death Proof? These are phenomenal movies made by possibly the best director of my generation X. His writing is second to none and im sorry if your attention spans rate in seconds, but I like having something to think about instead of just staring at the screen and pointing at “bright colors”.
You know what I hate? Country music. But you dont hear me talking about how stupid it is and how it doesnt deserve to win grammys because my little opinion matters in the big picture. Truth is tons of people love country music so who am I grade something I dont understand? Fact: the only time people sound stupid is when they dont know what they’re talking about.
Comment by chris — July 8, 2008 @ 3:23 pm
Thomas,
Keep directing people to your website and announcing that your “writing will be in the stores next year”. You’re right…that is definitely not shilling.
Love, Robert
Comment by Robert — July 8, 2008 @ 3:39 pm
I wonder what Tarantino will do for FEET in this new movie. Will we be treated to close shots of grimy soldiers’ feet? The feet of German women? Maybe the dirty, bony, emaciated feet of concentration camp victims? Feet, of course, are the only original element in any Tarantino movie, the only thing that’s really *him*. The rest is all sucked out of the work of other people. Tarantino isn’t a movie director so much as a movie grinder — you shove other people’s movies into one end, turn the crank, and out the other end comes Tarantino’s gooey mishmash. The only way he will ever make a movie that is totally and thoroughly his is if he makes a movie that’s about nothing but … well, feet. Interesting that the only part of his work that’s truly him is the most annoying to those of us who don’t share the fetish that apparently holds him in its iron grip — FEET! The only good thing about the fact that Tarantino is making another movie is that maybe it will keep him from standing in front of a camera and talking, which is even more annoying than having his podophilia shoved in our faces.
Comment by Joseph Locke — July 8, 2008 @ 3:43 pm
Any studio that gives him final cut, more then a two hr running time, and more then $30 million is crazy. The marketing of Grindhouse may have sucked, but so did the film.
Comment by realworldperson — July 8, 2008 @ 3:54 pm
Tarantino is alright - I don’t understand the people who hate on him nor the people who gush over him like he’s some sort of prodigal son. He has a unique style - which frankly is more than most director’s can say. So whatever - I’ll watch this if the opportunity presents itself.
Comment by Bob — July 8, 2008 @ 4:04 pm
Our movie screens are chock full of artless rip-offs (sorry “remakes”) of earlier creative works. It seems as if the last few years have seen nothing but outright mass destruction of the stories that once entertained us and helped to define our culture.
Notice the differences in meaning between “define” and ‘manipulate’; “helped”, and ‘crammed down our throats’.
Hollywood is producing virtually nothing whilst reducing everything they touch into an overpriced bumper sticker slapped on the ass-end of any random Prius in Malibu.
They’ve even managed to transmogrify the Star Wars franchise into a friggin’ Sesame Street simulacrum of their wish-fulfillment fantasies. Starship Troopers anyone? I f’n Robot? Omega Man? Planet of the Apes?. Everything they’ve touched that was once good, they turn to crap.
Having said that, I for one am looking forward to Inglorious Bastards and Tarantino’s take on the kick-fascist-ass genre - which probably means the doddering fools staggering around with their diminishing moneybags in ‘Hollywood’ will likely do whatever it takes to square it into their banal circle-jerk.
I can see the result of the sausage machine now: A crack contingent of the ‘Fighting Watermelon Brigade’ will infiltrate the very mountain halls of big oil in their armored hybrid cars to negotiate the release of Susan Sarandon from the evil clutches of Lord Cheney and his Zionist Doom Squad…
Actually, that’s a movie I’d pay to see, as long as the final scene resolves into Lord Cheney munching their still warm livers with a side of freedom fries.
You suck Hollywood!
Comment by monkeyfan — July 8, 2008 @ 4:04 pm
The only thing you can learn from a mediocre director, is how to be a mediocre director…
How copying a crappy genre somehow makes it watchable, is beyond me. Garbage in = garbage out.
But I’m just the ticket-buying public… what do I know?
Comment by Dredd — July 8, 2008 @ 4:09 pm
And where, dear Robert, did I SAY in my little J-O-K-E SCENE post, that “PLEASE PLEASE go to my website”? I merely put in my website-link together with my name. Did I say “oh, please buy me, snap me up, I cannot believe I am not butter?” It’s my home on the web. Nothing more, nothing less.
And that J-O-K-E scene I only quickly typed in, because of Matt’s little thing here posted previously:
Sample Dialogue
Hero — You Nazi bastard, prepare to be killed by this bullet.
Nazi — You only assume I’m a Nazi because I wear this clothing, but maybe I just like the way it feels. Maybe I’m pretending to be a Nazi so I can save my family. I don’t presume you’re the good guy just because you dress in certain articles of clothing that claim that you are on the right side of this struggle.
Hero — I’m not prejudging. You’re boss, sold you out, when I had him tangling over the ledge while giving him a foot massage. And not only is he hot for me, but he’s also a traitor to his people.
Nazi — Thank you for the tasty story.
And in my SECOND post, I merely reacted to an insult. Oh, I’m sorry that I am writer myself. So sorry. So sorry that I don’t hide behind little snarky names.
Sheesh.
This is the reason why I stay away from messageboards.
Comment by Thomas Gerhardt — July 8, 2008 @ 4:22 pm
inglorious bastards, a film by m. night tarantino?
Comment by Anonymous — July 8, 2008 @ 4:33 pm
Screw ‘Inglorious Bastards’ I wanna see ‘Machete’.
You listening Harvey?
Comment by Ace — July 8, 2008 @ 4:46 pm
I never imagined that I would enjoy a film about a couple of hit men who quote the Bible, dance to Chuck Berry, and accidentally blow off the head of their friend.
It never occurred to me that I would enjoy a movie about a samurai-wielding jilted bride who extracted revenge on those that betrayed her.
Never thought that I would appreciate a blood-and-gore vampire/zombie fest set in a depraved Texas roadhouse.
And it never even crossed my mind that I would have any interest in any type of WWII movie.
But then along comes QT and changes everything. I can’t wait to see IB (if and when it ever gets made!).
Comment by david — July 8, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
Tarantino is one of the few directors who understand what cinema is about - archetypes, fantasy, and emotion. I loved all of his movies except Resevoir Dogs.
I am extremely attracted to the idea of a spaghetti western crossed with a WWII movie. I would rather see heroes action heroic, but Tarantino wants to take it one step further. Typical & exciting. I can’t wait!!!
Comment by Gonzo Gorilla — July 8, 2008 @ 4:54 pm
One of the things I like best about QT is how passionate and vociferous his detractors are. Anyone that can anger this many people consistantly for a deceade and a half must be doing something right.
That being said, even QT’s WORST efforts are better than 95% of the drek released every year in by Hollywood and the boutique studios.
Comment by El Perro — July 8, 2008 @ 5:06 pm
Holy crap Ace! I forgot about Ma Che Te!
That I’d pay to see too.
Comment by monkeyfan — July 8, 2008 @ 5:16 pm
QT is one of the best writers in H-wood but he is also one of the worse directors. He definitely needs the suitd looking over his shoulder when he directs. The strip club schick is also getting old, he needs a new gag reel.
Comment by ewj1 — July 8, 2008 @ 5:16 pm
“He’s never made a truly original film. They were all written with someone else, adaptations of other source material, or else an “homage”/ripoff of lesser known movies.”
“Quentin writes great dialogue but I think he’s officially out of ideas.”
“The problem with Quentin is that he never tries to be original anymore, all of his work since Pulp Fiction has been homage after homage after homage. Make an original picture agin man”
SWAT, MIAMI VICE, The Dukes Of Hazard,The Departed,The Incredible Hulk, Spider-Man, The Punisher, Magnum P.I., The Crow, Sin City, 300. These among other movies are all remakes of/or concepts take from tv, books, commic books, or graffic novels.
Tarantino isn’t the only guy in Hollywood to fail to come up with an original idea for a movie.
Comment by thmsmgnm — July 8, 2008 @ 5:20 pm
thmsmgnm
You missed the point while making the point.
Dukes of Hazzard is craptastic.
So is the current Tarantino.
BTW as predicted Warners is out already!
Comment by FairyTaleListener — July 8, 2008 @ 6:03 pm
Okay, apparently very few here have any context for film history. You give me any film you think is original, and I’ll give you 10 films it was inspired by, or even the very piece of literature it was based on.
Tarantino’s originality and creativity comes from blending genre films and adding modern context. And you know he’s good because almost every action film post 1996 has been ripping him off…poorly.
Fine, criticize the hype or the over saturation of his influence on modern film…but it’s utterly ignorant to call him untalented, uninspired, or unoriginal.
(Since this is linked from Drudge, I’d expect a bunch of those ignorant yahoos are spamming up this board with their self-righteous propaganda.)
Comment by steve — July 8, 2008 @ 6:07 pm
Simply enough, other than Grindhouse, every film Tarantino has either made double its budget or has unequivocally been a hit.
Comment by Phil — July 8, 2008 @ 6:42 pm
If the Delta Blues musicians had placed a copywright on the 12 bar blues and Hitchcock on the overhead shot, to name but a few where would we be? Art is theft, but can you make it a beautiful theft.
QT doesn’t make movies that will earn him an Oscar nod and for that alone he gets respect. Originality, my god everyone wants to be original, do what you do, that makes it original, stop asking mommy to pay attention, that seems to be the gripe on this thread.
The Kung Fu movies were never crappy, once again it’s an aesthetic you either get it or don’t. Appreciate don’t denigrate.
Comment by squidfly — July 8, 2008 @ 7:03 pm
Did I seriously beat you to the idea - it’s a smokescreen and they’re making “Werewolf Women of the SS!”
Comment by Tim — July 8, 2008 @ 7:34 pm
MGM made three exceptional anti-hero WWII flicks in that era — DIRTY DOZEN If Quint can channel the best of those 3 and come in under 2 hr 45 min he’s golden. If the movie costs under 10 MIL! C’mon, no one under 35 will see this stuff. He’s ‘post’ Miramax era goods and no one gives a damn anymore. But I’ll still see it. I love that war stuff. Just use REAL tanks, please? No CGI Private Ryan boats off Normandy garbage.
Comment by undercover — July 8, 2008 @ 7:51 pm
Sad to say, but I really liked both of the Grind House flicks. I hope that his new idea brings him a lot of success, he does have a good talent for action/violent movies.
Comment by David — July 8, 2008 @ 7:57 pm
Someone on this thread said that Pulp Fiction was Tarantino’s best film. I disagree. I think Jackie Brown (1997) was his best film so far. So far I haven’t disliked any film he’s made. There all good.
Comment by Steve — July 8, 2008 @ 8:22 pm
QT couldn’t direct traffic.
Comment by Voolie — July 8, 2008 @ 8:35 pm
grindhouse sucked. planet terror was ok, but death proof totally blew.
Comment by farmy — July 8, 2008 @ 8:37 pm
Well, I’ve never seen the Italian film, but if it’s good, then this film might be too. QT doesn’t really have his own ideas, he takes other people’s ideas and turns them to gold(usually). Yes, I used to know the guy.
Comment by Max Thrax — July 8, 2008 @ 8:46 pm
Oh….and I hope this doesn’t distract Bender from the Nine Inch Nails project he’s working on.
Comment by Max Thrax — July 8, 2008 @ 8:56 pm
It would be interesting to see QT do a World War II film, but do a battle-film, not a “mission-film.” Though I agree the last great film he has was Kill Bill 1, which should been the second half–because the really second-half really bites!! As for Grindhouse, let’s face it–Deathproof really wasn’t a great story. As for his friend Robert R, I heard that he is bringing back Red Sonja. Why can’t Hollywood ever come up with their own ideas instead of recycling dogs and making comic book movies??
Comment by Greg — July 8, 2008 @ 9:34 pm
We’ll wait and see. Maybe, just maybe, QT can pull it off. Or he will will create the first half billion dollar film that everyone in the world will have to pay $7.50 at least three times to view before anyone ever sees a profit.
Comment by Richard — July 8, 2008 @ 9:48 pm
the main reason grindhouse bombed wasn’t the 3 hour thing, it was the fact they released it on Easter weekend of that year. Dumbasses! Even lapsed Catholics and those not all that religious still get together with family and friends on Easter weekend.
Seeing the promo’s for Grindhouse leading up to its release just wreaked of terrible timing for that film. If the consensus is that it was too long, well, that’s a nice excuse but it just covers up the harder reality that you missed the American market by a mile. Wake up!!!
I would hope the studio realizes it was the wrong weekend for that movie. You could of hired me out as an intuitive under the table and I would of saved you a ton of money.
Comment by Ronnie Sharky — July 8, 2008 @ 10:04 pm
He peaked at “Resivoir Dogs”, and its been all downhill since then. You can almost put Pulp together shot by shot from other movies, there is paying homage to your influences and then there is just copying shyte.
This is the man that made “Dusk till dawn”. Visionary film genius? Please. Flavor of a decade that made a producer a lot of money once and is therefore going to be foisted upon us until he is making sit coms.
“Influenced” by this Italian movie? You mean translated to english, injected with about 200 more dismemberment scenes and ta-da! Done.
Comment by SeattleBuzzKill — July 8, 2008 @ 10:33 pm
Here’s an idea. Why don’t one half of you get on one side of QT, and the other half get on the other side, and then jerk each other off?
Comment by Bilbo Buggers — July 8, 2008 @ 10:51 pm
Yikes! I think what Bilbo’s trying to say is, we’re all just blowing smoke and wasting life energy with our useless analysis and comments and opinions. The power players will do whatever they want.
Comment by Holy Smokes! — July 8, 2008 @ 10:59 pm
I publicly offer to shave 1 3/4 inches off Quentin’s chin using my patented Bon-Scrap-R plastic surgery turbo grindstone.
Comment by Dr. Meistro — July 8, 2008 @ 11:03 pm
Stop the presses! Look at the top of this page! “Get Quentin Tarantino Ringtones”!!! Holy Pusbags! I’m not sure I’m cool enough for Quentin Tarantino ringtones!
Comment by Generous Hindquarters — July 8, 2008 @ 11:06 pm
For America, Quentin tarantino is best making movies since him Alfred Hitcock. I am watching all movies and licking them very much. Why so anger just because Harvey bend over and offer man love to boy genius? Relax, allready.
Comment by Franz Kepple — July 8, 2008 @ 11:11 pm
TARANTINO IS DONE.
Quentin is so played out that he can barely stand the sound of his OWN voice.
He needs to keep his nose where it belongs, if you know what I mean.
Comment by O. Welles — July 8, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
I think what Generous Hindquarters (real name? I DON’T THINK SO!) is trying to say is that QT’s devolution into a ringtone subject is indicative of his devolution into kitsch. I mean, after a certain point, you become a parody of yourself, nes pas?
Comment by Holy Smokes! — July 8, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
Cool your jets, Dr. Meistro. My chin is the only thing standing between Jay Leno and Chin Domination by NBC!
Comment by Quentin Tarantino — July 8, 2008 @ 11:17 pm
Ah, crap, it doesn’t matter, Holy Smokes! The freakin’ ads are rotating. The QT ringtones ad isn’t there any more. Son of a —
Comment by Generous Hindquarters — July 8, 2008 @ 11:19 pm
I am in shock at all of the criticism of Tarantino on this blog… There are so few filmmakers left these days that actually ‘make’ as opposed to ‘recycle’ film.
Tarantino, Wachowski’s, Gilliam, Nolan, Shamalan, Coen’s, and probably a few others that I am missing.
From Dusk Till Dawn, Reservoir Dogs, and Pulp Fiction are three of the best movies ever made, and his other work has been incredibly original and groundbreaking as well.
I can only hope that he doesn’t take any criticism to heart, because it sounds like all of you would rather see “Transformers 2″ or “Saw 8″ as opposed to original material.
I hope all of you re-think your comments, and go watch his movies again.
Signed,
Disappointed.
Comment by Vincent Vega — July 9, 2008 @ 12:15 am
My professional limited psychobioanalysis of Mr Tarantino is that of a man who is highly creative but not a genius. He is very passionate about film and has a vast knowledge of every genre. His facial features indicated by his strong jawline and thinning hair shows he is very aggressive due to high levels of testosterone. His dialogue usage in his films are that of one who is uneducated in the classical approach to story telling, and reflects more a comic book sense of interaction with people than with real social settings. In other words, he’s a “big kid”.
Comment by bignose — July 9, 2008 @ 12:25 am
“influences”… “homages”… Right.
As a European filmmaker I’d like to do a homage space opera film with a kid, two robots and an asthmatic in a black cape. The log line will be something like “May the Shmorce be with you.”
I’m sure George Lucas wont object since it’s only an influenced homage.
There used to be a word for people like QT: plagiarist.
I support copyright thievery of all Hollywood products because Hollywood is the biggest thief of all.
Comment by Lupin — July 9, 2008 @ 1:15 am
This blog is wonderful!
How can an American (purely bred) generate so many tantrums, psychological hang ups, anticipation, suspense, twists and turns, despicable thoughts, irony, unpredictable ending WITHOUT releasing a movie?
You do realize that all of you are behaving like Tarantino characters?
I would call this the B Blog, and that’s a compliment.
Comment by Jackie — July 9, 2008 @ 2:22 am
all george lucas did was add say “boy oh boy i bet that would look cool with lazer beams while watching a space odyssey.
Comment by nathan — July 9, 2008 @ 2:28 am
I love watching the Tarantino movies with my grandaughters, ages 4 and 5. They get so excited they spill their beer.
Comment by Big Al — July 9, 2008 @ 4:31 am
Those that can’t, criticize.
You dawgs are just jealous of my man, Quentin.
Comment by Major Bob — July 9, 2008 @ 6:18 am
This should be interesting. Let’s just say my faves are:
True Romance, Pulp, and Kill Bill Vol 2. On the latter film, I am glad Q cut down dramatically on the expletives. Why a WW2 film, I don’t know, but I hope there are beautiful barefoot women in it. Go, Q. Do what you think works. But I don’t want another Death Proof or Jackie Brown.
Comment by Ferdinand — July 9, 2008 @ 6:20 am
tools. QT is one of the few directors out their with creative license to do something interesting. So what if you don’t like his movies and others do. Every great movie has had its numerous detractors. Just look to every one of Stanley Kubrick’s films, and the amount of criticism that each one of them got in the few years after they were released. Now they’re all classics.
If Pulp hadn’t been so damn good, then we wouldn’t even be having these conversations. I thought Kill Bill was a great story, well directed, and had a great score. Likewise, Death Proof, if you watch it by itself, is a great movie. He goes out and busts his balls to get real stunts and not just make everything CG, and people still bitch and moan.
And then for those who bitch about him always making an homage to one film or the other… There’s hardly anything original under the sun now. What do you expect him to do? I know what I expect. I expect good real dialogue, and a score that creates a wonderfully cinematic experience. He delivers every time.
Comment by Seth — July 9, 2008 @ 6:20 am
I can’t believe everyone thinks this guys sucks. True Romance was awesome (he wrote the story), Res Dogs was awesome, Pulp Fiction is brilliant, Jackie Brown was dope, Kill Bill was fun (OK, a little tiring and not great but FUN) and I haven’t seen Grindhouse so I can’t comment on it. Is he the Messiah of cinema? Hell no, I’ll save those accolades for the Kubricks of the world (of which there is a small handful). But he has made some sweet motherf’n films, motherf’rs!
Comment by Don Q — July 9, 2008 @ 6:28 am
Ummm in a day where every movie is a derivative of each other, you’re asking one of the few remaining auteurs in Hollywood to be “original”?
I think the problem with you people is that you want him to keep making Pulp Fiction over and over again, and that’s just it– he’s going to do what he wants to do, not what you want. If you know anything about movies, you’ll realize that Pulp Fiction was an homage, just like every one of his movies. He got into movies because of his love for them, so he makes movies for that reason. If you don’t like that, you haven’t ever really liked any of his work.
Also, I’m not sure about this, but I don’t think that Tarantino has ever made a movie and forced you to watch it and like it.
I just don’t get why people hold their mouths open and ask for more garbage to be shoveled in without opening their eyes, but when something GOOD comes along, it gets overanalyzed and chucked to the side from being overcautious.
Two recommendations for you moths:
-Become a writer/director and make “original” crap that you don’t care about for other people.
-Go watch Transformers and smile at that originality, kids.
Comment by BANCHO — July 9, 2008 @ 6:31 am
I am excited to see this new project. It marks an effort by Tarantino to stretch a bit. Let’s face it, much of Tarantino’s work draws upon his fascination with 1970’s culture. This will be the first time he has tried to do a pic set before that period. I will be interested to see how he shifts his focus and how he handles dialogue. True it is still derivative of seventies filmmaking, but I will be interested to see him draw upon his various other tools.
Comment by chap — July 9, 2008 @ 6:34 am
“…about a group of soldiers on their way to be executed who get the chance of a reprieve…” A fine line between “homage” and…well, another derivative. Just be careful not to step in the homage on the way not to the box office..
Comment by Bill Shears — July 9, 2008 @ 6:39 am
I couldn’t muck through all these comments, so if I’m being repetitive, I’m sorry…
“True Romance”, “Reservoir Dogs”, and “Pulp Fiction” were astoundingly good. “Jackie Brown” was pretty good. The “Kill Bill” movies were sadly disappointing. “Grindhouse” was horrible.
Having said all that, let me point out that Tarantino shouldn’t be compared to Spielberg or Lucas. He has proven himself to be better then them. He reminds me of Orson Wells.
It is because of his early brilliance, that we hope for something similar in the future. He could produce years of complete garbage and we would still remain hopeful.
Comment by Joe Hurley — July 9, 2008 @ 6:39 am
Brad Pitt? I know that Tarentino is in the habit of reviving has-beens careers but couldn’t he find somebody a bit more interesting? Thats the problem with hollywood, they still live in the past, he hasn’t had a hit movie since Mr. and Mrs. Smith yet they still think people want to go see a movie with him as lead. Oh well, if that happens I’ll just wait for it to come on HBO.
Comment by cambel — July 9, 2008 @ 6:40 am
Tarantino is a hack. All he does is re-spin other older films. If some other director made crap like kill bill, from dusk till dawn, or grindhouse they’d be laughed at but because hollyweird has some kind of love fixation with him they become art films. what do i care - i haven’t been to a movie theater in 4 years and am happy to spend my time on productive things.
Comment by mike — July 9, 2008 @ 6:59 am
Grindhouse (one film; two segments) was an amazing theatrical experience that I wish I could purchase for home viewing.
Hrm, so I would like to purchase a product and Harv needs some cash. If only there was a system that could help us both out.
Oh well. Hey, anybody know when that final cut of Kill Bill will be released?
Comment by greg — July 9, 2008 @ 7:06 am
Wow, another WWII film. How timely. A collective yawn from the the 96% of the world that ain’t white boys. And Peter Jackson’s remaking Dambusters (complete with Ni**er the dog)? Double yawn.
Comment by Schlonsky — July 9, 2008 @ 7:07 am
Please note in all criticisms the amount of response this little article about a hypothetical movie from Q.T. has generated. Its going to be, at least, entertaining. The one thing I don’t understand about every comment that bashes this or bashes that about his movies is that they are pretty fun to watch, even if they’re not monumental pictures. People hold him to a ridiculously high standard after years of great work — so when he makes Deathproof, a movie that is 90% car stunts/chase and about 10% plot, he gets bashed because its not Citizen Kane. You missed the point. Oh well, I had a lot of fun watching every one of his movies — and that was the point.
Comment by JP. Scheppard — July 9, 2008 @ 7:26 am
Quentin had a very unique style of movie making that no one had seen before… until we had all seen it. Now its been copied, flipped around, redone, and immitated innmerably. From shows like CSI to music like The Kinks. Its all been done.
If he wants to remain relevant, he needs to stop pushing the limits and just go on and remake Hannover Street!
Comment by Barry Whyte — July 9, 2008 @ 7:27 am
Why is it that our filmmakers are so ill with nostalgia? Tarantino certainly has talent, but I seriously question his imagination. The homage to the kung-fu flick, the homage to the horror/exploitation flick, now the homage to the Dirty Dozenesque war movie. The guy is wasting his potential on relieving his 60s/70s childhood! Most of his generation is. Learn from past works; build on past works, but SAY SOMETHING NEW. Add to the legacy of cinema, rather than regurgitate it, TQ. Death to this nostalgic disease.
Comment by Jim B — July 9, 2008 @ 7:36 am
I know this is heresy…but Pulp Fiction is not my favorite Tarantino film. True Romance is, in my opinion, his best movie. If you have not seen it, rent it and enjoy.
Comment by Marcelo DiNapoli — July 9, 2008 @ 7:42 am
Maybe QT/Tarantino is just tapped out of fresh and new ideas and needs a reboot.
Comment by Fresh Ideas — July 9, 2008 @ 7:49 am
All I have to say is that whenever Q comes out with a new movie, I will be there to watch it.
He is a offbeat director / writer that has somehow gotten into the mainstream and I think that’s great! He gives the general movie goer something to think about besides who is going to get the next award.
Comment by Clarke — July 9, 2008 @ 7:49 am
How original, another world war two movie. Why doesn’t he just make another Batman or Hulk movie.
Comment by T — July 9, 2008 @ 7:57 am
Tarantino looks like a comic book figure…..the joker maybe?
Comment by Otto — July 9, 2008 @ 8:30 am
I’m sure the film will be good, regardless of what’s written here. But what I’d really like to see is a movie about the Vega Brothers, set in a pre-Reservoir Dogs, Pre-Pulp Fiction setting…
Comment by randy — July 9, 2008 @ 8:42 am
After reading through all the comments here, I’m amazed that this many pretentious mimics all got together on one message board at the same time…
Tarantino’s films are, above ALL, entertaining. He gets it. Entertain people well and reliably and you’ll prosper greatly (and find artistic satisfaction, if you want it).
Comment by Laughing at the wannabes — July 9, 2008 @ 8:48 am
Anyone who has seen the original Chinese versions of “Hero” and “Shaolin Soccer” and his butchered versions knows what a hack he is. On top of it, He made it virtually impossible to get the Chinese versions of the DVDs in the USA. Fortunately, there are legal ways around him if you know where to go
Comment by Tronguy — July 9, 2008 @ 9:15 am
Both Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction are great. True Romance and Natural Born Killers (wich he disown) were benefited with the Tarantino’s cool factor during the mid 90’s, so they were enjoyable.
The problem started with Four Rooms and From Dusk Till Dawn, both very unpleasent movies. Then came Jackie Brown, which I didn’t like at the cinema but came to appreciate more on following viewings on DVD.
The first Kill Bill was exciting to watch, then came Vol. 2 (”using the change, he acted strange, and why I never know”). Grindhouse was an interesting failed experiment. Hope it was better, though.
Tarantno needs a real studio that allows him to tell the stories he wants, but with restrictions in terms of running time editing.
Comment by Ricardo — July 9, 2008 @ 9:22 am
Here’s the thing. My girlfriend and I watched Grindhouse in a near-empty theatre on opening night. AND WE LOVED IT!!! The movie was exactly what was advertised. Guess we just love schlock.
Comment by fezziwig — July 9, 2008 @ 9:22 am
Irregardless, I’m glad QT gave John Travolta’s decaying orbit a boost, it was just fun to see happen, and I was thrilled to see Michael Parks in Kill Bill.
It looks like QT repects actors and is more than content to honor their talent and let them fly.
No reflection on his product, but on a human level, it’s a nice professional quality.
Comment by Inglorious Custards — July 9, 2008 @ 9:24 am
Sorry but there is no one more overrated than QT. I agree with the poster who said ‘enough homages’. I loved Res Dogs and Pulp but his movies are pretty awful since then, especially Grindhouse.
Comment by Bopkins — July 9, 2008 @ 9:31 am
you’re all assholes. every director makes good and bad films. every artist goes through different periods in his life. pulp fiction’s success was as much about time and place as the film itself. if the same film was released today, it wouldn’t make nearly the same impact. in 50 years, jackie brown will be remembered as a masterpiece. and critics and film fans will wonder why he never made another intimate, personal, character-driven film. sadly, it’ll be because immature fans of his early stuff violently rejected is attempt to do something artistic and human. oh well… you guys won. tarantino will probably spend the rest of his life making silly but stylish and well crafted tripe like kill bill and grindhouse so he doesn’t have to be depressed about fan reactions.
Comment by mink — July 9, 2008 @ 9:33 am
All his films are HACK jobs, that he steals from other films…please look into it your self…He takes bits and clips from films and glues all that with his dialogue. He’s spent 10 years in a video store. I question him on this 1998 (with facts) when he spoke @ UCLA..The look on his face was Priceless.
Comment by raj — July 9, 2008 @ 9:39 am
People always complain that there aren’t enough ballsy film-makers or that there aren’t enough original ideas. So when a guy like Tarantino offers something original, all he receives are attacks because some ideas flopped or because he’s not as ‘polished’ as some other safe film-makers.
You can’t have it both ways. That said, the W brothers need to spend more time spending money and less time interfering with men who know what they are doing. That’s how you make money in this business. One does the financing and the other one does the dirty work.
Get it done.
Comment by Joel — July 9, 2008 @ 10:11 am
It’s called FOLLYWOOD!
Comment by Hans Jurgen — July 9, 2008 @ 10:30 am
I love QT. He’s a tremendous writer and director and has such a unique gift in creating soundtracks. Kill Bill 1&2 are at the top of my list of favorite movies all around and everything else he has done has been great (except maybe Death Proof…that was a bit of a snooze-fest, but I’ve still watched it more than once for the parts that were good). He certainly has his critics and that’s fine. What fun would a world be where everyone agrees? Different strokes, ‘n all. There is a huge audience he speaks to and I’m glad to be part of it. I can’t wait to see this new movie.
Comment by B — July 9, 2008 @ 11:19 am
Those who can’t, criticise those who can. Q doesn’t give a damn about your self important comments. Like him or hate him, you all paid to see his work, thereby adding to his multi million dollar bank account.
Comment by BLACK WART — July 9, 2008 @ 11:31 am
The film that Quintin Tarintino should make: a Three Stooges short. When Moe hits Larry with a hammer, Larry gets a concussion. When Curly swings around with a board on his shoulder, Moe’s jaw is shattered and his teeth fall out. When Moe pokes Curly in the eye, it comes out on its stem, hanging on his cheek. At the end of the short — a seething pile of broken bodies basted in blood, gasping for one last breath, muscles twitching involuntarily. Slowly Lary raises his head. Moe’s muscle spasm results in Larry getting a final kick in the face.Curly emits one last nyuk nyuk.
Comment by Jake Bamber — July 9, 2008 @ 11:44 am
Personally i LOVED Grindhouse i thought it was awesome but i believe im the audience that Tarantino was focusing on the 30-somethings that grew up in the 70s and remember these films on the big screen and on tv movies in the early days of cable. These movies werent meant to be serious they were meant to be gore and parodies of sorts of the old grindhouse movies of the 60s and 70s. But whatever people cant sit still for 3 hours then thats on them. I enjoyed the dialoge in death proof and loved the campy horror effects in Planet Terror.
Comment by jspicer — July 9, 2008 @ 11:46 am
A lot of jealous haters here.
Comment by Chris c — July 9, 2008 @ 11:57 am
You QT supporters are blind to the truth. He’s a hack. You’re calling his new Inglorious Bastards original, when it clearly isn’t — it’s just a remake of the Italian film from ‘78, which was just a remake of the Dirty Dozen.
Reservoir Dogs — remake of The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3 and City of Fire.
Kill Bill — remake of The Bride Wore Black and Death Rides A Horse, with kung fu and swords added in.
True Romance — just a more violent version of the legend of Bonnie and Clyde.
I’ll admit, Pulp Fiction was entertaining, but everything else I’ve seen in movies from the 70s. Except Jackie Brown, which as was said earlier, was based on an Elmore Leonard novel.
Comment by Just a dude — July 9, 2008 @ 12:12 pm
I do not claim to be anything but a fan of Q’s work.
I have no connection to the film industry, with the exception of loving movies.
Some of the comments made here are insane. I ask but one question, those of you who hate QT, please list the movies you have made, and direct us to where we can view them.
That way I can judge you body of work.
Movies are made for consumers, not film critics.
Comment by David Maley — July 9, 2008 @ 12:15 pm
What kills me reading most of these comments is MOST of you really don’t know a damn thing about Tarantinos talent. If you ask me besides the obvious Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill, one of the best movies he’s writen is called True Romance. He also wrote the original screen play for Natural Born Killers. His movies are the way they are for certain reasons (over-the-top explosions and that 70’s b movie feel in Grindhouse to the very dialouged Resvoir Dogs) you cant deny his status and talent.
Comment by Joshua — July 9, 2008 @ 12:24 pm
He has not done anything as good as Resevior Dogs. That was a briliant movie. It steadily goes down after that.
Comment by f8te — July 9, 2008 @ 12:40 pm
Quentin Tarantino’s films are ll masterpieces. People say Kill Bill Vol 2 wasnt needed, and perhaps not, but would people have gone to the cinema to see it? Kill Bill as a whole would have received less critical acclaim, citing loss of pace and so on in the latter half of the movie. Watch them back to back as so many are watching grindhouse, easily one of his best movies.
Frankly who gives a fuck about his supposed “lack of originality” Are any films original these days?? Magnificent 7 unoriginal, Spiderman! unoriginal, pirates of the carribbbean uses the same regurgitated crap that a hundred other pirate films ahve used in the past, Hell “The Matrix is a reworking of Philosphers ideals and beleifs. At lest Tarantino’s movies arent sequels. His work is some of the funniest most original Hollywood movies ever made, arguably giving Hollywood ythe kick up the arse it deserved, now a bunch of talented directors are here, growing up with tarantion, the market is flooded, and now Tarantion is unoriginal?? Sorry but thats like saying that because the disciples ll made churches spreading the word of jesus that Jesus was unoriginal.
Inglorious Bastards will, i hope, be awesome and show everyone that he’s the daddy
x
Comment by DanglyBrasco — July 9, 2008 @ 1:18 pm
Inglorious Custards - there is no such word as “irregardless”.
Comment by Neil — July 9, 2008 @ 1:20 pm
originality?theres rarely any originality anymore. the magnifcent seven. based on the japanese 7 samurai. grudge. remake of a japanese film. point of no return. a remake of a french film.last man standing. remake of another japanese samurai film.tarantino will probably be remembered mostly for reservoir dogs and pulp fiction.i think he lost a lot of fans when he went blood and gore crazy.he is original in his approach.if anything his films are a differant slice
Comment by michael — July 9, 2008 @ 1:46 pm
How soon we forget those who set the standards…”one hit wonder”? I think not. Let’s not forget his scripts that have gone on to become some of the greatest movies, with the greatest casts and probably the greatest characters…and also the resurrection of John Travolta, Bruce Willis and George Clooney’s careers!!! Lets not throw QT under the bandwagon that the entire Hollywood Industry is at the mercy of. It’s not his fault everything he makes is a hit! Thats just what happens when a failing industry tries to imitate ‘genius’ through bought sold market research. I’m sure Frank Miller is going through the same amount of speculation. They are on top for a reason, we need their movies! So that we can go on practicing in hopes of someday attaining the skill on the level that these guys have beening working for their whole lives, we forget they are great, because of numbers. They are the filmakers who actually love cinema and not just making a shitload of money! A true artist does what he does out of love, nothing else! So love it or leave it!
Comment by nathan gomez — July 9, 2008 @ 1:55 pm
T. Gerhardt’s dialogue is easily the best post in this thread.
QT can go way over the top but you gotta love his enthusiasm and genre knowledge. I will always check out what he puts out, however imperfect.
I think we are all more likely to agree that the guy can put together a kicking soundtrack.
Comment by mr. gee — July 9, 2008 @ 2:08 pm
Quentin Tarantino always seems to be full of projects that never get off the ground,whether it’s his updates of “The Man From UNCLE” and “Friday The 13th.”,to his proposed “Airport”-esque disaster project,his “Vega Brothers” project,and his period piece martial arts Chinese film(in Mandaraian with English subtitles),for now it looks like Messeuir Tarantino is trying to decide on whether to make either(the longly proposed)”Inglorious Bastards” or that recently announced “Faster Pussycat,Kill,Kill !!” redux(with Tera Patrick),for I surely hope that Tarantino fully decides on what to make as his next project(that becomes a real-life full-length feature film)before he loses whatever credibility he has left(although I can see that he still has his faithfully devoted legion of fans here by his side,for hopefully he’ll make whatever project-into-film he makes sometime real soon).
Comment by Steven Millan — July 9, 2008 @ 2:10 pm
I assume that in the current Hollywood environment, any movie about WWII will portray the Americans as the bad guys.
Comment by Tom — July 9, 2008 @ 2:23 pm
I am truly amazed at all of the haters on here. People walked away from Grindhouse because they were accustomed to watching the lame rehashes that Hollywood dishes out. They couldn’t appreciate a really brilliant concept. While I loved both movies, my favorite was Death Proof. I am a huge fan of great car chases, big stunts and Kurt Russell. The dialog and music selection is something that sets a QT movie apart from everything else.
Comment by Glenn — July 9, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
Here is the sad reality for all of you “Q” fans,
I represent the “mainstream”. So this is the “mainstream” view on “Q”:
True Romance came out, and it was a really good movie. Then, Pulp Fiction came out, and it was a great movie. Easily in many people’s top-20, or Top-10 lists.
Then, all of the cool people ran back and watched Reservoir Dogs, and started saying that it was sooooo wonderful! Wrong, it was forgettable. That’s why it didn’t give him the big break like Pulp did.
From there, he started releasing the same weird action, Starbucks dialogue movies that we see today.
The “mainstream” has grown tired of his slop, most notably Grindhouse and Death Proof.
There you have it. Spoken from a true, proud “mainstream” guy. Unless he makes another breakout movie, his budgets will shrink, thus preventing him from making the slop he has been regurgitating for his dwindling fanbase.
Comment by Kdog — July 9, 2008 @ 3:08 pm
What do Quentin Tarantino and a one-armed projectionist have in common? Neither one of them can open a film. Quentin, I hear Blockbuster is hiring.
Comment by Glen Hull — July 9, 2008 @ 3:35 pm
Tarantino is not the same without Avary or another talented person to work with. At this point, he is his own worst enemy, over indulgent and unaware. Unfortunately, people like Diablo Cody are copying his writing style.
Comment by wilbur — July 9, 2008 @ 4:37 pm
Kdog, you are a mainstream retard.
Reservoir Dogs was the farthest thing from a forgettable movie. AND… a LOT of people, myself included, didn’t NEED to run back and watch it because we actually saw it in the theater upon its original run and that was followed by True Romance, which was merely his screenplay, and the mainstream hit, Pulp Fiction.
ugh… I can’t stand all the venomous posts. Find a fu–ing hobby, or better yet… GO MAKE YOUR OWN DAMN MOVIE if you think you can do better!!!
Comment by hortha — July 9, 2008 @ 4:43 pm
I really think his movies are lame
Comment by shemndrick — July 9, 2008 @ 5:20 pm
Oh hortha,
I’m sure you saw it in the movie theatre, just keep telling your kewl friends that. You can be the hippest hipster around. You people make me laugh, measuring your selfworth by your movie knowledge. hee hee Try going outside from your mommy’s attic, and get some friends (real, not internet).
Reservoir Dogs was a waste.
I’m sorry the truth hurts, but without the mainstream, there’s no money to make your dribble. Q is washed up. End of story. He can’t get over himself.
Comment by Kgolf — July 9, 2008 @ 5:20 pm
Oh Kfuk.
Self worth is not measured in the movie knowledge. Its in the heart. Tarantino has more of it than you can conceive. Its nice that you think you know whats “kewl” and what isn’t. You should write a book or something productive. Lets see what the fok you have to offer the world beside petty criticism, huh?
GOOD LUCK!
Comment by hortha — July 9, 2008 @ 5:34 pm
Put your pacifier back in hortha,
Wow, I guess you have to kiss Q’s butt to not be criticized around here. When you don’t like him, you are a “retard” and you are “venomous”. Please hortha, if you got a thing for the guy, you can let everyone know, but learn to listen to another point of view ya nazi.
I didn’t know this was the Q d*ck s**king forum.
It is funny how you never heard about Reservoir Dogs until AFTER Pulp went big. Then the posers, like hortha, came out of the woodwork and were like, “I loved Tarantino back when Reservoir Dogs came out! I heard of Tarantino first!”
Nice try hortha, but we read through your BS. Just another wannaabee. :O)
Comment by Kgolf — July 9, 2008 @ 5:48 pm
I don’t understand what some of the people on here think is a good movie. They probably live for Rob Schnider movies or another will ferrel sports movie, i think all he’s got left is baseball and football.
Comment by willy — July 9, 2008 @ 6:07 pm
Sick minds produce sick movies.
Comment by Robert Banet — July 9, 2008 @ 6:36 pm
why can’t most of you just enjoy his movies instead of being some sort of “wanna be influential movie critic”. Tarantino is doing something that anyone of us would give our balls just to do once. He writing is sharper than anything that most of you can write or even dream of writing that well. I applaud QT for trying different things and being willing to take chances with his movies, this is not something you see today with all the comic book movies and sequels and just plain pap that hollywood dishes out. Get over yourselves and appreciate his movies for what they are and stop trying to make yourselves sound like your opinion really matters, they are just movies after all.
Comment by jay — July 9, 2008 @ 7:04 pm
God, you people. Tarantino is a great talent in certain aspects of film making. He is also a derivative hack when it comes to writing. He also needs to stop giving actors line readings.
Digital technology blew his cover as far as being derivative, bully on him for realizing it and just coming clean with his influences. But now, damn we don’t really care anymore. I don’t care which movies he loved when he was a fat kid living in Knoxville (I used to live there and I can understand why he was only watching movies all the time). I’m tired of watching his movies about having grown up watching movies. I want him to take a good script, genre script since that’s his game, and run with it.
Comment by Mark — July 9, 2008 @ 7:21 pm
Does everyone that works or lives in Hollywood drink the same cool-aid?? QT is a one trick pony! The ONLY reason Pulp Fiction even caught on was the star power! In all his movies, If it weren’t for the big stars being QT’s friends—they wouldn’t have made it off his living room movie screen. Grindhouse was horrible. All of his movies were too long- with the exception of Pulp Fiction, none of them should have gone beyond a 5 minute short story! You guys in the industry need to start drinking plain H2O and get some self respect.
Comment by CoolHandLuke — July 9, 2008 @ 7:33 pm
I’m sure it will suk like all of his other deranged
cinamatic piles of dung!
Comment by Ron — July 9, 2008 @ 7:38 pm
Thomas Gerhard - 2:00 p.m. That is the best dialogue ever and much better than the crap that will be written for this movie. When you get your script gig, let me know. Your words will make a $10 ticket a pleasure!!
Comment by Mitzi — July 9, 2008 @ 7:56 pm
It is true that he has more film making talent than a lot of us amateur critics who couldn’t shoot a 5 min short worth watching, but that is exactly why I don’t go around trying to make movies. He should think about reevaluating his outlook in general and go to Tony Robbins’ island or something to snap out of the funk…
Comment by jjames — July 9, 2008 @ 8:37 pm
I’m waiting for his homage to himself, Kill the Pulp Fictional Bride From the Reservior with her Dogs in the Grindhouse.
Annette Funicello, Wayne Newton, and Paul Reubens set to star. Son of Lassie to play the dog.
Comment by Doc — July 9, 2008 @ 8:59 pm
If the majority of “Cinema Buffs” in American sat around and wrote their own films, instead of yapping about other peoples’ all the damn time, this country’s potential for producing groundbreaking cinema would seriously increase.
And I bet a year’s salary that 90% of the Negative Nancys on this board aren’t artists, as artists usually respect other people’s work, regardless of whether or not they like it.
Comment by Zane — July 10, 2008 @ 12:19 am
I wouldn’t let this guy direct a Geico commercial, let alone a major motion picture. In his Dirty Dozen, we’ll surely have a karate expert, an angry, simmering black dude, and a lot of white guys who use the N word. That’s for “tension.”
QT’s next media appearance should be as the subject on A&E’s Intervention. Have any of you seen him when he’s NOT obviously coked-up?
Comment by JohnnyD — July 10, 2008 @ 12:28 am
Before Starting,
MR.Tarantino I respect you, i admire u, to be frank after seeing Pulp fiction you are the directior of our generation.
I have learned a lot from you, and will hopefully use my knowledge from your films and characters to good use.
I am an Iranian in Iran and i love Quentin Tarantino films, REsorvour dogs was a great film.
Pulp Fiction was a majestic one which, will be voted in the top ten categories of any polls in years to come.
When i saw Natural born killers, i see why u had problems with Mr.Oliver stone(IF ITS TRUE)
And also sorry true romance was a film given to the wrong director.
But what i have seen after that really dissapoints(Especially jackie brown)not saying that Kill bill 1/2 or Death proof are bad films, but come on they can never be compared to your previous movies its like comparing the mona lisa to doodling. (Very sorry). While like a nerd browsing to IMDB i realised that after the split of Roger Avery, Tarantino has not been able create the magic he once did.
As a writer that plays with your mind he is good, the characteristics of his characters are masterfull, but the standard of intensity and especially dialouges compared to his previous movies have gone down, since Pulp fiction
Tarantino is acting like a child, using up all his childhood favourite genres like the shaw brothers martial arts Movies, Sergio leons Spagethi westerns,Grind house films (which i didnt know about) but enjoyed it,lots of jap films and animes,(BLOOD BLOOD) most importantly the talent which i really love in him is his shots, which are very inspired from european film directors like Godard, Truafaut, fellini and many others.
I feel Roger avery should get back with Mr.Tarantino (WHich i know will not happen very soon)
Because Roger avery is explosive by nature while Mr.Tarantino is more inplosive it (Yes there is blood and gore in his films but, its not AMerican psycho nor Hostel(yes i know TArantino produced Hostel)
All i want to know till when is MR.Tarantino going to experiment with his Retro agents, it looks like after inglorious Bastards, he will most well do a silent film, but with slasher elements.
But mR.Tarantino please do what ever you wnat
Because i am a student and i love to learn
Comment by yasharpayami — July 10, 2008 @ 12:37 am
“No one wants a war movie right now?”
Actually a USA all the way Americans as good guys movie would go huge. It’s the ones where Hollywood tried to crap all over the war that have gone down like Lead Turkeys. The pro-War on terror crowd wouldn’t see them and the antis didn’t want to see any war movie in the movies when they blog about it all day. The other way would make money, bank on it. Too bad no one in Hollywood is smart enough to go with that. Patton did great in 1970 and Tora Tora Tora was just a few years later. The Steel Helmet did well a short time after Korea. Tons of WW2 movies were made during and soon after the war and did well.
Comment by Jersey Dave — July 10, 2008 @ 3:50 am
He’s Billy Walsh. Or rather, Billy Walsh is Quentin Tarantino.
Comment by Kate — July 10, 2008 @ 3:56 am
To all who (stupidly) claim that Tarantino is ‘unoriginal’.
Now, be honest. You can ALWAYS know a Tarantino movie and, most of the time, you will know a Tarantino-inspired movie. That’s how strong his signature is. Whatever inspiration he gets - and my comment here has been inspired by some of the more stupid posts on this thread - it all blends into his work and comes out as a Tarantino piece.
To those who decry the length of Kill Bill… come on people. Are you saying that you would rather have one great movie instead of two? Why not ZERO movies? Yeah, just forget about movies, go out and do something interesting in real life. Then, when you come home you can watch Kill Bill pt. 1. Then go out some more and come back for Part Deux.
I agree. Most American movies, including Spilberg tends to be crap that goes boom. Tarantino is the exception. His movies are great art that goes boom.
Comment by Arth — July 10, 2008 @ 4:28 am
@ mitzi
Your words will make a $10 ticket a pleasure!!
Thank you for that line, although what I wrote was merely a bit of a small set-up, the “Madonna Speech, 1944 Redux”, so to speak, because – as others have pointed out, it will be interesting to see how good Quentin will be without his pop culture and pop soundtrack crutches.
Also, and perhaps this is just me (could very well be), the actual mission will be vital to that type of movie. Let me put on my “William Goldman” hat for a moment and think structure and theme and spitball. We already shaved Ryan’s privates, we killed, hostaged, liberated spies/German generals/Hitler himself so often in WW 2 movies that “blowing up a castle in the alps” is probably going to not just bore people to death, it will also invite comparisons, and I fear most will not be pleasant ones.
Pulling this from my arse as I type this, a move like that would have to have a mission that starts tiny, almost an archetypical mission: here, go into Germany and liberate this guy. He’s an important guy. We need him to win the war. Do this, we won’t shoot you. Problem is, the guy is no longer where he is supposed to be, so you can have your guys do all the things that guys do in a criminal guys war movie, you know, blow up stuff, get killed one by one etc. But here’s the thing. Been there. Done that. Be it POW movies, be it Where Eagles Dare.
Now, and here’s the reason why it should be set in 1944, with the Nazis already on the run and in retreat, they put this guy we’re all looking for in a concentration camp.
Not one of the big ones, like Auschwitz or Bergen Belsen, no, we put him in one of the medium ones that are only known to those who died there and to those who lived around them and spent the better part of the past six decades to strike it from social memory.
And our guys, they’re good, they make it all the way through the German lines they make it all the way into the camp, and here’s the thing: the guy refuses to leave, unless they can take everybody along. Now, that’s a problem, because at that point in history, the Germans tried oh so very hard to kill every concentration camp inmate before the Allies could find out about them, so our band of brothers is stuck inside, they could leave only with the guy they are entrusted with and leave everybody else behind to die at the hands of the SS coming. Or they could turn this particular camp into the Alamo. Which means – and if you DO want to do the Dirty Dozen, they would very likely die there as well. And they choose to make a stand, knowing that.
Okay, like I said, pulled it out of my arse as I typed this, but yeah, I think the type of mission will make or break that type of movie into today’s market. Otherwise, netflix Band of Brothers.
Because, and let me put away my William Goldman hat now, I believe that Mitzi brought up THE most important thing in her throwaway line.
The audience is paying us. With all the hedge fund money and the egos involved, it appears a lot of times that gets forgotten in the “artistic quest” or the “merchandising bonanza” extremes that fuel film-making. We’re not artists. We’re not toymakers. We’re the ones who knock on your door and say: “hey, give me 10 bucks and two hours of your life, and I will entertain you, I will make you laugh, I will make you gasp, maybe even shiver a l