GREEN CINE Already a member? login
 Your cart
Help
Advanced Search
- Genres
+ Action
+ Adult
+ Adventure
+ Animation
+ Anime
+ Classics
+ Comedies
+ Comic Books
+ Crime
  Criterion Collection
+ Cult
+ Documentary
+ Drama
+ Erotica
+ Espionage
  Experimental/Avant-Garde
+ Fantasy
+ Film Noir
+ Foreign
+ Gay & Lesbian
  HD (High Def)
+ Horror
+ Independent
+ Kids
+ Martial Arts
+ Music
+ Musicals
  Pre-Code
+ Quest
+ Science Fiction
  Serials
+ Silent
+ Sports
+ Suspense/Thriller
  Sword & Sandal
+ Television
+ War
+ Westerns


Public Discussions

topics
GreenCine Movie Talk
Cult
Those films with a following all their own.
83

QT
Topic by: dwhudson
Posted: August 26, 2002 - 1:59 PM PDT
Last Reply: January 10, 2003 - 12:04 PM PST

author topic: QT
dwhudson
post #1  on August 26, 2002 - 1:59 PM PDT  
People used to argue about Quentin Tarantino. Sometimes vehemently. And they don't much anymore, probably because the two camps have formed -- yea or nay -- and, in the six years it's been since he's made a movie, they've pretty much been able to leave each other alone. The nay people have probably just about forgotten all about him and moved on; the yea people are chasing news and trading copies of the screenplay for the movie he's shooting now -- Kill Bill -- on the Net. (One version can be downloaded here.)

But QT is edging back into mediaspace. Last week, it was the release of the souped up Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown DVDs (preview the features here, then come back and rent); tomorrow, it's a new Reservoir Dogs DVD.

And today, it's a New York Times where-are-they-now sort of article -- primarily a Kill Bill preview and/or scary warning that it's going to be violent and gory as hell. There is a quote from a Miramax rep: "The violence is stylish. It's somewhat cartoonish. It is a mythical movie, not realistic." But I'm not sure that the NYT writer really gets the difference. The article has a very unfortunate "In a world... after September 11..." sort of tone.

Far, far more fun are two fresh reports from Harry Knowles direct from the set in China that are, well, nothing short of exhilarating, breathless... I even caught myself wondering if he'd actually gone. What if he's just sitting at the back of some bar in Austin, making all this up? Of course, Harry Knowles is often exhilarated and out of breath. But given the experiences he describes, who wouldn't be. The reports: Day 1 (which is actually Day 58 of a 111 day shoot) and Day 2.

At one point, Harry reminds us that QT has set out to make "the greatest cult exploitation film of all time." Which is one of the reasons I thought a QT topic might belong in "Cult" -- even though, by some definitions, none of his own movies are really old enough to be "Cult" yet. Maybe.

The other reason is that QT is the ultimate spawn of "Cult" movies; not the "midnight movies" that went into high rotation in the 70s, as chronicled in Jonathan Rosenbaum and J. Hoberman chronicled in their 1983 book of that name -- but the favorites of the so-called "video generation" with unprecedented access to all the art and majesty, pop and schlock of world cinema.

The nay people say QT "steals"; the yea people say he "quotes" and "pays homage".

I'm a yea person. I'm also of the school that holds that, as a director, QT matures with each film, i.e., each one is "better" than the one that preceded it.

Do I hear a nay? Or maybe even another yea?
dpowers
post #2  on October 11, 2002 - 9:58 AM PDT  
what do we do here, compare pulp fiction with wild at heart or something else that plays with movies without being obsessed with its own coolness ... QT's on his own trip.

in a novelty shop in north beach they sell reservoir dogs action figures, the young cop comes with a detachable ear, that's kinda how the movies feel when they're over, to me.
Eoliano
post #3  on January 8, 2003 - 3:06 PM PST  
I've kept myself on the fence with Tarantino's films, though I rather enjoyed Jackie Brown, his first two films are a matter of contention.

It's a debate between my two sides; one wanting to accept Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, but I usually come away with very mixed emotions, finding only patches between the two that seem to work.

Other than the trailer for Kill Bill, which I've seen a couple of times at local theaters (it's nicely placed just before the feature and after a bunch of cretinous others), their seems to be little advance about the film. It's being kept very hush-hush and on the q.t. {g}
dwhudson
post #4  on January 8, 2003 - 3:31 PM PST  

> [there] seems to be little advance about the film.

I have to say, as a true QT fan and long-time defender (practically a full-time job in and of itself), the trailer for Kill Bill does not do a whole lot for me. I don't see Tarantino taking this exploitation flick beyond where it's already been, which is what his past films have been about; and, as I said in the original post to this topic, I think he gets better and better at it with each successive film. But then, it's only a trailer. Naturally, I'll withhold judgment til the full feature's in.
Eoliano
post #5  on January 8, 2003 - 3:52 PM PST  


>> I don't see Tarantino taking this exploitation flick beyond where it's already been...

That may be true, but let's hope that he had a good time making the film and that the result bears the fruit of his enthusiasm. On the face of it, it looks pretty mainstrean, but as you say, it's only a trailer.

Kill Bill trailer

Eoliano
post #6  on January 8, 2003 - 4:00 PM PST  

>> But then, it's only a trailer.

And a real teaser, at that.

I forgot to ask if you've seen the infamous script.
dpowers
post #7  on January 8, 2003 - 4:10 PM PST  
> I have to say, as a true QT fan and long-time defender (practically a full-time job in and of itself) <

quick! who's the eminem of the movie world?

he lives for his own hype, he does. can't blame him, if i were in his shoes with his taste, i'd love to get something corman-in-black going like that. quick!

> the trailer for Kill Bill does not do a whole lot for me. <

well for once he's heading into an area that has been looked at very thoroughly from his point of view. it'll be interesting to see if he can get past that, the way nagisa oshima did with taboo.

i figure kill bill and taboo will have a lot to say to each other even though it looks like ringo lam is QT's main target, again, putting aside the swords. now, oshima, he hated the sword movies.

uma thurman does a passable imitation of bruce willis. i give her an A.

shifting sideways a little, interesting to compare takeshi kitano's work in taboo with robert forster's in jackie brown.
Eoliano
post #8  on January 8, 2003 - 6:41 PM PST  

Who is eminem?
yulek
post #9  on January 8, 2003 - 11:21 PM PST  
> On January 8, 2003 - 6:41 PM PST Eoliano wrote:
> ---------------------------------
>
> Who is eminem?
> ---------------------------------

you're very lucky not to know :)

thanks for pointing me to this thread.

i'm not a QT fanboy, but i loved the dialogue in Dogs and i thought Pulp Fiction was a near perfect film. i didn't like Jackie much.

Kill Bill looks like it could be a pure blast to watch. i can't wait.
yulek
post #10  on January 8, 2003 - 11:23 PM PST  
dang, these forums need an edit feature...

anyways.

i absolutely loved Carpenter's Big Trouble in Little China and something about the Kill Bill trailer makes me think it'll be a similar type of movie. fun fun fun!
dpowers
post #11  on January 8, 2003 - 11:58 PM PST  
a hip-hop vocalist.
Eoliano
post #12  on January 9, 2003 - 5:06 AM PST  

I was being facetious, of course. But truthfully, and perhaps thankfully, I wouldn't know Eminem from a sick toad.
dpowers
post #13  on January 9, 2003 - 11:17 AM PST  
big trouble yeah i can see that. and pistol opera - which is probably the best look-back at asian gangsters and swords so far, and QT'll have a tough time outdoing it for fearless. like i said, for the first time, i think this is really well-travelled ground he's on.
Signalstation
post #14  on January 10, 2003 - 11:32 AM PST  
Is Pistol Opera available anywhere yet?
dpowers
post #15  on January 10, 2003 - 12:04 PM PST  
there's no legal DVD yet. quick web search - it's been picked up. media blasters, its american distributor, screened it for the first time last month, at the smithsonian in washington, DC. they also have fudoh and they let that run around theaters at the same time they put out the DVD, so i wouldn't be surprised if it showed up on pretty soon on shelves and at theaters like the four star in san francisco, if landmark theaters doesn't grab it.

about greencine · donations · refer a friend · support · help · genres
contact us · press room · privacy policy · terms · sitemap · affiliates · advertise

Copyright © 2005 GreenCine LLC. All rights reserved.
© 2006 All Media Guide, LLC. Portions of content provided by All Movie Guide®, a trademark of All Media Guide, LLC.