Quentin Tarantino ,do you like him?

[iamnobody]

I am a huge Tarantino fan. Reservoir Dogs, one of my favorites. I love the final shoot out scene(almost Shakespear-like in that everybody dies) I also liked Four Rooms. Is that included in the collection?

[OrphanPip]

The only Tarantino film I really don't care for is Jackie Brown, otherwise I'm a big fan.

Pulp Fiction I think is his best.

[DanielBenoit]

Of course I'm a Tarantino lover. Pulp Fiction is one of the best films of the 90's. There is no better American screenwriter living today.

[mona amon]

I love all the Tarantino films I've seen so far, even Jackie Brown.

[Maximilianus]

For those who haven't seen him acting, the few occasions when he has done it, I recommend that you do.

[Emil Miller]

I haven't seen any of his films, and don't intend to, but I did see him in person when, some years ago, he gave a pre-screening talk about an old James Stewart film that I went to see at the National Film theatre in London. He didn't seem to know what he was talking about and he even laughed out loud during the performance at a point in the film which was far from funny.
I prefer my film directors to be a little more worldly wise.

[Maximilianus]

I prefer my film directors to be a little more worldly wise.
It's a good point, and not seen as often as it would be expected.

[Drkshadow03]

It's a good point, and not seen as often as it would be expected.

What do you mean?

[Maximilianus]

What do you mean?
I mean that sometimes people related to the media, in any of its forms, are not so well aware of the world around them as it could be expected, or sometimes they underestimate their audience. For example, I'm recalling one TV producer (not Tarantino) who once stated that showing a sky take of Africa wouldn't help people realize that they are seeing a portion of planet Earth, so it should be clearer to take a shot of North America. In my opinion, that is to diminish the audience's general culture, because I'm pretty sure there are people who can still distinguish the form of the African continent when they see it in pictures. Just a thought.

[OrphanPip]

Idk, Tarantino may have unconventional opinions of works, he certainly isn't a formally educated film critic like Roger Ebert, but he has struck me in interviews to have a fairly broad knowledge of film as a medium, in particular genre films.

If Tarantino didn't know anything about film would he have been able to sustain 20 years of relatively high critical success.

[Drkshadow03]

Idk, Tarantino may have unconventional opinions of works, he certainly isn't a formally educated film critic like Roger Ebert, but he has struck me in interviews to have a fairly broad knowledge of film as a medium, in particular genre films.

If Tarantino didn't know anything about film would he have been able to sustain 20 years of relatively high critical success.

Is Roger Ebert a formally trained film critic? According to the only information I can find Ebert has his degree in Journalism and English (http://www.suntimes.com/images/cds/pdf/cst-archive/04051967cst.pdf).

[DanielBenoit]

Is Roger Ebert a formally trained film critic? According to the only information I can find Ebert has his degree in Journalism and English (http://www.suntimes.com/images/cds/pdf/cst-archive/04051967cst.pdf).

Formally trained or not, from the works and commentaries of Ebert's I've read, he is more than a qualified authority on cinema.

Tarantino is more of a film geek than a film critic. When he says that The Five Fingers of Death is one of the greatest films of all time, I recognize the difference in our tastes.

All and all, Tarantino is not a 'realist' nor is he really aiming to say anything profound. I think he once said that he wanted to be remembered as a filmmaker like Howard Hawkes. His films revel in the art of cinema and are almost all about cinema itself. Tarantino does not deal with reality, but with the art and universe of cinema itself. And for that, he is a master at what he does.

[Drkshadow03]

I mean that sometimes people related to the media, in any of its forms, are not so well aware of the world around them as it could be expected, or sometimes they underestimate their audience. For example, I'm recalling one TV producer (not Tarantino) who once stated that showing a sky take of Africa wouldn't help people realize that they are seeing a portion of planet Earth, so it should be clearer to take a shot of North America. In my opinion, that is to diminish the audience's general culture, because I'm pretty sure there are people who can still distinguish the form of the African continent when they see it in pictures. Just a thought.

Yeah, but from what I've seen of his films, Tarantino seems to have a very good knowledge of old films, especially genre films. In fact, his whole work is based around postmodern re-workings of various film sub-genres. So it's hard to imagine Tarantino made comments about James Stewart films and didn't know what he was talking about. Possible? Sure. But highly unlikely.

[DanielBenoit]

Yeah, but from what I've seen of his films, Tarantino seems to have a very good knowledge of old films, especially genre films. In fact, his whole work is based around postmodern re-workings of various film sub-genres. So it's hard to imagine Tarantino made comments about James Stewart films and didn't know what he was talking about. Possible? Sure. But highly unlikely.

Yeah, one can criticize Tarantino's aesthetic or opinions, but you cannot deny his film knowledge. I have very little doubt in my mind that Tarantino has seen farrrr more films than anyone on this forum, including me.

[Drkshadow03]

Formally trained or not, from the works and commentaries of Ebert's I've read, he is more than a qualified authority on cinema.

Sure, I love Ebert, but I've heard people claim he has formal training (I think the other time was during a debate about reviews and reviewers in newspapers), and I haven't been able to find any evidence corroborating this fact.

Keep in mind, at the Grad School I attended, the English and Film Departments are run in the same building. The head of the Film program is one of the English teachers. So all the grad film classes are offered as English courses.

[OrphanPip]

Is Roger Ebert a formally trained film critic? According to the only information I can find Ebert has his degree in Journalism and English (http://www.suntimes.com/images/cds/pdf/cst-archive/04051967cst.pdf).

Well that's as close to being a formally educated film critic as you can get from that period. I don't think film studies really takes off until the 80s. Besides, Tarantino has a high school diploma, he is anything but formally educated in criticism. Ebert has a formal education in criticism at least, and is a professional film critic. Tarantino doesn't really claim to be a film critic, what I meant by pointing out his lack of formal training in response to Brian wasn't to demean his opinions but rather to paint them more in the light of his position as a film maker. Tarantino, I doubt, looks at a film the same way a critic does, he's probably looking at it with more of a self-conscious perspective of its influences and uses on his own film making. More importantly, his value as a film critic or authority on film is not really important at all, and shouldn't matter when it comes to judging his films.

[DanielBenoit]

Oh and btw, Tarantino's aesthetic is pretty much a fulfillment of the criticism and theory of Pauline Kael (whom I both love and hate with a passion).

[Drkshadow03]

Well that's as close to being a formally educated film critic as you can get from that period. I don't think film studies really takes off until the 80s. Besides, Tarantino has a high school diploma, he is anything but formally educated in criticism. Ebert has a formal education in criticism at least, and is a professional film critic. Tarantino doesn't really claim to be a film critic, what I meant by pointing out his lack of formal training in response to Brian wasn't to demean his opinions but rather to paint them more in the light of his position as a film maker. Tarantino, I doubt, looks at a film the same way a critic does, he's probably looking at it with more of a self-conscious perspective of its influences and uses on his own film making. More importantly, his value as a film critic or authority on film is not really important at all, and shouldn't matter when it comes to judging his films.

He was giving a pre-screening talk before a viewing of a film. It's not written criticism. Authors do introductions of other authors all the time. It's basically the same idea, in my opinion.

[TheChilly]

Of course I'm a Tarantino lover. Pulp Fiction is one of the best films of the 90's. There is no better American screenwriter living today.

Except Paul Thomas Anderson.

[DanielBenoit]

Of course I'm a Tarantino lover. Pulp Fiction is one of the best films of the 90's. There is no better American screenwriter living today.

Now that I read this I'm a little hesitant. If there is a better screenwriter living today in America, it is Charlie Kauffman. His Synecdoche, New York belongs alongside the heights of Ingmar Bergman.

Also, now while I think that Tarantino is one of the greatest writers of dialouge we've had since Howard Hawks (who re-worked almost all of the scripts that were given to him). Tarantino wants to be remembered as this generations Hawks, and I think he deserves that stature. That said, I think there are more than just a few directors working in the world today whose work rivals or even transcends Tarantino's.

Also, I now step back from my statement that Pulp Fiction is the best film of the 90s. It's still one of my all time favorites, but Tarr's Satantango is the best film of the 90s.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I haven't seen any of his films, and don't intend to, but I did see him in person when, some years ago, he gave a pre-screening talk about an old James Stewart film that I went to see at the National Film theatre in London. He didn't seem to know what he was talking about and he even laughed out loud during the performance at a point in the film which was far from funny.
I prefer my film directors to be a little more worldly wise.

Why don't you intend to see any of his films?

What does it matter how "worldly wise" a director is? If he makes excellent movies, like Tarantino does, I could care less on how "knowledgable" he is on cinema. He obviously knows enough to make a great film; that alone should be enough to convince anyone of his merits.

Personally, I think he's a great filmmaker, but at times a bit overrated. I liked Inglorious Bastards, but didn't see it as the masterpiece many claim it to be.

[DanielBenoit]

Tarantino = Hawks + early Godard + genre movies + blaxpotation films x Generation X