Tarantino's "tributes"

J.R. Hudson said:
It's funny how very few filmmakers cause such ire in discussion; De Palma, Tarantino, Spielberg, Kubrick, Lynch and even little Michael Bay.

Love em or hate em, one can't deny their impact in cinema.
Click to expand...
you know, you can learn a little from everybody. having worked on the behind the scenes docs for Transformers, I was forced to watch hours of footage of Michael Bay doing his thing and you know what... he is the most efficient director I've ever seen at work. he comes on set "hot" -- meaning he keeps everyone prepped so he can start shooting as soon as he arrives (and will throw a tantrum if he can't). he also surrounds himself with a team that has worked with him since his early advertising days. lately, a key person he's struggled to keep with him is a DP. Mauro Fiore (The Island), for example, publicly declared never to work with him again because of the way he treats his crew.

I have great Michael Bay stories. a friend went to interview him. when they arrived, Michael was in the same room (didn't acknowledge him) eating a sandwich. a receptionist approached my friend to say, "Michael is eating his lunch right now, he will be with you shortly". still, they are in the same room. Michael finishes, the receptionist returns, "Michael is finished and ready for the interview", and suddenly Michael (who has been sitting beside him this whole time) springs to life with a little, "hey guys, how ya doin'! blah, blah, blah..."

also, my favorite Bay quote, said to a lowly crew member he was kicking off his set, "Get the f*ck out of my imaginary world!!!!!!"
 
Can't deal with that shite.

I wonder how long his career will go with that temperment.

I suppose as long as he is making money.
 
you learn a lot about him just through seeing his body language on set. he's the sort of person who is only in the moment when he's being aggressive. because when he's chilled out and joking around with the crew he's constantly in his own head, looking for approval -- he'll make a joke and then his eyes start darting around too see who's laughing and who's not and probably trying to determine whether or not the laughter is genuine.
 
QT rules !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jones.jpg
 
Did anyone ever see that episode of The Golden Girls where QT played an Elvis Impersonator, dancing in the background with a bunch of other Elvis Impersonators?
 
I love Tarantino's dialogue. The only one close, IMO, are the Coen Brothers. Just saw No Country for Old Men today and was absolutely blown away by the dialogue.

Now, I know a lot of you didn't like Death Proof, but I felt it was the best thing since Jackie Brown. His dialogue is like poetry.
 
Charlie Anderson said:
JR I can relate to you man, I've never been a fan of Tarantino. Yeah sure his films are great...if you haven't seen the exact camera angles and stroy plots he's ripped off just to make money off of. Damn it really just pisses me off that there's unique and interesting ideas out there and yet htis guy is going around flaunting this stuff like it's his own idea!
Click to expand...

I have always loved his early stuff and snuck into it all when I was younger, but the man has changed over time and in a good way. As a person, the way he used to act when confronted was childish and made him look like a total douche bag. I wish he would have just fessed up to taking other stuff and said "so what? I made it f@cken cool". However, I don't judge director's work (read: artist's art) based on who they are in real life. Otherwise I would hate many people whose work I love.


J.R. Hudson said:
Then why comment in here ? You'e being insulting DeSica with these undercurrent statements.

Your dismissive tone is what is concerning me here. The same spin can be said from the other point of view of the fans perspective.
Click to expand...

Regardless if they are intended to be insulting or not, you make similar posts.


Jim Brennan said:
Pulp is still genius, but it hasn't held up for me over a decade later like I thought it would. But, it was the first movie that kept me up all night thinking about it.
Click to expand...

Really? I think the film has held up remarkably well and is still as funny as ever.


Zak Forsman said:
also, my favorite Bay quote, said to a lowly crew member he was kicking off his set, "Get the f*ck out of my imaginary world!!!!!!"
Click to expand...

OMG i spit everything out of my mouth and more when I read that! Thanks for sharing that. haha


tarantinoelvisbig.jpg
 
Last edited:
I watched City on Fire and thought it felt like a Made For TV movie. If anything, Tarantino made it better. Who even heard of that film until the Dogs revelation ?
Click to expand...
He did make it cooler for North American audiences...there is no swearing or talk of sex in HK cinema...it is taboo. Violence, on the other hand....

The only people who would have heard of it are world cinema fans who watch HK cinema...RD is a great little "remake", or what have you. I enjoyed it, and I own it on DVD.



My spin is that he is cut from a certain cloth of filmmaker which I find to be fresh when no one else is doing it. I like his style and welcome it. It is a rare style to see when everything else looks the same.
Click to expand...
I know what your spin is. How can something that has already been done be fresh with nobody else doing it? It is new for those unfamiliar with orginal stuff, yes...and the spin he puts on it is bang on for North American audiences.

I saw Pulp Fiction in Havana my third or fourth time seeing it...they didn't get much of it, trust me.
It reminds me of De Palma being ragged on about being too much like Hitch back in the day; there aint enough filmmakers working that are steeped in technique.
Click to expand...
Huh? Godard, Polanski, Leconte, Tornatore, Bertolucci, Almodovar, Leigh, Apted, Frears, Eastwood, Ritchie (if he ever dumps that tart), Nolan, von Trier, Weir, Coen Bros., Allen, P.T.Anderson, Mann, Scorsese, Malick, Jewison, Arcand, Cuaron, Bigas Luna....there are plenty steeped in technique, ...and art, and history, and culture...

I don't know. I've written songs that were hummed with others in my head. Paintings have been painted as direct tributes and styles to others, books have been spawned off existsing material. It's an art cycle.
Click to expand...
Sure, I know what you mean. What I was talking about was just taking an existing thing and adding your own touches...do you consider the Magnifient Seven to be original? I see it as a westernised Hollywood remake...and a great film.

I guess imitation does happen unconciously sometimes, after all, The Rolling Stones swear they never realised they copied Constant Craving by KD Lang when they wrote Has Anybody Seen My Baby...but they are pretty much the same song



:shocked: Huh ?
Click to expand...
Truffaut, Coppola, Scorcese...that's steak. Jackie Brown is steak..some of his other stuff is more like a Big Mac...not your best piece of beef, but still yummy.


I'm probably the biggest Tarantino fan on this board,
Click to expand...
No, really? That goes without saying, and there is nothing wrong with that at all. You're also a moderator, but nobody minds when you let your personal opinions mix in...you make your points well, and you know what you like.

but a quick Google search shows he is super popular. My point is made even better with those comments, I'm glad there are some here that don't like his work like I do, cause I can't identify with the crap they do like. That was my point in case you missed it.
Click to expand...
So then you get my point...I'm a fan of Tarantino, but I have no illusions that it means I am on to something.

Of course he is super popular...his stuff is for the masses. It is heavily teen and young 20-something targeted and marketed...I've discussed this with a VP of marketing for a huge film company. I know plenty of guys in their 40s who like him..and when you ask about influences, or point out source material, they couldn't care less. They don't care about film or cinema...they just want to have fun watching a movie and be entertained. Nothing wrong with that, is there?

It goes back to the cloth. He cuts from it in much the same way as De Palma, like Scorsese and Spielberg's cinematic vernacular, they're operating off of the same table.
Click to expand...
These guys are not really similar at all, and he isn't in a league with any of them....at least I don't think he is, not quite.

He's a great filmmaker who writes some of the best dialogue heard. Some director's are known for certain styles; Burton and his twisted setdesign styles, Gilliam and his crazy imagination, Lynch .....

Why discount a trademark ?
Click to expand...
I don't...I point it out, and you had to have read it when I did, as you have read a few of my posts saying as much. Roger Avary had something to do with some of that dialogue, and QT wasn't always quick to admit it...and now they aren't really buddies anymore. Whether you believe Avary when he says QT sucks off him like a sponge is a whole other matter. Either way, QT writes good, catchy, stay with you dialogue.


You get the same three guys lighting candles and staring daggers...[/quote]

Then why comment in here ? You'e being insulting DeSica with these undercurrent statements.
Click to expand...
I was merely pointing out how the same guys seem to divide into the same camps...and the die hard Tarantino fans take it all personally.

Some people are too quick to dismiss the guy altogether...and it is not exactly fair. Other guys will defend anything he does no matter what...which is just as bad, in my opinion.
Your dismissive tone is what is concerning me here. The same spin can be said from the other point of view of the fans perspective.
Click to expand...
There is no dismissive tone. I'm sorry you took it that way. My post was not meant to be like your "Yaaawwnnn."

There really is nothing to cool...I don't recall insulting anyone or making rude comments. If my disagreeing with you offends you, then I am sorry to have offended.

Again, I am a Tarantino fan...I just don't revere him.

And yes, I saw that clip from Golden Girls...I'd say he has come a long way since then.
 
Last edited:
DeSica said:
He did make it cooler for North American audiences...there is no swearing or talk of sex in HK cinema...it is taboo. Violence, on the other hand....

The only people who would have heard of it are world cinema fans who watch HK cinema...RD is a great little "remake", or what have you. I enjoyed it, and I own it on DVD.
Click to expand...

I explored Asian cinema about a year ago and although I enjoyed it, It didn't hook me. I had no idea the restrictions you mention.

I know what your spin is. How can something that has already been done be fresh with nobody else doing it? It is new for those unfamiliar with orginal stuff, yes...and the spin he puts on it is bang on for North American audiences.
Click to expand...

My point, is that it is not FRESH per se, but different than what is being done. I am more than aware of his style and influence. It isn't what's been done, but how one does it. Tarantino is doing it better than most right now.

Whether it is homage or a blatant redo, it's much better than the source.

I saw Pulp Fiction in Havana my third or fourth time seeing it...they didn't get much of it, trust me.
Huh? Godard, Polanski, Leconte, Tornatore, Bertolucci, Almodovar, Leigh, Apted, Frears, Eastwood, Ritchie (if he ever dumps that tart), Nolan, von Trier, Weir, Coen Bros., Allen, P.T.Anderson, Mann, Scorsese, Malick, Jewison, Arcand, Cuaron, Bigas Luna....there are plenty steeped in technique, ...and art, and history, and culture...
Click to expand...

And those you mention are true masters. I can't argue that list and wouldn't try to. But comparatively speaking, that's a minority.

Sure, I know what you mean. What I was talking about was just taking an existing thing and adding your own touches...do you consider the Magnifient Seven to be original? I see it as a westernised Hollywood remake...and a great film.
Click to expand...

Me too. But yes, original with '...how one does it."

I guess imitation does happen unconciously sometimes, after all, The Rolling Stones swear they never realised they copied Constant Craving by KD Lang when they wrote Has Anybody Seen My Baby...but they are pretty much the same song
Click to expand...

Truffaut, Coppola, Scorcese...that's steak. Jackie Brown is steak..some of his other stuff is more like a Big Mac...not your best piece of beef, but still yummy.
Click to expand...

Agree in some part; sans PULP FICTION. That's Prime Rib in my book. Guyt has made 5 films. In my opinion, he's waaay ahead of the game. His career will tell.

So then you get my point...I'm a fan of Tarantino, but I have no illusions that it means I am on to something.
Click to expand...

Nor do I, but my previous comment stands. I feel a bit of relief being on the Love end of a Hate relationship. I've done it with De Palma and dig ti with QT.

Of course he is super popular...his stuff is for the masses. It is heavily teen and young 20-something targeted and marketed...I've discussed this with a VP of marketing for a huge film company. I know plenty of guys in their 40s who like him..and when you ask about influences, or point out source material, they couldn't care less. They don't care about film or cinema...they just want to have fun watching a movie and be entertained. Nothing wrong with that, is there?
Click to expand...

Disagree completely. Reservoir Dogs ? Yes. A little bit of Pulp ? Yes. Jackie Brown ? No way.

Kill Bill ? I don't know. I've met more than one 20 something that wasn't into it.

Deathproof ? Something tellms there was too much talky for the average 20 year old moviegoer.

These guys are not really similar at all, and he isn't in a league with any of them....at least I don't think he is, not quite.
Click to expand...

I won't put him in the the same league with accomplsihment, I am referring specifcally to visual langauge in my grouping.

I don't...I point it out, and you had to have read it when I did, as you have read a few of my posts saying as much. Roger Avary had something to do with some of that dialogue, and QT wasn't always quick to admit it...and now they aren't really buddies anymore. Whether you believe Avary when he says QT sucks off him like a sponge is a whole other matter. Either way, QT writes good, catchy, stay with you dialogue.
Click to expand...

I haven't heard this. Avary ? The guy who wrote BEOWULF ? I think it's obvious who the real talent is in that relationship.


I was merely pointing out how the same guys seem to divide into the same camps...and the die hard Tarantino fans take it all personally.
Click to expand...

It goes both ways I think, but depends on which side of the debate one is on.

Some people are too quick to dismiss the guy altogether...and it is not exactly fair. Other guys will defend anything he does no matter what...which is just as bad, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

There is no dismissive tone. I'm sorry you took it that way. My post was not meant to be like your "Yaaawwnnn."
Click to expand...

My mistake DeSica. Maybe I hadn't had my tea.

The damn internet gets in the way of our meanings at times. I apologize for any uneccsary angst I showed. :+ )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top