He wanted to make a martial arts grind film because they dont make them anymore, and what did he do? He gave us a film that rivals the best in asian martial arts cinema. The film was still packed with his cynical and sarcastic dialgue touch along with his own style. Unlike many Filmakers, when Tarentino gets and idea for scene he will not make exceptions in presenting his vision, not for the FCC and not for the fear that audience may not approve.
Tarentino Doesnt change the pace and style of his movies, they always stay consistant, and everytime your watching one of his films you know that it is infact a tartentino film. He is a filmaker that never strays from his style,but only elaborates on it.
He came from nothing, and had only one shot to make it into movies, and succeeded because he has an original and vivid feeling to his movies.
Cinemaddiction Except the stories and characters for his movies. I am just saying he can't come up with idea's on his own. He may have movies with original feeling to his films yet the stories are anything,but original, yet he gets praised as being one of the most innovative and original directors out there.
Ranson, EdtV, and parenthood are movie remakes. All others are eigther movies he fell into or were inspired from stories that have already been written, or has had other writers write the screenplays for him.
Even his techniques are greatly inspired by lucas, and Da palma. When Howard goes into making a movie, he has a crew of writers, and editors by his side.
It is known he rarely writes the scripts and screenplays for his films, and also has an editing team. He say's he trusts his writers and editors because they have worked with him for so long. I don't think this is any exscuse though for taking the credit that he does. I'm not saying he steals anything from anyone, that was an exageration.
Tarentino Gains inspiration for his films. He doesnt steal a damn thing. When he uses inspired characters from stories or previous movie characters he always makes it known. Tarentino also writes all of his scripts and screenplays, and takes a full both hands in editing.
He cares about his films,and does whatever it takes to make sure they get made in his vision. Saying he steals his stories is like saying every director in the business steals their stories for having inspiration.
If anyone in the business is a thief it would be Howard, every movie film he makes is eigther directly taken from a published story, or movie, or is dominated greatly by other films and stories.
Cinemaddiction I'm going to quote you a few times, so if this looks messy, I apologize in advance. That's not what's in question here. If that's the case, and you're arguing in the defense of Tarantino, he and Howard are in the same boat. To cover his bases, he claims that he's "inspired" by grindhouse, blaxploitation, yadda, yadda, yadda.
All he does is take characters and storylines from the most obscure movies imaginable, and uses them as his own, because he knows nobody is going to go through a video stores library, looking for the sources. How many times has he acknowledged these "inspirations"? Stories and characters can only be used in so many ways. Tarantino is a thief. Plan and simple, and he has all his fans duped. No matter how nonchalantly they carry themselves when approached with the evidence, we all know that his lack of originality gets to them, and they are wallowing in some insufferable stage of denial.
A common thread of blood, sexism, and foul dialogue doesn't make him original. It makes him the Milli Vanilli of cinema.
Like I say - I think he's amazing for pulling this grab-bag thing off with such style. He can write some snappy dialog but he can't put a plot together for shit and directorialy he's like a rap artist that can't write a tune so has to sample some old classic and mumble over the top about how big his dick is.
He never lied about that crap. I remember when pulp fiction Came out Tarentino was questioned about that a great deal. He always said that it was a heavy motivator for the film, that he has loved chow yun fat, and when watching city on fire he was overwhlemed with idea's on how to elaborate on the films story, and yes he did so greatly. The movie was so great because of the execution and the rawness in his writing. Yes he says all the time that the concept of the bride was taken from the bride wore black and snowblood very openly.
Every talk show he appeared on he always talked about it, and also the other schenes in the films that he took from old gring house films. Shit he even talks about the bride concept on the DVD. He says also that the movie was made for fans to the genre like me. Tarentino has also never tried to hide the fact that jackie brown was from the novel rum punch. He also always gives the author recognition. Saying Tarentino cant create a plot is crazy.
He makes movies that he wants and feel are worth making. Even with the stories that he borrows and elaborates which are fewer than you claim. He writes the entire screenplay and script. This is a man that understands story telling. Many producers and directors have apporached tarentino many times to write seagments or elaborate on characters in their stories. Tarentino wrote the story for the film true romance, which was directed by tony scott.
True romance is a great movie and is acclaimed. Tarentino is a writer to rival any hollywood writer, and has a cinematic vision and excution that is totally unique. It's insane to suggest that Quentin tried to cover that up, especially since Leonard is even acknowledged in the film's opening credits. As to whether he's first denied, then admitted to using other films as inspiration to one extent or another, I'm not seeing any documentation here. Like I said earlier, even his most hardcore followers would support any evidence of such machinations on Quentin's part, then chastise him accordingly.
Even if he stole the plot for reservour dogs directly from city on fire, and never acknowleged it as being a motivator of his, and not only a dream of his to be his first film. If he would never have acknowledged this, my views on tarentino would be different.
I would still like his films because there all products of great movie making, but i wouldnt be as fanatic about him. He is a regular guy who dropped out of high school and was working a dead end job and decided to enter a film at some festivals. Theguy has no reason to lie. He parties with his fans and recognizes his fan base as being the only reaosn he is able to make movies. He has no reason to lie, and when he says that he has taken certian characters or scenes in amovie to create a vision he was given from there inspiration, i tend to believe him especially since he gives credit where credit is due, even if he doesnt get all his credit.
Cinemaddiction I see I've wasted my time in this thread. Mr Zero You say that like you are surprised? It was a forgone conclusion Cinemaddiction I left the door open, given there was little hope for salvation, but alas. As for Stormydiction; he was last seen licking his wounds in the "Mona Lisa Smile" and "Blade" threads.
Mr Zero I actually seriously hurt my gut laughing. SlipknoT SD isnt going to be around for about 2 weeks. Cinemaddiction So I read. Sorry for the derailment, Q. RaventheOnly I concur Great director and filmaker yes! Why do we like him? One factor is that QT like the rest of us here loves movies. The man is an Encyclopedia of movies. Whether is classic Hollywood or Cult or foreign, QT has seen tons of those films. Some of us identified ourselves with his movies.
We'd all seen that before in other movies. And QT did it in Kill Bill. I'm sure there are ppl who don't like QT movies and that's understandble. I mean not every director can be like Spielberg or Lucas.
But that's a thought for another time. Tarantino is a genius is because he has a tested IQ in the 's -- well above genius level. Detractors will say that Tarantino is unoriginal and simply steals his work. Supportes claim he is merely paying homage to his favorites. What both sides seem to be forgetting is that Tarantino is an artist who has chosen film as his way of expressing himself.
And, like all true artists, his goal is to say as much as possible in a unique way with the medium he is using.
While there is no argument that Tarantino "borrows" heavily from outside sources, you really need to consider why Tarantino chooses the homages to pay when he does choose them. Tarantino hides so much in his movies that the average movie goer fails to see. For example, read these quotes from Pulp: "Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper, and the finder of lost children" -- Jules, from his Ezekial speech.
They were in the Valley of Darkness, now they needed Jimmy to be their brother's keeper. Do you know why you didn't see that sign? At least a part of it? Did he find these lost children? What's Fonzie like? But, I'm trying, Ringo, I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd". Who was he trying to be like? Orange about the death of Vic Vega: "The man you just killed was just realeased from prison. He was caught in a company warehouse full of hot items.
He could have walked. All he had to do was say my father's name. But he didn't. He kept his mouth shut and he did his time and he did it like a man. What he should have said was: "Oh yeah? He could have walked, all he had to do was say MY name, but he didn't. He kept his mouth shut, and he did his time and he did it like a man.
Cinemaddiction Just because a guy has great dialogue, doesn't make him a genius. Stephen hawking has shitty dialogue. Great, ground breaking studies and theories on quantum physics, but shitty dialogue my friend. So yeah, i would say you very well could be the stephen hawking of KMC plenTpak52 I think you are clearly the ignorant one here. If you actually knew anything about him, you'd know that he never presents it as his own work. He always gives credit where credit is due.
You really don't know what you're talking about Cinemaddiction Yep, I got the whole I. It's his movies I have a problem with. Us so called "detractors", meaning people who aren't too deep in denial to prove that he plagiarizes, will indeed say that Tarantino is unoriginal and simply steals his work, because he does.
Why does he? I read the quotes, what was I supposed to find in them? Some "cool" dialogue? That's not hard to decipher. You forget to mention any of the sexually demeaning dialogue that people go gah gah for. You're clearly confused. I said if someone is to go as far as saying Q. You dig? BackFire I like Tarintino for a few reasons, originality is none of them. His dialogue is extremely well done.
He is arguably the best dialogue writer in teh business. He has an uncanny ability to take seemingly generic types of conversations and throw them in his films, which adds a realism that very few other films posess.
It makes his characters that much more believable. However, he also makes these conversations mean something, and help define the character who is saying them. Also, he is a master story teller.
His films flow extremely well, and considering the non-linear way he usually tells his stories, that's saying a lot. It takes great skill to make a film that jumps around and still flows and makes sense. He's one of the few people who does this. His characters are great. He often has some of the most interesting and 3 demensional characters around. You can tell that the man actually cares about the characters he's creating, giving them a unique and realistic personality that's easy to differentiate between other characters.
I think as a director he's solid. But I think it's writing that he's most skilled at. Because both of these aspects I mentioned above are directly connected to his scripts rather then his directing abilities. I think his overwhelming skill in all of these departments more then makes up for the fact that he lifts most of his premises from earlier films. He plays with the audience. The Gimp, the adrenaline shot, Mr. Blonde's torture scene, Nurse Buck, and the rock salt blast are just a few examples of his uniqueness and unpredictability as a writer and director.
Stumping hard for his upcoming villainous turn in the James Bond adventure Spectre , Waltz stopped for a chat with Playboy. Talking with the soon to be non-nudie mag, the Austrian-German actor elaborated on his admiration for Tarantino, saying:. Quentin can write a sentence of seven words and the whole character is condensed into this sentence. Tarantino is certainly known for his sharp dialogue and his deep, expansive love for film. His movies are a veritable collection of references, homage, and cap tips to the cinema that came before, some overt, others in your face — the same goes for the movies he alludes to, some are obvious and well known, while others are deep cuts, even for seasoned cinephiles.
It also makes a great deal of sense that Waltz would have a fondness for Tarantino, especially considering what the director has done for his career. Unlike others, he learned his craft from his days as a video store clerk studying movies showing on in-store monitors, rather than as a traditional film school student.
As a result of this unorthodox beginning, he has developed a knack for tapping into exactly the kind of stories people find immensely entertaining. Others describe his style as a fusion of pop culture and independent art house cinema. In March , Quentin Tarantino turned 51 years old. The perfect balance of rapid-fire mayhem and the intriguing controlled drama of Pulp Fiction instantly changed cinema. It also made Tarantino a star and Samuel L. With its raw, intense nature, Reservoir Dogs serves as our first glimpse at Tarantino.
In it he pays homage to the films he loves and those that inspired him. It is a distinctly original film as far as some film critics are concerned, even with the blood-drenched finale. Some disagree with this order, believing the second of the Kill Bill films to be the superior of the two, but many prefer the glossy and more colorful blood splatter of the first.
0コメント