Tarantino, vexed by his fear of failure. I recommend a psychiatrist...He can't truly be a crass, misogynistic, verbose movie-bottom-feeder with his eyes going 'ker-chingg' like some cartoon dollar sign? Or can he...dum dum dummmmm. Tune in next week for some more crackly cash-ins on the Tarantinos Radical Interminable Terror Experience..
Have been a big fan of Tarantino but relegating Drive to "Nice Try Award" in his end of year list is just another example of what really nags me about him. He worries more about his "cool" and his own ego.
@chanceie12 Or, perhaps, you're just too ignorant to understand anything I've said on here. Really, I'm not that big of a fan of Transformers. I thought the first two films were entertaining, wicked adaptations of a cheesy cartoon from the '80s--that's it. I do not believe there's much logic in reviewing them due to the fact that they're very preference-based films...
@chanceie12 I have the username that I do not because I like Transformers in any way but as a method of determining whether or not someone's worth the time. Only a hater with nothing else to backup their argument or anything better to say would attack the other individual for their username....
Absolutely agree! What a sheep. Not everything he has done is pure genius, but a lot of it is. He and Kermode are the types that follow whatever everyone else thinks is "art". This over here is good because it's a trend, but that over there isn't because it's different. If it's a romance with dramatic scenes, it's art to them. Scorsese is great, but his cinematography and soundtracks are nothing compared to Tarantino's. Besides, I.B.'s a film that grows on you. I hated it and now I love it.
Tarantino's combination of writing, directing, cinematography, storytelling and casting make him one of the best film makers in cinema history. Reservior Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown are incredible pieces of work and i never tire from seeing them. However, to say Tarantino's latest work is playing it 'safe', just shows Kermode's level of ignorance.
And I think Jackie Brown was terrible. The idea was great and all, but the soundtrack lacked majorly, there was hardly any action, and it didn't feel anything like a '70s blaxploitation film. In fact, none of the characters looked '70s at all. The unneeded sex and makeout scenes....It was not his best film. I mean, he took an actual novel that wasn't like that in the first place and tried to give it this '70s image. It never had that image of course. Kermode's just too ignorant to recognize art.
How was Uma Thruman in Kill Bill like Tarantino in any way? How were any characters in that film like Tarantino? Does this greasy European even know that Tarantino actually hangs out with people to get a good idea of how people talk? That's why the dialogue in his films is so realistic! I personally think Kill Bill was a masterpiece. It's a film like no other....Kermode's just one of those types who can't handle action. Well, too bad for him. Those '70s martial arts films had a lot of action!
@Transformers2themax I think that this 'greasy European' was referring to pre-Jacke Brown movie characters being a version of Tarantino, and I agree...that said, I did really enjoy Reservior..and Pulp Fiction.
So your criticism of Jackie Brown, was that there was 'hardly any action'...then you go on about 'recognising ART"?
You need to watch his reviews of films like 'No Country For Old Men' and the recently released 'Drive' ...it would have saved you from looking quite so much of an idiot
@comanchio1976 That's like saying everyone of his characters has the same personality, which itself if pure ignorance. If they sounded like him, he wouldn't let the actors improv as much as they do. See, you seem to think that you're clever and witty just from messing with logical speaking. You compared two irrelevant nitpicks out of my logic as if it made sense. And I don't believe I have the time much less the interest to watch any of his other reviews since he liked High School Musical.
I think that Inglorious Basterds is really good, and is different to his other movies, Christoph Waltz steals the show. One thing I would say to Tarantino is, if you wanna be in your film, be a background character, don't act! And also is it me or does he really want to be black?
@WinterXL What I mean is that his dialogue in most films is an imitation black dialouge e.g. the use of Samuel L Jackson over using the word "n****r", and as kermode says its typical comic book nerd imitation, don't get me wrong, i love Tarantino, he is one of my favorite directors, but his earlier stuff he is always trying to do that. Perhaps more Pulp Fiction or Jackie Brown rather than Reservoir Dogs, that is my view anyway, there was no malice behind the comment.
I've always hated Tarantino's work. It took me about 3 viewings of Pulp Fiction to decide I hated it. It took me 1 viewing of Kill Bill Vol 2 to decide I hated it. It took me 5 MINUTES to decide that I hated Kill Bill Vol 1. People think he's the fanboy's director, but he is an insult to fanboys! If all directors took a page from Kubrick, there wouldn't be bad movies, but Tarantino is re-inventing lazy cinema every time he makes a film, and I HATE that.
except quentin tarantino not only discussed filming kill bill as early as the pulp fiction shoot, he unofficially CAST uma thurman as the lead during the filming of the diner and dance contest scene
so basically, this dude's wrong. he loves hearing himself talk, but he's wrong.
QT really just is an ENORMOUS nerd with incredible fanboy dreams, like filming a kung fu epic (and a vampire splatter movie--which he did BEFORE jackie brown's box office btw)
@000EatMan000 QT filmed a vampire splatter-movie? That's news to me. What's the name?
I hope you're not referring to From Dusk till Dawn, because that was filmed by Robert Rodriguez. QT co-wrote the script and acted in it, but that's all. Kill Bill 1 started with a mentioning that it's the fourth Tarantino-Movie. Which are the other three in your opinion?
@GothamClive he didn't direct it, he wrote and acted in it. the point is that he was diving headfirst into fanboy projects well before any jackie brown conspiracy. it's actually the opposite, the reason why his movie have become MORE fanboyishly over the top is because he's successful. when artists are successful they get increasing creative control. and tarantino has had a career that now gives him basically 100% creative control. hence all his recent movies becoming guilty pleasures--like FDTD
@000EatMan000 Let's see, someone comes up with an idea for a film, then after seeing the box office problems with the film he makes next, still keeps the idea exactly the same? At a stage THAT EARLY, it's impossible to say that he didn't react to it all. Because he most likely didn't start writing it until after Jackie Brown was released, and thus, changed things to make it more "homage" based.
I think Kermode should enjoy his new film Django Unchained which is a western, can't see any of the characters talking about other movies in that one
Part of the problem is Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown were crime films and featured real characters and captured what real people talk about - movies, tv, pop culture whereas when you start to do that in another genre like in Basterds and Kill Bill the homage it's a less than subtle case of a writer paying homage to something he loves
Woah... Mark is way off here, comparing QT to Bay. None of Quentin's films are massively commercial or chasing a fast buck at all, look at Kill Bill and Basterds... very weird films that just happened to be successful finically, the irony is that Jackie Brown is far more conventional than either of those films.
@PompamooseMagique He isnt comparing them artistically. He says that what he has done is no different to what michael bay has done...selling out.
And it's true. He didnt make alot of money with Jackie Brown, so he decided to make a massive kung-fu action film, which I thought sucked. However I did enjoy Kill Bill 2 more than the 1st. It seemed to have more dialogue and backbone to it rather than stupid action scenes.
I loved inglorious basterds and I cant wait for his new spaghetti western.
@jamesthemod I wasn't comparing them artistically- just saying, look at how Michael Bay markets films- to the lowest common denominator compared to how QT markets films- to his fanbase.
@jamesthemod Technically, Kill Bill is one entire film that was split into two movies. I think why a lot of the action scenes seem pointless is because Volume 1 has a lot of exposition.
@slayerette86m I guess so. But then you could say that about ANY sequel, tirodgy...? That's like saying, you can't like ONE starwars film more than the other 5 as it's one film split into 6 parts. lol
@jamesthemod Lol, no literally, the film was made as a whole. In a decision brought by Harvey Winstien, he decided to split the film to keep the story intact.
Kind of like Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 1 and 2. It's one movie split into 2 films.
I'm starting to think Pulp Fiction was a fluke. Resevoir Dogs was a remake of City on Fire so I don't count it. Jackie Brown was solid. But since then he's done nothing but utter shit. a homage to kung fu theatre. a homage to war movies. now he's making a spaghetti western. another fuckin' HOMAGE. lol! Maybe Roger Avery is responsible for more of Pulp Fiction then we thing.
Tarantino seems to work best when he's grounded by someone else's creative forces, e.g.; Roger Avary co-writing Pulp Fiction, or working from Elmore Leonard's novel Rum Punch for Jackie Brown. I suppose that makes Tarantino the Jim Carrey of directors - great in collaboration, but a bit annoying when it's all just him, him, him.
The only thing I would disagree with is that perhaps it isn't to do with the money, but to do with the praise of fans. Kill Bill is good, no doubt, but it should have been one movie, part 2 drags. The same can be said about the Grindhouse project, which was cut into 2 seperate films by the time it got a UK release.
And that statement about holding QT to QT's standards at the end is asinine. You create a masterpiece like Pulp Fiction and try to remake it each and every time.
Utter bullshit. QT hasn't made a bad film yet. #1. Pulp Fiction, #2. Inglorious Basterds, #3. Reservoir Dogs, #4. Kill Bill 2, #5 Jackie Brown, #6. Kill Bill, #7. Deathproof. Even if the degree of awesomeness (or film making maturity) varies from film to film they are all equally better than the majority of films out there. I don't believe for a second he's chasing money. He could of retired after Pulp Fiction.
Couldn't agree more. I loved Jackie Brown, and while I like Kill Bill I agree that it was a bit of a regression. Death Proof was an atrocity, and Basterds was well-made but all over the place.
I don't know if I agree that it's about money, however. I think it's because he's surrounded himself with sycophants who think everything he does is brilliant *cough*EliRoth*cough.
I haven't seen "Jackie Brown" yet, but I think that "Pulp Fiction" and "Inglourious Basterds" are both absolutely phenomenal films. Two of the best films I've ever seen, actually. So no, I suppose that means that I don't agree with Mark on this one.
I'll resonate the same things Mr.Kermode has said, Jackie Brown is Taratino's BEST work. It took some growing up and some film watching on my part to understand this, but I'm glad I did. Not to say I don't enjoy Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill etc., but, getting older, Jackie Brown clicks with me more than a film largely based around homages or fanboy wet-dreams. Like Mark said, it is a shame Quintin hasn't directed a film of that caliber in respect to writing, characters and over all maturity.
I think Tarantino has a great portfolio. RD, PF, JB where great stories with interesting dialogue. Kill Bill and Death proof are different and I don't think it's fair to compare them with his earlier efforts. Kill Bill is straight from a comic, it was over the top and bloody, it was good fun, it was not as complex as Pulp Fiction. Death Proof was never intended to be a classic or be his best, it was a homage to b movie exploitation films. Inglorious was a return to form, very unpredictable
i think mark is right. Quentin is a good filmaker but for some reason likes to make fan boy films. i don't think he is trying to make money, i think he just enjoys doing those sorts of films. i also believe him to be a sadist because the extreme violence in the kill bill films was un called for. imagine him in the directors chair saying ''this is the part where uma's character rips out that guys eye and puts it in the other guys mouth'' i don't really think that has anything to do with narrative
Jacky Brown was probably the last on the list of those three for me; including Pulp Fiction and Resevoir Dogs, the former being my favourite. It was a cool movie, I just thought it wasn't quite as thrilling or entertaining as the other two. It was different, sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean its great. Kill Bill Volume II was excellent while Volume I was a cool action flick and nothing more. Death Proof, unlike Planet Terror, just felt like half a movie.
Tarantino sucks, that is something I've always believed. His movies are nearly all chapterised, non-linear, full of incompetant characters, needless references, horrible dialogue and gratiutous violence. His films have never sought any thought provoking themes and he shamelessly stuffs bits of other genres into other movies and pronounces it cool. Cool isn't ripping things from other people but reinventing stuff and playing around with it. Tarantino is the ultimate ADHD man-child.
I think KB1 and 2 were where it went wrong, mainly because it was a retreat (regression?) into Tarantino's youthful influences and more worryingly perhaps, an increased effort to be "cool" without the good dialogue of previous films.
This guy has no idea what the hell he's talking about. Every film contains an homage in some way to another film or filmmaker. If he paid any attention to Reservoir Dogs, he'd know that it pays homage to movies like The Killing and City on Fire. If he is such a fan of Jackie Brown, he'd know that it pays homage to Blaxploitation films of the '70s.
According to the Kill Bill making of video, QT and Uma Thurman created that movie on the set of Pulp Fiction, and he wasn't so much "running back" to the "fanboy claptrap" that made him famous, he was essentially making good on the promise he made to Uma he made before Jackie Brown existed, a film which incidentily is nowhere near as good as PF. Point is i think its unfair to say he is merely trying to make money with these movies, even though they arent he has done better
I don't really think it's fair to make that assumption but, as much as I love all his movies to date, I'd like to see a more serious movie out of him again.
I enjoy a Tarantino movie. He's not Chris Nolan or Guillermo Del Toro but he's not Paul WS Anderson or Michael Bay so it could be worse he's just uneven.
Stop propping up this juvenile moron MK, he's a better filmmaker than he is made out to be, ahhhhhhhhh, stop Mark, his dialogue from RD to PF was so hamburger driven in its cheese, it's disposable, he was never a filmmaker, his career was fallacy from the beginning, end of story
I agree about Jackie Brown. That was his best one in my view and should have been his biggest smash. Kill Bill seemed cheap and cheesy after that but hell, what do I know ay?
Kermode's absolutely right...too many blind "Tarantinophiles" out there who think everything he does is "genius"..get a life or at least get an education in cinema...David Lynch, Scorsese, Cronenberg, Coen Brothers, Paul Thomas Anderson are only some of the current comtemporary directors churning out more consistently good and more original work than "QT" has ever done..Tarantino isn't good enough to tie Scorsese's or Lynch's shoelaces..he;s a minor league pretender..always was, always will be
@machiaveliyoohoo I don't need an 'education in cinema'. Thankfully, i have a brain which i'm capable of using. It helps me to think and (amongst many other wonderful things) it allows me to make up my own mind regarding what i think is quality or not in the world of cinema and popular culture.
Evidently, the same cannot be said for yourself. Pull your head out of your arse you pretentious, indoctrinated cunt.
Boo to that. Shyamalan's movies are consistently interesting and evocative. He just needs a collaborator to check his worst tendencies. Like Jeunet and Caro.
I am suspicious of the conclusion that Tarantino makes his choices based on box office return. Aside from that, "Jackie Brown" he directed but didn't write, "True Romance" he wrote but didn't direct. I think Tarantino's problem is that when he lacks budget, script, or collaborative constraints, he lacks the discipline to reign all his ideas into a cohesive unity. He's certainly a talented writer and director, but perhaps he shouldn't do both until he can learn restraint.
@Lostdog171 Did the ancient Greek philosophers have to write plays in order to write about and analyze the theatre? Of course not. Also, you presume that film criticism is entirely negative, but in fact, the most important function a critic today is to champion smaller films that don't have large advertising budgets, which Kermode does extremely well.
I must agree, again, with Dr Kermode. I think Inglours Baesterds touches on brilliance. it starts with a nod to Kubrick. Surley it wasn't an accident the farmer is the image of Stanley, considering Kubrick never got to make his WW2 movie Aryan Papers. What we have is a movie about war movies. I thnk it's great!
I think he was a bit unfair there. Tarantino, for me, has been one of the most consistently brilliant filmmakers of the past decade. Even his weaker films such as Deathproof are still excellent. I thought Inglourious was fantastic and those who have criticised it need to have a word with themselves.
Kermode doesn't know what he's talking about here, firstly Jackie Brown made over 3 times its budget...in America alone. Secondly, calling Tarantino a sellout is unfounded. The man was offered many many big budget movies to direct like Men in Black for example, and he turned them down. Kill Bill was fine for what it was supposed to be, and Inglourious Basterds was also a great film.
@BigBoss7777777 if you watched the video. Kermode said that in Tarentino`s terms it wasn`t a success. Jackie Brown didn`t make as much as Reservoir Dogs & Pulp Fiction did. So in QT eyes it wasn`t a successful film. IB was boring as sin. KB 1&2 i did like but i do see why Kermode disliked it.
@TheCSMman Um he clearly says that Jackie Brown didn't make money at the box office at around the 3 minute mark which is completely innacurate. I'll say it again, it made over 3 times its budget in the US alone, add in the worldwide gross and its a solid financial success. Kermode isn't looking at this objectively at all. He also says that Tarantino made the Kill Bill movies for a 'fast buck'. He made it 6 years after JB! I'm sorry but Kermode is completely off the mark in this matter.
@TheCSMman Although Reservoir Dogs' success at the box office in the UK can be attributed to the fact that it didn't come out on video for years, thus it stayed in cinemas for longer than it perhaps would
Finally, someone else has said it exactly the way I've been saying it: The number one problem with QT is that every character in his movies IS QT. I've been saying this for a long time now. I simply cannot believe it. I never thought I'd ever hear another person not only not scoff at that claim but agree with it verbatim. Unfortunately I haven't seen Jackie Brown though. But... hahaha, finally!!
kill bill is empty, i realised that recently when i watched it again on blu ray, and kill bill volume whilst midly better is still empty, i have to agree with mark kermode that tarantino only has one voice, his characters all talk the same way, bill talks exactly like beatrice kiddo, who talks exactly like daryl hannah who speaks exactly like the character (whos name escapes me) who was the first character thurman
@EllSiefilms I think that's a load of bollocks. That's Tarantino's voice as a film maker. That's his artistry. I think his writing is elegant and brilliant.
I don't entirely agree with Mark here. Kill Bill wasn't a return to his comfort zone, it was actually a departure for Tarantino - much more of a pure action movie with little of his trademark showy dialogue. I agree a return to the more adult style of Jackie Brown would be nice, and parts of Basterds showed him doing just that, though not all of it.
I find his post Jackie Brown movies very entertaining, but that's it. I can't take Kill Bill or Death Proof or even Basterds 1/10th as seriously as I take Dogs or Pulp Fiction. I think he should do what Hitchcock did with Vertigo, ie, make a movie that won't necessarily please everyone, that won't necessarily make much money at the box office, but a movie that people will quietly ponder over for years until they realize that it's actually his greatest ever. I think he's capable of such a film.
I got to say I agree with everything but the money. Tarantino's first films were an interesting change and take on worn out genre's. However since Kill Bill he has asserted himself as the fan boy director. Everyone in his films talks like a nerds wet dream. He continues to pick great artistic films from the past and slaps them in his movies for no real reason. Yes he likes Goddard and Leone but there is no attempt at exploring their issues or his own. They have no meaning but to be 'cool'
What a load of pretentious, self indulgent, speculative bull shit Mark Kermode speaks... QT chasing a quick buck? Come on... he's offered pretty much every script in Hollywood and he turns it down, Michael Bay? Who gives a fuck what you expect Mark Kermode. You make a film. Basterds was fantastic btw.
@timclark83 It was a decent film, the opening scene was one of the best opening scenes I have ever witnessed, totally blew me away ... but the music selection was far too forced, it seeemed like Quentin was trying his hardest to get his own personal ipod playlist in and inconvenient 'oldskoolness' really killed off the movie for me.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Karmode thinks he know everything about tarantino, it's realy stupid. He started writing kill bill before jackie brown. I have seen kill bill about 50 times. But i think tarantino is a lasy self focused person who have lied his way into the movie industry, and made the great movie kill bill.
Er, no. Kermode doesn't say that Tarantino made Jackie Brown on his own. Unless Tarantino can do a much better Pam Grier impression than we've given him credit for. Kermode's point is precisely that, with Jackie Brown, Tarantino managed to rein himself in and put his film-making talents to work with a proper plot-and-characters narrative (based on Elmore Leonard's novel Rum Punch) rather than his own self-indulgent episodic (yet undeniably talented) waffle, as seen in Kill Bill, etc.
DEATH PROOF was a gamble, certainly not a film the director took on for a quick buck. It was a lot to swallow for modern audiences, initially being released in the U.S as a double feature.
death proof was awful, aside from kurt russels instant transformation from a stoic, cold killer into a panic sticken shit scared bully getting his comeuppance. while dogs is an all time favourite, some of the dialogue in pulp fiction (particularly the mia/vincent, pre dance contest conversation) is awful. as the good doctor says, not everyone in the whole world is a hyper chatty pop culture spewing motormouth.
the problem with tarantino, i feel, is that he writes the first thing that comes to his head. he's sort of insulated himself and does whatever he wants.
In a way I see your point. I don't think it's a money thing and the Michael Bay comment should make you ashamed of yourself(that's like comparing Marlon Brando with Rob Schneider.
I think what it is he fell into was a sort of self-consciousness and awareness of his status as a creator and tried too hard with the Epic Kill Bill and then was a little challenged by the simple means he gave himself for Death Proof. All I know is they were really good and Basterds has surpassed Pulp by miles.
i love tarantino, and i still enjoy his films immensely. for me though, i kind of feel how i did about kubrick when watching eyes wide shut. its good, and kubrick is always always watchable, but its just not up their with the shining and clockwork and 2001. i feel a similar way about tarantino, still love the guy, and really enjoy the films, but he is kind of the incredible groundbreaking director, that in many cases, kind of never was.
i hear what he's saying, ive been feeling let down by QT. bastrerds wasnt the movie it shouldve been, still better than most of the other pish this year!
The only thing I agree with here is that Jackie Brown is Tarantino's best film.
Recent Tarantino is not an attempt at selling out, and even if it was, it was a poor attempt (see: Grindhouse). He's just more free lately to film whatever he fancies.
don't agree with Kermode on this AT ALL.. so many people get hung up on the whole 'fanboy' 'movie geek' thing, including Kermode- i think tarantino is much more than this, and all his movies are worth your time- i dont think he 'retreated' back to 'homage' movies or his only 'mature' film is jackie brown- theres more going on in the kill bill movies than hes given credit for, and inglorious basterds too- theres a lot in there- its about performance, deception, cinema itself and more
The more I think about this, the more absurd Mark's idea is. If you want to see a trend in the development of Tarantino's movies, surely it makes more sense basically the other way around: in his early career he makes tighter, commercial films, up to Jackie Brown - then after the hiatus come the more indulgent, messier films where he follows his artsy fanboy dreams. Not a view I really agree with but a bit more understandable than this strange notion that he's become a sellout.
An unsubstantiated and unfair pet theory from Mark Kermode, almost amounting to a personal attack. Grindhouse: 191 minutes long, and Tarantino's section consisting basically of girly chitchat with one car crash and one car chase. Describing this as 'chasing a fast buck' is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard from Kermode. Reservoir Dogs is a far more marketable and commercial-seeming film.
This is Mark at his absolute wrongest. Should've thought a bit harder.
But there are lots of fans of Tarantino out there who just want more of the same. They will spend money on things like deathproff. If Tatantino trys something different. The fans would not spend money on it. So he makes films he knows his fans will like and does not take risks. This is "chasing a fast buck"
I reject the notion that Tarantino's chasing a quick buck completely. It's bs. If that were the case, why didn't he go back to remaking Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs a million times? He didn't even rush back to make a film after Jackie Brown, in an attempt to just do any ole thing for money. Tarantino likes what he likes and makes films he cares about. To me, it's evident in the work. Like him or not, it's a thoughtless claim to dismiss him as merely another Michael Bay.
what a tool - and by the way, for those who have not seen Inglorious Basterds, please do, it is fantastic, 2 hours and 45 mins and at the end I did not want to leave.
Grindhouse was a massive gamble in financial terms which DIDN'T pay off, and a 2hr 40min war film with very little warfare, only one 'star' performance (in a supporting role) and a language track primarily comprised of French and German is hardly 'going for the easy buck'... say what you will of Tarantino but you can't question his integrity, and he's not in it for the money.
exactly and theres no way that he made inglourious basterds for a quick buck, he genuinely wanted to do a western style men on a mission movie set in world war 2. Not to mention not one person sounded like a nerdy video store employee in inglourious basterds. was he watching the same movie?!
anyway i strongly feel that anyone who bashes tarantinos movies are just pretentious BASTERDS who can only enjoy a movie thats meant to be moving instead of entertaining, which tarantino is.
I think he is right - everybody has their weaknesses, including Tarantino. Come on, he's not exactly Mike Leigh. He (QT) makes films with guns in them and always has done.
Small wonder then that he went for the money shot!
I'm not saying that his films are bad because they have guns in them. I should have clarified that. Within the realm of films that please people, such as violent films, which he is one of the best.
But being in that realm, one is susceptible to the temptations that hollywood directors are and this can lead to compromises and even mediocrity.
In the UK most reviewers just sound like film industry shills and arse lickers, especially in the tabloid press, There have been only a few reviewers on TV that actually sound like film fans - Alex Cox (also a director) Mark Cousins, Barry Norman and Mark Kermode. Jonathan Ross was once good as a reviewer of trash cinema in the 80s but is now a mainstream whore/bore. We need people with opinions like Kermode who are also fans of the films WE LIKE like horror sci-fi, pulp etc.
Which centers heavily on Brad Pitt. Who is only in about 1/3 of the movie while most of it centers around a Jewish women who is hiding out after her family has been massacred. All of her dialogue is in French by the way, try finding any bit of that in the trailer.
3: Inglourious Basterds is not a return to form because he never left.
4: In the case of Kill Bill and Death Proof, he took a trashy genre and made a masterpiece and a very good film out of it.
But this is not most audiences want. They would prefer large metal robots banging into each other and half naked women running away from them. Audiences like the fast-food approach to movies. So you give them a movie like inglourious basterds with a two and a half hour running time, which features long conversations subtitled in French and German and don't be surprised if it doesn't do well. The only thing that is going to save this film from financial failure, is its marketing campaign.
I, like many movie goers in the 90s felt that Tarantino hit the mark perfectly with his first 3 films. I was surprised that such a wordy film like Pulp Fiction could be a success. Long monologues littered with pop cultural references that went nowhere didn't turn people off but instead made Tarantino a household name around the world. When I saw Kill Bill I kept thinking "maybe I'd like this if I was a more of a Asian film buff...am I missing the references?". It just felt shallow and pointless.
Your arguments don't hold water. Tarintino clearly is a total fan of trash culture and the 'fast-food approach to movies'. Cheap schlock B-movie horror, exploitation, blaxploitation, chop socky, low budget westerns etc ....in other words grindhouse! Thats a big part of what makes Tarantino enjoyable. No doubt Tarantinos next film will be about 'metal robots banging into each other and half naked women running away from them'....with subtitles
I am well aware of Tarantino's love of bad, trashy movies. Thats not what I'm saying. I was saying that just because a movie doesn't do well in the box office, that doesn't mean it's a bad movie. Quite the opposite. What Tarantino does is he takes the B-movie genre and makes a great film out of it.
And good word of mouth from the audiences who goes to see this film. I seemed to have a great reaction from my audience. This was a great film and I hope it does well.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
1: Tarantino is not annoying.
2: Box office doesn't mean shit. Your average moviegoing audience doesn't know anything about good movies and this is a fact. Transformers, G.I. Joe, and the latest Adam Sandler movie are always number one in the box office. Films like Jackie Brown and the more recent masterpiece, Public Enemies, don't do very well because they are "Good Films." They have interesting characters who have actual conversations.
Tarantino, vexed by his fear of failure. I recommend a psychiatrist...He can't truly be a crass, misogynistic, verbose movie-bottom-feeder with his eyes going 'ker-chingg' like some cartoon dollar sign? Or can he...dum dum dummmmm. Tune in next week for some more crackly cash-ins on the Tarantinos Radical Interminable Terror Experience..
zaroffhound 18 hours ago
Have been a big fan of Tarantino but relegating Drive to "Nice Try Award" in his end of year list is just another example of what really nags me about him. He worries more about his "cool" and his own ego.
SuperBob909 5 days ago
LOL - the foot fetish shot. I mean that really puts it into perspective, doesn't it?
Raymint 1 month ago in playlist Mark Kermode Reviews II
And I love how he's hating on Tarantino as a person; yet, he greases his hair back...typical.
Transformers2themax 1 month ago
@Transformers2themax cant take you seriously when you have transformers name.
chanceie12 1 month ago
@chanceie12 Or, perhaps, you're just too ignorant to understand anything I've said on here. Really, I'm not that big of a fan of Transformers. I thought the first two films were entertaining, wicked adaptations of a cheesy cartoon from the '80s--that's it. I do not believe there's much logic in reviewing them due to the fact that they're very preference-based films...
Transformers2themax 1 month ago
@chanceie12 I have the username that I do not because I like Transformers in any way but as a method of determining whether or not someone's worth the time. Only a hater with nothing else to backup their argument or anything better to say would attack the other individual for their username....
Transformers2themax 1 month ago
@chanceie12 Besides, with the level of poor grammar that you have, I can't entirely take you seriously either.
Transformers2themax 1 month ago
Absolutely agree! What a sheep. Not everything he has done is pure genius, but a lot of it is. He and Kermode are the types that follow whatever everyone else thinks is "art". This over here is good because it's a trend, but that over there isn't because it's different. If it's a romance with dramatic scenes, it's art to them. Scorsese is great, but his cinematography and soundtracks are nothing compared to Tarantino's. Besides, I.B.'s a film that grows on you. I hated it and now I love it.
Transformers2themax 1 month ago
Finally someone has put words to the nagging feeling I have had about Tarantino for years...
Baktor 2 months ago 6
Tarantino's combination of writing, directing, cinematography, storytelling and casting make him one of the best film makers in cinema history. Reservior Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown are incredible pieces of work and i never tire from seeing them. However, to say Tarantino's latest work is playing it 'safe', just shows Kermode's level of ignorance.
judgenutmeg1977 2 months ago
And I think Jackie Brown was terrible. The idea was great and all, but the soundtrack lacked majorly, there was hardly any action, and it didn't feel anything like a '70s blaxploitation film. In fact, none of the characters looked '70s at all. The unneeded sex and makeout scenes....It was not his best film. I mean, he took an actual novel that wasn't like that in the first place and tried to give it this '70s image. It never had that image of course. Kermode's just too ignorant to recognize art.
Transformers2themax 3 months ago
How was Uma Thruman in Kill Bill like Tarantino in any way? How were any characters in that film like Tarantino? Does this greasy European even know that Tarantino actually hangs out with people to get a good idea of how people talk? That's why the dialogue in his films is so realistic! I personally think Kill Bill was a masterpiece. It's a film like no other....Kermode's just one of those types who can't handle action. Well, too bad for him. Those '70s martial arts films had a lot of action!
Transformers2themax 3 months ago
@Transformers2themax I think that this 'greasy European' was referring to pre-Jacke Brown movie characters being a version of Tarantino, and I agree...that said, I did really enjoy Reservior..and Pulp Fiction.
So your criticism of Jackie Brown, was that there was 'hardly any action'...then you go on about 'recognising ART"?
You need to watch his reviews of films like 'No Country For Old Men' and the recently released 'Drive' ...it would have saved you from looking quite so much of an idiot
comanchio1976 3 months ago
@comanchio1976 That's like saying everyone of his characters has the same personality, which itself if pure ignorance. If they sounded like him, he wouldn't let the actors improv as much as they do. See, you seem to think that you're clever and witty just from messing with logical speaking. You compared two irrelevant nitpicks out of my logic as if it made sense. And I don't believe I have the time much less the interest to watch any of his other reviews since he liked High School Musical.
Transformers2themax 3 months ago
Actually, Jackie Brown did pretty not bad at the box office.
terratrema 3 months ago
I think that Inglorious Basterds is really good, and is different to his other movies, Christoph Waltz steals the show. One thing I would say to Tarantino is, if you wanna be in your film, be a background character, don't act! And also is it me or does he really want to be black?
milligan127 4 months ago
@milligan127 what exactly do you mean by "really want to be black"?
WinterXL 4 months ago
@WinterXL What I mean is that his dialogue in most films is an imitation black dialouge e.g. the use of Samuel L Jackson over using the word "n****r", and as kermode says its typical comic book nerd imitation, don't get me wrong, i love Tarantino, he is one of my favorite directors, but his earlier stuff he is always trying to do that. Perhaps more Pulp Fiction or Jackie Brown rather than Reservoir Dogs, that is my view anyway, there was no malice behind the comment.
milligan127 4 months ago
This argument would be water-tight if Grindhouse hadn't been a massive flop.
neafcy 4 months ago
Totally agree
TheSionThomas 5 months ago
I sort of agree with Mark here on Tarantino, but am I the only one on this comment board who really likes the intro song to this clip?
iamgreatest987654321 5 months ago
I'm glad someone has the balls to criticize Tarantino.
spillfan1 5 months ago
quite succinct
marlboroman1985 5 months ago
I've always hated Tarantino's work. It took me about 3 viewings of Pulp Fiction to decide I hated it. It took me 1 viewing of Kill Bill Vol 2 to decide I hated it. It took me 5 MINUTES to decide that I hated Kill Bill Vol 1. People think he's the fanboy's director, but he is an insult to fanboys! If all directors took a page from Kubrick, there wouldn't be bad movies, but Tarantino is re-inventing lazy cinema every time he makes a film, and I HATE that.
Bassbait 6 months ago
except quentin tarantino not only discussed filming kill bill as early as the pulp fiction shoot, he unofficially CAST uma thurman as the lead during the filming of the diner and dance contest scene
so basically, this dude's wrong. he loves hearing himself talk, but he's wrong.
QT really just is an ENORMOUS nerd with incredible fanboy dreams, like filming a kung fu epic (and a vampire splatter movie--which he did BEFORE jackie brown's box office btw)
guess he's not reactionary after all...
000EatMan000 6 months ago
@000EatMan000 QT filmed a vampire splatter-movie? That's news to me. What's the name?
I hope you're not referring to From Dusk till Dawn, because that was filmed by Robert Rodriguez. QT co-wrote the script and acted in it, but that's all. Kill Bill 1 started with a mentioning that it's the fourth Tarantino-Movie. Which are the other three in your opinion?
GothamClive 6 months ago
@GothamClive he didn't direct it, he wrote and acted in it. the point is that he was diving headfirst into fanboy projects well before any jackie brown conspiracy. it's actually the opposite, the reason why his movie have become MORE fanboyishly over the top is because he's successful. when artists are successful they get increasing creative control. and tarantino has had a career that now gives him basically 100% creative control. hence all his recent movies becoming guilty pleasures--like FDTD
000EatMan000 6 months ago
@000EatMan000 Let's see, someone comes up with an idea for a film, then after seeing the box office problems with the film he makes next, still keeps the idea exactly the same? At a stage THAT EARLY, it's impossible to say that he didn't react to it all. Because he most likely didn't start writing it until after Jackie Brown was released, and thus, changed things to make it more "homage" based.
Bassbait 6 months ago
I think Kermode should enjoy his new film Django Unchained which is a western, can't see any of the characters talking about other movies in that one
Part of the problem is Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown were crime films and featured real characters and captured what real people talk about - movies, tv, pop culture whereas when you start to do that in another genre like in Basterds and Kill Bill the homage it's a less than subtle case of a writer paying homage to something he loves
Nezzley 7 months ago
Woah... Mark is way off here, comparing QT to Bay. None of Quentin's films are massively commercial or chasing a fast buck at all, look at Kill Bill and Basterds... very weird films that just happened to be successful finically, the irony is that Jackie Brown is far more conventional than either of those films.
PompamooseMagique 7 months ago
@PompamooseMagique He isnt comparing them artistically. He says that what he has done is no different to what michael bay has done...selling out.
And it's true. He didnt make alot of money with Jackie Brown, so he decided to make a massive kung-fu action film, which I thought sucked. However I did enjoy Kill Bill 2 more than the 1st. It seemed to have more dialogue and backbone to it rather than stupid action scenes.
I loved inglorious basterds and I cant wait for his new spaghetti western.
jamesthemod 7 months ago
@jamesthemod I wasn't comparing them artistically- just saying, look at how Michael Bay markets films- to the lowest common denominator compared to how QT markets films- to his fanbase.
PompamooseMagique 7 months ago
@PompamooseMagique I completely agree, but QT had to make a quick buck for the studio he worked for after Jackie Brown.
jamesthemod 6 months ago
@jamesthemod Fair enough. I have to say, I quite enjoyed Kill Bill, but that's personal taste for ya I s'pose
PompamooseMagique 6 months ago
@jamesthemod Technically, Kill Bill is one entire film that was split into two movies. I think why a lot of the action scenes seem pointless is because Volume 1 has a lot of exposition.
slayerette86m 6 months ago
@slayerette86m I guess so. But then you could say that about ANY sequel, tirodgy...? That's like saying, you can't like ONE starwars film more than the other 5 as it's one film split into 6 parts. lol
I see your point though mate :-)
Oooh i loves a film debate!
jamesthemod 6 months ago
@jamesthemod Lol, no literally, the film was made as a whole. In a decision brought by Harvey Winstien, he decided to split the film to keep the story intact.
Kind of like Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 1 and 2. It's one movie split into 2 films.
slayerette86m 6 months ago
Reservoir Dogs is masterful, Pulp Fiction thoroughly entertaining and Jackie Brown intelligent and sharp. The rest are drivel.
wonderbhoy1967 7 months ago
hey kill bill is awesome and so is death proof
BRm2008 7 months ago
I'm starting to think Pulp Fiction was a fluke. Resevoir Dogs was a remake of City on Fire so I don't count it. Jackie Brown was solid. But since then he's done nothing but utter shit. a homage to kung fu theatre. a homage to war movies. now he's making a spaghetti western. another fuckin' HOMAGE. lol! Maybe Roger Avery is responsible for more of Pulp Fiction then we thing.
Rimbaud1531 7 months ago
@Rimbaud1531
Tarantino seems to work best when he's grounded by someone else's creative forces, e.g.; Roger Avary co-writing Pulp Fiction, or working from Elmore Leonard's novel Rum Punch for Jackie Brown. I suppose that makes Tarantino the Jim Carrey of directors - great in collaboration, but a bit annoying when it's all just him, him, him.
TheConciseStatement 7 months ago 5
jeez the size of his hands!
gillri 8 months ago
The only thing I would disagree with is that perhaps it isn't to do with the money, but to do with the praise of fans. Kill Bill is good, no doubt, but it should have been one movie, part 2 drags. The same can be said about the Grindhouse project, which was cut into 2 seperate films by the time it got a UK release.
tubbstarful 8 months ago
Mark 'get the fuck off the' Kermode.
Cuntfinger 8 months ago
Agreed, Jackie Brown is his best.
SeeLeekFilms 9 months ago
And that statement about holding QT to QT's standards at the end is asinine. You create a masterpiece like Pulp Fiction and try to remake it each and every time.
Arkduune 9 months ago
Utter bullshit. QT hasn't made a bad film yet. #1. Pulp Fiction, #2. Inglorious Basterds, #3. Reservoir Dogs, #4. Kill Bill 2, #5 Jackie Brown, #6. Kill Bill, #7. Deathproof. Even if the degree of awesomeness (or film making maturity) varies from film to film they are all equally better than the majority of films out there. I don't believe for a second he's chasing money. He could of retired after Pulp Fiction.
Arkduune 9 months ago
Couldn't agree more. I loved Jackie Brown, and while I like Kill Bill I agree that it was a bit of a regression. Death Proof was an atrocity, and Basterds was well-made but all over the place.
I don't know if I agree that it's about money, however. I think it's because he's surrounded himself with sycophants who think everything he does is brilliant *cough*EliRoth*cough.
ItchythaWookiee 9 months ago
Omage!
jacktalbot 9 months ago
I haven't seen "Jackie Brown" yet, but I think that "Pulp Fiction" and "Inglourious Basterds" are both absolutely phenomenal films. Two of the best films I've ever seen, actually. So no, I suppose that means that I don't agree with Mark on this one.
Markunator 10 months ago
@Markunator
I don't know if you've seen Jackie Brown yet, but if not, here's a reminder to watch it ASAP! :D
ExtremeBogom 8 months ago
I'll resonate the same things Mr.Kermode has said, Jackie Brown is Taratino's BEST work. It took some growing up and some film watching on my part to understand this, but I'm glad I did. Not to say I don't enjoy Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill etc., but, getting older, Jackie Brown clicks with me more than a film largely based around homages or fanboy wet-dreams. Like Mark said, it is a shame Quintin hasn't directed a film of that caliber in respect to writing, characters and over all maturity.
EcologicalFighter 10 months ago
I think Tarantino has a great portfolio. RD, PF, JB where great stories with interesting dialogue. Kill Bill and Death proof are different and I don't think it's fair to compare them with his earlier efforts. Kill Bill is straight from a comic, it was over the top and bloody, it was good fun, it was not as complex as Pulp Fiction. Death Proof was never intended to be a classic or be his best, it was a homage to b movie exploitation films. Inglorious was a return to form, very unpredictable
jimmymckooel 10 months ago
Once I grew up I realised that Jackie Brown was the best QT movie for the reasons Mark stated!
jibsmokestack1 10 months ago
i think mark is right. Quentin is a good filmaker but for some reason likes to make fan boy films. i don't think he is trying to make money, i think he just enjoys doing those sorts of films. i also believe him to be a sadist because the extreme violence in the kill bill films was un called for. imagine him in the directors chair saying ''this is the part where uma's character rips out that guys eye and puts it in the other guys mouth'' i don't really think that has anything to do with narrative
ec123456789able 10 months ago
Jacky Brown was probably the last on the list of those three for me; including Pulp Fiction and Resevoir Dogs, the former being my favourite. It was a cool movie, I just thought it wasn't quite as thrilling or entertaining as the other two. It was different, sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean its great. Kill Bill Volume II was excellent while Volume I was a cool action flick and nothing more. Death Proof, unlike Planet Terror, just felt like half a movie.
BigSal51 11 months ago
Tarantino sucks, that is something I've always believed. His movies are nearly all chapterised, non-linear, full of incompetant characters, needless references, horrible dialogue and gratiutous violence. His films have never sought any thought provoking themes and he shamelessly stuffs bits of other genres into other movies and pronounces it cool. Cool isn't ripping things from other people but reinventing stuff and playing around with it. Tarantino is the ultimate ADHD man-child.
pimpdadysuperman 11 months ago
I think KB1 and 2 were where it went wrong, mainly because it was a retreat (regression?) into Tarantino's youthful influences and more worryingly perhaps, an increased effort to be "cool" without the good dialogue of previous films.
JLDoggard 11 months ago
This guy has no idea what the hell he's talking about. Every film contains an homage in some way to another film or filmmaker. If he paid any attention to Reservoir Dogs, he'd know that it pays homage to movies like The Killing and City on Fire. If he is such a fan of Jackie Brown, he'd know that it pays homage to Blaxploitation films of the '70s.
MrBlonde600 11 months ago
According to the Kill Bill making of video, QT and Uma Thurman created that movie on the set of Pulp Fiction, and he wasn't so much "running back" to the "fanboy claptrap" that made him famous, he was essentially making good on the promise he made to Uma he made before Jackie Brown existed, a film which incidentily is nowhere near as good as PF. Point is i think its unfair to say he is merely trying to make money with these movies, even though they arent he has done better
reservoirdog666 1 year ago
I don't really think it's fair to make that assumption but, as much as I love all his movies to date, I'd like to see a more serious movie out of him again.
derebin 1 year ago
Quinton Tarantino is an awesome filmmaker.
ancoloco 1 year ago
fuck u ,mark.
BRm2008 1 year ago
rack off . he's a genius
BRm2008 1 year ago
@BRm2008 you sound like a massive cliche stupid fanboy
howaboutpie1 1 year ago
I enjoy a Tarantino movie. He's not Chris Nolan or Guillermo Del Toro but he's not Paul WS Anderson or Michael Bay so it could be worse he's just uneven.
Filmzie 1 year ago
He's wrong. Q want to do what he does cause he is passionate for it
Gandalfgrey93 1 year ago
kermode is wrong
gregorygumpas 1 year ago
Stop propping up this juvenile moron MK, he's a better filmmaker than he is made out to be, ahhhhhhhhh, stop Mark, his dialogue from RD to PF was so hamburger driven in its cheese, it's disposable, he was never a filmmaker, his career was fallacy from the beginning, end of story
MrMarcusirish 1 year ago
I agree about Jackie Brown. That was his best one in my view and should have been his biggest smash. Kill Bill seemed cheap and cheesy after that but hell, what do I know ay?
podfunk 1 year ago
@Lostdog171
I would much rather watch Kermode's show, than a quentin tarantino movie.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol fuck u
BRm2008 1 year ago
I'd say a large reason why Jackie Brown has real characters is because it's based on a novel by Elmore Leonard.
sparkyinbath 1 year ago 20
Kermode's absolutely right...too many blind "Tarantinophiles" out there who think everything he does is "genius"..get a life or at least get an education in cinema...David Lynch, Scorsese, Cronenberg, Coen Brothers, Paul Thomas Anderson are only some of the current comtemporary directors churning out more consistently good and more original work than "QT" has ever done..Tarantino isn't good enough to tie Scorsese's or Lynch's shoelaces..he;s a minor league pretender..always was, always will be
machiaveliyoohoo 1 year ago 8
@machiaveliyoohoo Ever hang around the IMDb? There's a fellow who comes to mind....
hanshotfirst1138 3 months ago
@machiaveliyoohoo I don't need an 'education in cinema'. Thankfully, i have a brain which i'm capable of using. It helps me to think and (amongst many other wonderful things) it allows me to make up my own mind regarding what i think is quality or not in the world of cinema and popular culture.
Evidently, the same cannot be said for yourself. Pull your head out of your arse you pretentious, indoctrinated cunt.
judgenutmeg1977 2 months ago
@machiaveliyoohoo is it not possible to be a tarantino fan and enjoy more mature cinema?
imcaspa1995 1 month ago
Runner-up to M. Night Shambolic in the 'diminishing returns' awards.
fieldingmellish44 1 year ago
@fieldingmellish44
Boo to that. Shyamalan's movies are consistently interesting and evocative. He just needs a collaborator to check his worst tendencies. Like Jeunet and Caro.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol i lold
gregorygumpas 1 year ago
I am suspicious of the conclusion that Tarantino makes his choices based on box office return. Aside from that, "Jackie Brown" he directed but didn't write, "True Romance" he wrote but didn't direct. I think Tarantino's problem is that when he lacks budget, script, or collaborative constraints, he lacks the discipline to reign all his ideas into a cohesive unity. He's certainly a talented writer and director, but perhaps he shouldn't do both until he can learn restraint.
cygnifilius 1 year ago 3
@Lostdog171 Did the ancient Greek philosophers have to write plays in order to write about and analyze the theatre? Of course not. Also, you presume that film criticism is entirely negative, but in fact, the most important function a critic today is to champion smaller films that don't have large advertising budgets, which Kermode does extremely well.
TulseLuper 1 year ago
"Homaaaaage"
SmokiSounds 1 year ago
I must agree, again, with Dr Kermode. I think Inglours Baesterds touches on brilliance. it starts with a nod to Kubrick. Surley it wasn't an accident the farmer is the image of Stanley, considering Kubrick never got to make his WW2 movie Aryan Papers. What we have is a movie about war movies. I thnk it's great!
BlowDeBloodyDoorsOff 1 year ago
I think he was a bit unfair there. Tarantino, for me, has been one of the most consistently brilliant filmmakers of the past decade. Even his weaker films such as Deathproof are still excellent. I thought Inglourious was fantastic and those who have criticised it need to have a word with themselves.
Rshady 1 year ago
Kermode has said everything i've been struggling to say for years, in about four minutes. unfortanatly Inglorious wasn't a return to form.
51yourtimeisup 1 year ago
Agreed on Jackie Brown. You can't eff up Elmore Leonard's dialogue, but it's a great take. IB was a zavinac in the face.
TreyRoque 1 year ago
Kermode doesn't know what he's talking about here, firstly Jackie Brown made over 3 times its budget...in America alone. Secondly, calling Tarantino a sellout is unfounded. The man was offered many many big budget movies to direct like Men in Black for example, and he turned them down. Kill Bill was fine for what it was supposed to be, and Inglourious Basterds was also a great film.
BigBoss7777777 1 year ago
@BigBoss7777777 if you watched the video. Kermode said that in Tarentino`s terms it wasn`t a success. Jackie Brown didn`t make as much as Reservoir Dogs & Pulp Fiction did. So in QT eyes it wasn`t a successful film. IB was boring as sin. KB 1&2 i did like but i do see why Kermode disliked it.
TheCSMman 1 year ago
@TheCSMman Um he clearly says that Jackie Brown didn't make money at the box office at around the 3 minute mark which is completely innacurate. I'll say it again, it made over 3 times its budget in the US alone, add in the worldwide gross and its a solid financial success. Kermode isn't looking at this objectively at all. He also says that Tarantino made the Kill Bill movies for a 'fast buck'. He made it 6 years after JB! I'm sorry but Kermode is completely off the mark in this matter.
BigBoss7777777 1 year ago
@TheCSMman Although Reservoir Dogs' success at the box office in the UK can be attributed to the fact that it didn't come out on video for years, thus it stayed in cinemas for longer than it perhaps would
reptongeek 4 days ago
Pam Grier was hot in Jackie Brown. I also liked Kill Bill 1 & 2, but I can also see Mark's point of view: very different sides to QT.
sulijoo 1 year ago
Finally, someone else has said it exactly the way I've been saying it: The number one problem with QT is that every character in his movies IS QT. I've been saying this for a long time now. I simply cannot believe it. I never thought I'd ever hear another person not only not scoff at that claim but agree with it verbatim. Unfortunately I haven't seen Jackie Brown though. But... hahaha, finally!!
SandBarAndYou 1 year ago
his hands are bigger than his face!!
kieranbird5 1 year ago
I've bored my mates stupid the last few years saying EXACTLY the same thing, practically word for word.
When I saw Death proof, i just thought "You are so much better than this! Why are you wasting your time on this shit?"
IB was an improvement... but he's far more talented than that.
JoeScaramanga 1 year ago 2
i thought kill bill and IB were both pretty good, but death proof was meh
jewthunder 1 year ago
I honestly don't think Tarantino's plan was what Kermode thinks.
Mrster 1 year ago
kill bill is empty, i realised that recently when i watched it again on blu ray, and kill bill volume whilst midly better is still empty, i have to agree with mark kermode that tarantino only has one voice, his characters all talk the same way, bill talks exactly like beatrice kiddo, who talks exactly like daryl hannah who speaks exactly like the character (whos name escapes me) who was the first character thurman
EllSiefilms 1 year ago
@EllSiefilms I think that's a load of bollocks. That's Tarantino's voice as a film maker. That's his artistry. I think his writing is elegant and brilliant.
slayerette86m 6 months ago
spot on
algildea 1 year ago
disagree!
mm.
welovetofu 1 year ago
I don't entirely agree with Mark here. Kill Bill wasn't a return to his comfort zone, it was actually a departure for Tarantino - much more of a pure action movie with little of his trademark showy dialogue. I agree a return to the more adult style of Jackie Brown would be nice, and parts of Basterds showed him doing just that, though not all of it.
paustecri 1 year ago
Yeah, Jackie Brown's a top flick.
Litshttam 1 year ago
1. Pulp Fiction
2. Jackie Brown
3. R. Dogs
4. Kill Bill 2
5. Kill Bill 1
6.Basterds
7.Death Proof
veenstra56 1 year ago
Jackie Brown is so underrated! But I still prefer Reservoir Dogs.
Shnufkin 2 years ago 2
I find his post Jackie Brown movies very entertaining, but that's it. I can't take Kill Bill or Death Proof or even Basterds 1/10th as seriously as I take Dogs or Pulp Fiction. I think he should do what Hitchcock did with Vertigo, ie, make a movie that won't necessarily please everyone, that won't necessarily make much money at the box office, but a movie that people will quietly ponder over for years until they realize that it's actually his greatest ever. I think he's capable of such a film.
WWAAK 2 years ago
Haha look at Kermode in his Harrington, looks like he's slumming it.
1985snowball 2 years ago
Kill Bill and Death Proof/Grindhouse weren't very successful either were they?
SNKTHX2000 2 years ago
Grindhouse pretty much bombed, but Kill Bill did OK.
wonderfulwomp 1 year ago
in my mind quentins only lesser film was deathproof, i love all his others & basterds is my fav' of the moment for any number of reasons!
mackychloe 2 years ago 2
I got to say I agree with everything but the money. Tarantino's first films were an interesting change and take on worn out genre's. However since Kill Bill he has asserted himself as the fan boy director. Everyone in his films talks like a nerds wet dream. He continues to pick great artistic films from the past and slaps them in his movies for no real reason. Yes he likes Goddard and Leone but there is no attempt at exploring their issues or his own. They have no meaning but to be 'cool'
Maas8701 2 years ago
What a load of pretentious, self indulgent, speculative bull shit Mark Kermode speaks... QT chasing a quick buck? Come on... he's offered pretty much every script in Hollywood and he turns it down, Michael Bay? Who gives a fuck what you expect Mark Kermode. You make a film. Basterds was fantastic btw.
timclark83 2 years ago
@timclark83 It was a decent film, the opening scene was one of the best opening scenes I have ever witnessed, totally blew me away ... but the music selection was far too forced, it seeemed like Quentin was trying his hardest to get his own personal ipod playlist in and inconvenient 'oldskoolness' really killed off the movie for me.
Temposama 2 years ago
Why do you have to make a film in order to have an opinion?
TulseLuper 2 years ago 34
Good point. Very good point.
TheDensley7 1 year ago
The lexspression and punshline at the end made me think of Andy Rooney lol
Wowbagger86 2 years ago
Jackie Brown > Reservoir Dogs > Kill Bill 1 > Pulp Fiction > Kill Bill 2 > My last shit > Death Proof
danj85 2 years ago
Inglourious Basterds?
Vincecouk 2 years ago
Comment removed
danj85 2 years ago
I haven't seen it yet. The violence (and Eli Roth) put me off seeing it at the cinema.
'Pulp Fiction' is a better film overall than 'Kill Bill 1' but it's about 30 minutes too long for me and doesn't repay repeated viewings.
danj85 2 years ago
@danj85 Are u kidding? I see new things in it every time I see it. Even if I don't the energy and flow of the film grabs me every time.
BlowDeBloodyDoorsOff 1 year ago
His films are in three groups, IMO... From best to worst...
1.) Pulp Fiction + Reservoir Dogs
2.) Inglourious Basterds + Jackie Brown + Kill Bill
3.) Death Proof
Anything2DoWithFilm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Karmode thinks he know everything about tarantino, it's realy stupid. He started writing kill bill before jackie brown. I have seen kill bill about 50 times. But i think tarantino is a lasy self focused person who have lied his way into the movie industry, and made the great movie kill bill.
killbill402 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this guy's a fucking idiot.
humbabwe 2 years ago
pulp fiction >inglorious basterds>reservoir dogs > jackie brown
kerealciller 2 years ago
Kermode is right
Jackie Brown is Tarantino's best film
jeff9868 2 years ago
does he know that jackie brown was based on a novel by elmore leonard, therefore the plot and character development were not his ideas.
THIS BLOKE THINKS HES MADE THT FILM ON HIS OWN. HES AN IDIOT
blingbot92 2 years ago
Er, no. Kermode doesn't say that Tarantino made Jackie Brown on his own. Unless Tarantino can do a much better Pam Grier impression than we've given him credit for. Kermode's point is precisely that, with Jackie Brown, Tarantino managed to rein himself in and put his film-making talents to work with a proper plot-and-characters narrative (based on Elmore Leonard's novel Rum Punch) rather than his own self-indulgent episodic (yet undeniably talented) waffle, as seen in Kill Bill, etc.
arguingplentifully 2 years ago
DEATH PROOF was a gamble, certainly not a film the director took on for a quick buck. It was a lot to swallow for modern audiences, initially being released in the U.S as a double feature.
Samsfashi0n 2 years ago
death proof was awful, aside from kurt russels instant transformation from a stoic, cold killer into a panic sticken shit scared bully getting his comeuppance. while dogs is an all time favourite, some of the dialogue in pulp fiction (particularly the mia/vincent, pre dance contest conversation) is awful. as the good doctor says, not everyone in the whole world is a hyper chatty pop culture spewing motormouth.
still never seen jackie brown, to my shame.
deanh1978 2 years ago
I also get the feeling that Tarantino isn't making as good a film as he can make. I think Mark just might be on to something here.
Mystandrain 2 years ago 2
the problem with tarantino, i feel, is that he writes the first thing that comes to his head. he's sort of insulated himself and does whatever he wants.
markors13 2 years ago 2
In a way I see your point. I don't think it's a money thing and the Michael Bay comment should make you ashamed of yourself(that's like comparing Marlon Brando with Rob Schneider.
I think what it is he fell into was a sort of self-consciousness and awareness of his status as a creator and tried too hard with the Epic Kill Bill and then was a little challenged by the simple means he gave himself for Death Proof. All I know is they were really good and Basterds has surpassed Pulp by miles.
Halfdan1 2 years ago
i love tarantino, and i still enjoy his films immensely. for me though, i kind of feel how i did about kubrick when watching eyes wide shut. its good, and kubrick is always always watchable, but its just not up their with the shining and clockwork and 2001. i feel a similar way about tarantino, still love the guy, and really enjoy the films, but he is kind of the incredible groundbreaking director, that in many cases, kind of never was.
ollymcguirk 2 years ago
i hear what he's saying, ive been feeling let down by QT. bastrerds wasnt the movie it shouldve been, still better than most of the other pish this year!
nolanzebra3 2 years ago 9
The only thing I agree with here is that Jackie Brown is Tarantino's best film.
Recent Tarantino is not an attempt at selling out, and even if it was, it was a poor attempt (see: Grindhouse). He's just more free lately to film whatever he fancies.
yushis1 2 years ago
don't agree with Kermode on this AT ALL.. so many people get hung up on the whole 'fanboy' 'movie geek' thing, including Kermode- i think tarantino is much more than this, and all his movies are worth your time- i dont think he 'retreated' back to 'homage' movies or his only 'mature' film is jackie brown- theres more going on in the kill bill movies than hes given credit for, and inglorious basterds too- theres a lot in there- its about performance, deception, cinema itself and more
TobeUK 2 years ago 3
The more I think about this, the more absurd Mark's idea is. If you want to see a trend in the development of Tarantino's movies, surely it makes more sense basically the other way around: in his early career he makes tighter, commercial films, up to Jackie Brown - then after the hiatus come the more indulgent, messier films where he follows his artsy fanboy dreams. Not a view I really agree with but a bit more understandable than this strange notion that he's become a sellout.
sam99foster 2 years ago 3
An unsubstantiated and unfair pet theory from Mark Kermode, almost amounting to a personal attack. Grindhouse: 191 minutes long, and Tarantino's section consisting basically of girly chitchat with one car crash and one car chase. Describing this as 'chasing a fast buck' is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard from Kermode. Reservoir Dogs is a far more marketable and commercial-seeming film.
This is Mark at his absolute wrongest. Should've thought a bit harder.
sam99foster 2 years ago
But there are lots of fans of Tarantino out there who just want more of the same. They will spend money on things like deathproff. If Tatantino trys something different. The fans would not spend money on it. So he makes films he knows his fans will like and does not take risks. This is "chasing a fast buck"
badhead 2 years ago
Yeah except Death Proof a) lost loads of money and b) wasn't much like his previous films.
sam99foster 2 years ago
Death Proof was a huge flop, it didn't make money. If anything he's dodging the fast buck.
Hostile 2 years ago 2
what a wanker ! He totally missed the point !
aimshunter 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
IB is a fucking masterpiece.Jackie Brown is a boring piece of shit.And Kill Bill is shit too.Movies with nazis are always great.
SuperHess88 2 years ago
Your an idiot.
Muskateering 2 years ago
Inglorious Basterds was brilliant cinema!!
larma7 2 years ago 3
I reject the notion that Tarantino's chasing a quick buck completely. It's bs. If that were the case, why didn't he go back to remaking Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs a million times? He didn't even rush back to make a film after Jackie Brown, in an attempt to just do any ole thing for money. Tarantino likes what he likes and makes films he cares about. To me, it's evident in the work. Like him or not, it's a thoughtless claim to dismiss him as merely another Michael Bay.
ProudAchilles 2 years ago
Sorry to disappoint but Reservoir Dogs was already sequelled...in space. Its called Starship Troopers.
You fucking plum
PepStreebeck 2 years ago
What are you talking about?
ProudAchilles 2 years ago 2
If Chris Waltz doesn't get an Oscar for the sadist Colonel in Basterds something is wrong. His performance was absolutely brilliant.
bwhite53 2 years ago 3
Even though I enjoyed Kill Bill more than Inglourious Basterds, I do miss his complex films like Jackie Brown.
thejobloshow 2 years ago 2
I think Taranttino was sumed up rather well here. And Death Proof was just a very expensive foot fetish movie.
thejohnsmith 2 years ago
Isn't every Tarantino movie an expensive foot fetish video?
captain07234 2 years ago
what a tool - and by the way, for those who have not seen Inglorious Basterds, please do, it is fantastic, 2 hours and 45 mins and at the end I did not want to leave.
abrushett 2 years ago
It's 2 hours and 32 minutes.
grindhouse14 2 years ago
yeah yeah sorry I did not put in the exact time haha....just ball parkin' it man, no big deal
abrushett 2 years ago
Grindhouse was a massive gamble in financial terms which DIDN'T pay off, and a 2hr 40min war film with very little warfare, only one 'star' performance (in a supporting role) and a language track primarily comprised of French and German is hardly 'going for the easy buck'... say what you will of Tarantino but you can't question his integrity, and he's not in it for the money.
iggsta 2 years ago 2
exactly and theres no way that he made inglourious basterds for a quick buck, he genuinely wanted to do a western style men on a mission movie set in world war 2. Not to mention not one person sounded like a nerdy video store employee in inglourious basterds. was he watching the same movie?!
anyway i strongly feel that anyone who bashes tarantinos movies are just pretentious BASTERDS who can only enjoy a movie thats meant to be moving instead of entertaining, which tarantino is.
dandadub 2 years ago
I think he is right - everybody has their weaknesses, including Tarantino. Come on, he's not exactly Mike Leigh. He (QT) makes films with guns in them and always has done.
Small wonder then that he went for the money shot!
Speaking cinematically there.
antag0nismo 2 years ago
I'm not saying that his films are bad because they have guns in them. I should have clarified that. Within the realm of films that please people, such as violent films, which he is one of the best.
But being in that realm, one is susceptible to the temptations that hollywood directors are and this can lead to compromises and even mediocrity.
antag0nismo 2 years ago
Comment removed
abrushett 2 years ago
In the UK most reviewers just sound like film industry shills and arse lickers, especially in the tabloid press, There have been only a few reviewers on TV that actually sound like film fans - Alex Cox (also a director) Mark Cousins, Barry Norman and Mark Kermode. Jonathan Ross was once good as a reviewer of trash cinema in the 80s but is now a mainstream whore/bore. We need people with opinions like Kermode who are also fans of the films WE LIKE like horror sci-fi, pulp etc.
End of rant
Alimantado91 2 years ago
Which centers heavily on Brad Pitt. Who is only in about 1/3 of the movie while most of it centers around a Jewish women who is hiding out after her family has been massacred. All of her dialogue is in French by the way, try finding any bit of that in the trailer.
3: Inglourious Basterds is not a return to form because he never left.
4: In the case of Kill Bill and Death Proof, he took a trashy genre and made a masterpiece and a very good film out of it.
grindhouse14 2 years ago
I agree. It's amazing to me how many people act as if Tarantino is in THEIR film class.
ProudAchilles 2 years ago
But this is not most audiences want. They would prefer large metal robots banging into each other and half naked women running away from them. Audiences like the fast-food approach to movies. So you give them a movie like inglourious basterds with a two and a half hour running time, which features long conversations subtitled in French and German and don't be surprised if it doesn't do well. The only thing that is going to save this film from financial failure, is its marketing campaign.
grindhouse14 2 years ago
I, like many movie goers in the 90s felt that Tarantino hit the mark perfectly with his first 3 films. I was surprised that such a wordy film like Pulp Fiction could be a success. Long monologues littered with pop cultural references that went nowhere didn't turn people off but instead made Tarantino a household name around the world. When I saw Kill Bill I kept thinking "maybe I'd like this if I was a more of a Asian film buff...am I missing the references?". It just felt shallow and pointless.
Alimantado91 2 years ago
Your arguments don't hold water. Tarintino clearly is a total fan of trash culture and the 'fast-food approach to movies'. Cheap schlock B-movie horror, exploitation, blaxploitation, chop socky, low budget westerns etc ....in other words grindhouse! Thats a big part of what makes Tarantino enjoyable. No doubt Tarantinos next film will be about 'metal robots banging into each other and half naked women running away from them'....with subtitles
Alimantado91 2 years ago
I am well aware of Tarantino's love of bad, trashy movies. Thats not what I'm saying. I was saying that just because a movie doesn't do well in the box office, that doesn't mean it's a bad movie. Quite the opposite. What Tarantino does is he takes the B-movie genre and makes a great film out of it.
grindhouse14 2 years ago
Agreed. I think that's true of all art. Or most things come to that. Just because Mcdonalds sells the most food doesn't mean it's the best etc.
I pretty much agree with Kermode on Tarrantino though. He's one of the better directors around, but he aint Bergman.
Alimantado91 2 years ago 2
And good word of mouth from the audiences who goes to see this film. I seemed to have a great reaction from my audience. This was a great film and I hope it does well.
ProudAchilles 2 years ago
I agree.
grindhouse14 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
1: Tarantino is not annoying.
2: Box office doesn't mean shit. Your average moviegoing audience doesn't know anything about good movies and this is a fact. Transformers, G.I. Joe, and the latest Adam Sandler movie are always number one in the box office. Films like Jackie Brown and the more recent masterpiece, Public Enemies, don't do very well because they are "Good Films." They have interesting characters who have actual conversations.
grindhouse14 2 years ago