I’m not advocating or making a statement here in the slightest. I’m merely putting out a colleague’s thoughts to the readership to gauge a reaction:
I don’t know Tarantino, but I believe he’s stuck his finger up his ass and given it a good sniff and smelled lilacs and gardenias so many times that he’s lost his mind, which is to say he’s lost whatever sense of proportion he may have once had about the relationship between juicy creative imaginings (which he’s obviously had a rollicking good time with in years past) and the way life actually is when you get dressed and put your shoes on and get in your car and put the key in the ignition and deal with the situation.
From Jeffrey Wells’s skewering of Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglourious Basterds.” The early graphs about “arrogance” and “sadism,” by the way, are what I was getting at when I wrote that the film depicted “a world that might appeal to an angst-ridden child, perhaps. The rage that courses through its veins is pure, concentrated tantrum.”
Comments
24 responses to “Agree or disagree?”
Agree.
But I did enjoy Kill Bill Vol. 2.
Jeff Wells is a moron. I haven’t seen IB yet, but I can’t even read that site anymore.
I think the first sentence is the only correct part of that paragraph, he doesn’t know Tarantino. I’m not claiming to know him personally either, but I know enough of him to assert that he simply makes the sort of movies he wants to see, and that the Hitchcock likening of films as “slices of cake” are more apt to his Tarantino’s filmography than any of that vitriol. He’s infectiously in love with the movies, he writes terrific dialogue and he does what makes him happy. You’re basically pistol-whipping a puppy when you so harshly attack a guy like that. Then again, I loved the screenplay of Inglourious Basterds, so I must either be immature or a misguided fanboy…
I completely agree with that statement. Wells is often wild and unpredictable (read: nutty), but in this case, he is dead-on. Of course, I’m still going to check out IB, but…I fear that I will continue to strongly dislike the 21st-century version of Quentin Tarantino.
I love Wells for his blunt flants and rants and frequently agree with him.
I’m also less and less excited about Basterds. I’ll still see it of course but I’m expecting a boring talkfest and not much beyond that.
John H. Foote will agree.
Everyone knows Tarantino believes he’s the greatest thing on Earth. That’s no secret.
Tarantino has always depicted some brutal violence in his films that has to have one wonder whats going on in his head. While I think Pulp Fiction is a great film the Ving Rhames man on man rape scene is pretty out there. Its really in some ways demented. Its clear that Tarantino relishes in this type of disturbing stuff. Why? I couldn’t say but its not that easy to stomach because it feels so real the way it plays out in his movies.
chuck
he wrote and directed Pulp Fiction, the man shouldnt be living on our level anymore, but come on guys, why must we attack him so? Or worship him? Hes just another director making movies, yet such hate and love
Chuck, isn’t that kind of the point? He’s trying to make you feel uncomfortable in that scene. Good stories typically feel plausible within their own world. Drawing out real emotion from you is the director’s job.
Re: Basterds. I’m not a Tarantino lover (although I love Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown), nor am I a Tarantino hater (although I hate Death Proof). Having said that, I’m going to see Inglorious Basterds expecting a talky snooze, but am more than willing to be surprised.
Keeping my mind open.
http://www.celebrityfreakshow.com/2009/08/movie-critic-threatens-suicide-over-stupidity-of-humanity/
Boosh.
When I first read the headline, I thought, oh god, he’s serious.
I love Tarantino. I don’t judge him like you do – but if someone with a brain takes a piss on old von Trier – lookout.
It’s perfectly true that Tarantino has fallen into this hole of self-parody. Tim Burton is doing the same thing — although in his case, he still makes quality films.
a lot of people can tend to be high off there ass…
and personally i think half of tarentinos movies are fun to watch but kinda retarded, like pulp fiction was pointless to me, and his other half kinda suck but at least the man tries and pleases some people even if they are mostly pretty wack people
I continue to anxiously await this flick.
I had to laugh; I read Well’s post earlier today. When I got home from the District 9 screening I decided to come here, and I was telling myself “no doubt Kris will have linked to this Wells piece”.
I don’t get it Kris. Of all the people to dislike to vocally, the guy whose created so many great cinematic moments just seems, I don’t know, personal. Did he snub you in some way? Something? Or is it just that the QT fanboys annoy you more than the GI Joe fans? I see you gave that movie a pass. At least compared to Tarantino, who you continue to slag at least once every week or two, more now that his film is approaching.
@ kevin: Pointless? Did you actually describe Pulp Fiction as *pointless*? Geez louise…
As for Tarantino himself, yeah, he’s definitely a pale shadow of the cinematic god we all saw in the 90s. I’m still going to watch Inglourious Basterds out of some hope that I’ll catch glimpses of what we all loved about QT in the beginning.
vibe: Nothing personal at all. Just bemoaning wasted talent.
I recently saw Reservoir Dogs again. I must say while it’s good, the flaws are showing as well. Mainly perhaps because he’s still not learned from them.
Wells confirmed my worst fears. No way I’ll sit in a theater watch another bloated wankfest from Tarantino again. Grindhouse was absolute torture.
What were the Weinstein brothers thinking putting all of their chips in on this hand?
Tapley, you commented about how perhaps it was time reassess Tarantino’s career. You should put some effort into a write-up. I’d love to read it.
Agree.
Used to love his stuff but Death Proof was unwatchable and I have no interest in this.
i was merely curious to see IB before, but all of the derision it’s getting from Teh Serious Film Blogz has me champing at the bit to see it now. if you genuinely lament what you consider wasted talent, fair enough, but it honestly seems like taking shots at him is the thing to do now if you’re a Serious Film Thinker. all of a sudden his violent fetishism is distasteful, even though that’s what he’s always been about and he’s never made any pretensions about being anything else. in other words, the backlash train keeps a-chuggin’ . . .
robert- ive only watched pulp fiction once, and in my personal opinion i didnt see the point in the movie, i got the messages and themes and just thought it was all kinda for nothing even if it was fun to watch for the most part. sometimes i think film purists get attached to some movies that are different and revolutionary, but arent really that great of movies if just taken completely for what they are(CITIZEN KANE!!!)