Is Tarantino Overrated? - Hot Takes
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 07. 2021
- Website: www.deepfocuslens.com
Support me on Patreon: www.patreon.com/deepfocuslens...
Follow me on instagram: / deepfocuslens
Follow me on twitter: / deepfocuslens
Like my Facebook page: / deepfocuslens
Email me: deepfocuslens@gmail.com
#hottakes #deepfocuslens - Krátké a kreslené filmy
Properly respected amongst cinephiles but overrated amongst casual audiences
What does that mean
@@anthonymartensen3164 it means casual audiences dont really like auteur filmmakers because its too sophisticated for them
Eh, he's still overrated among cinephiles.
I think it's actually the opposite lol.
Well put!
Nicolas Cage (love him or hate him) has made some indisputably wonderful movies.
mandy and wild at heart are two of my all time faves
“I’m a vampiya! I’m a vampiya!”
@@sweetjamyams7281 Lol “Vampire’s Kiss” was just goofy - I was thinking more like “Birdy” or “Leaving Las Vegas,” but I also really liked “Valley Girl,” “Peggy Sue Got Married,” among others.
@@Wildcock23 Yeah! jokes aside, Nicolas Cage is actually a fantastic actor. When he’s given the right script.
I think cage knows when he's working with a director and screenplay that is going to work well and match what he does 'wild at heart' 'bring out your dead' 'adaptation' and recently 'mandy', I think he also knows when to go balls to the wall with mediocrity because at least that way the film will at least be memorable from his over the top performance.
I remember Jonathan Ross telling Tarantino to stop using music from other films, as it takes him out of it and it becomes a game of ‘spot the music’.
you could just... not "spot the reference"? I know i do that and just focus on the story
@@purplewine7362 well... the story is a reference to another film
How can you not spot the reference
@Ramona Ripley I get what you're saying but that's a bold statement to say *"every"* movie but yeah I get what you're saying. But there are some directors/writers that are completely original
Problem with being a hipster autistic nerd.... I love being able to just enjoy things for what they are and not always be trying to read more into things....9 times out of 10 you way off the mark anyway...
This was fun! DFL is so insightful and articulate. I really appreciate her perspective on films. Thanks!
The Nic Cage take is on point. The weirdest thing about the current naturalist/ "realistic" acting trend is that most of the time in films we watch, the characters are in utterly absurd circumstances. Its necessarily why we're watching. Except the actors give all these restrained performances. Because this is what's seen as good and naturalistic. Nic Cage just gives the intensity and expression and absurdity these absurd circumstances require. The only time his performances seem bad is when his partners give absolutely nothing back. Or the director is also obsessed with muted performances. In which case, why hire Cage?
Exactly
Curious if you watched Twin Peaks The Return, would love to hear your thoughts on it and of the take that it's as much an 18 part film as it is a season of television.
Yes, and she doesn't which is worse, that or Tarantino's garbage, infact both Lynch and Tarantino are pretentious boring garbage and imitators of imitators of the real cinema of the golden age lol
Love these theme videos! Love the reviews too of course but I love these just as much. 😊
I love Nicolas Cage. I don't care what people say, he has done some great roles. I like to watch him go crazy.
Cage? Wtf🤦♂️😅 Just because he looks great compared to the garbage actors of today's doesn't make him any good. All those Pitts, Cages, DeCaprios and the rest of them are pathetic garbage compared with the golden age actors (and I don't mean Brando, Dean, Monroe and all the later m0r0ns lol)
Jackie Brown was QT best film. That is because the late great Elmore Leonard who wrote the book Rum Punch co-wrote the screenplay. Elmore Leonard’s other great adaptation was 52 Pick-Up. Great film.
Yes, every movie he made after that one has always been somewhat of a disappointment to me because he's never tried to make anything of that kind of quality again. I like some of his newer films up to a point but I'm always disappointed.
@@Fedorevsky Yes, and Jackie Brown had the least amount of graphic violence. It was more implied or not shown graphically.
Get Shorty and Out of Sight are pretty good too.
Remarkable, still, about those LotR extended cuts is that they never feel winded or as a chore to endure by their end. But really. We basically live in an era where normal movies are gargantuan fantasy fare (if only so by their geological time scale), and most of those can feel like interminable slogs. But the LotR extended cuts feel fresh and engaging and almost never assail one's experience as being a bore.
Inception was never meant to be Lynchian though. For a mainstream actioner, which is is, its so much better than its competition. It can be interesting to imagine what a film could've been if it was more ambitious or explored a certain concept deeper but especially with million budget blockbusters like Inception you have to judge it for what it is. It's not an arthouse film and it was never trying to be. To quote tarantino, you deliver the goods of the genre but present it in a way you haven't seen it before. If it was to really delve into the surreal quality that reflects the way people really dream it would've probably alienated most of the audience. It'd be like going from the mulholland drive diner scene to the shootout from Heat.
Tarantino is a great director but certainly not up there with the greatest ever , simply due to the fact that he has never really stretched himself beyond revenge/violent crime movies. The best are always the most versatile and can succeed across the genres.
I wouldn’t say he’s overrated but he has made some sub par movies for his standards but he has some great films that deserve his earned status as one of the best to do it
I saw Reservoir Dogs in the early 1990s. Since it was long before social media, the dialog had more of an impact. Back in the 1990s a serious discussion about Madonna or about the logic of tipping by a group of petty criminals felt like a revelation. These days it just feels like something you see every time you open up Twitter or Facebook, but it does testify to Tarantino's greatness as a director that he anticipated a type of communication that did not yet exist. I do think that without Michael Madsen and the palpable sense of evil he was able to convey the film would have been forgettable, even back then.
I really find it hard to believe though that Tarantino actually invented this type of dialogue between characters that was about tipping, food or Madonna. Or pop culture references in general. Even when I first saw Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, certain dialogue sequences kind of reminded me a little of Lynch era Blue Velvet (Heineken/Paps Blue Ribbon) and Twin Peaks (coffee and cherry pie). Which were often quoted a fair bit at my school at the time. And even back in the 90's, Tarantino was considered to be the first rockstar director which ahem, blatantly false again. It almost seemed like he just jumped in the footsteps of other popular directors before him. I think at that point, the mantle kind of shifted from Lynch to Tarantino.
However, he's certainly an extremely talented director, no doubt about that, but his writing, I mean asides from a handful of his films, is he REALLY that good?
Homo Sapiens have been communicating like that in cafes and bars for centuries. Tarantino did not invent it. And I don’t think he invented the concept of putting into dialogue in film. The French new wave, which he takes a lot from, has lots of moments like that.
@@Muskateering I guess it might be more accurate to say that Reservoir Dogs was the first time I noticed that style of conversation about popular culture. Perhaps it's because Tarantino has a lighter touch than David Lynch. In Blue Velvet a lot of the references to popular culture are surrounded by symbolism and "meaning." In Reservoir Dogs they're just sort of tossed off to pass the time while eating breakfast.
Four upsides to the Theatrical versions over the Extended cut.
- They just flow better (especially Fellowship which loses its snappy pacing)
- Some of the added humor can be really cringy (Think Aragon reacting to Eowyn's crappy cooking. Is this really what we want in a LOTR movie? Or Merry and Pippin finding the Orcs weed-stash after the ents attack)
- Some of the added stuff feels superfluous (Think Faramir's flashback to finding Boromir's corpse in the boat. That even deflates the moment. The punchiness of him just telling the tale to Frodo had a bigger impact).
- The added scenes of heft are... of varied quality. (Seeing Faramir and Boromir together in Osgiliath feels like you genuinely missed an important moment. But stuff like Faramir and Eowyn romancing after the battle... feels kind of fleeting and doesn't add much to their snap-wedding. Leaving out Saruman's death was a felony but... honestly... the scene itself isn't that good. It certainly doesn't carry the punch the death of such a momentous villain should carry. Seeing him thud into that big industrial wheel is poetic and all considering how he destroyed nature... but also kind of feel like a plopping comedic thud in how its excecuted).
I'll await my reply from Deepfocuslens the Wise, Maggie of Many Movie Opinions, Young Raven-Haired, She Who Sits Before the Sofa. :D
I've always felt the theatricals were better. There are some truly great extended scenes, but very few that made me think, "Yeah, that was necessary."
About Inception... The dreams can't be dream-like because big pieces of that plot rely on not being able to distinguish a dream from reality... Feel like the point was kinda missed there by that commenter.
Kill Bill is my favorite by far. I also loved Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown and Reservoir Dogs. I probably rewatch Reservoir Dogs the most. I liked Inglorious Basterds, Hateful Eight and Django (but feel less need to rewatch them as much as I rewatch those earlier ones). Enjoyed Once Upon a Time In Hollywood a lot.
🤓🤓🤓
I enjoy your channel a lot . I love film discussions and people’s takes on things . I agree with you on Nic Cage . I’ve always liked him. Going all the way back to Raising Arizona. I think unfortunately he’s had to do some films over the years for financial reasons. I don’t hold those against him. In the right film with the right Director he’s as entertaining as anyone. I completely agree with you on Nolan. I think at this point he’s convoluted for the sake of being convoluted . I tried with Interstellar ( McConaughey is behind some bookcase or something…. I’m not even sure really 🙄). I didn’t even make though his latest film Tenant. I think the problem people have with QT is what you touched on. He’s very well aware of his talent. And has no problem with telling everyone how good he is . And rubs people the wrong way . It’s not a usual response. If he was more humble I think it would change peoples outlook on him. People don’t like the man and can’t separate the work . I get it he’s not for everyone. But it’s what I like most about him . He inspires me to keep writing. He like myself comes from a broken home . He never went to film school and is one of the most celebrated directors of our time. I like the fact he sticks it in the nose of Hollywood. I think that’s why they won’t give him a best director Oscar. But I’ve learned so much about movies and different directors. Things I wouldn’t have known if not for him . In a lotta ways he’s a been a professor of sorts to me . I recently finished his book and it made me love Once upon a time in Hollywood more.
He's got his "thing". Theres nothing wrong with it til he kind of falls into self parody sometimes. In fact, all the "big" directors fall into that at some point. I do find some of his earlier work tighter tho.
his best 2 by far are reservoir dogs and once upon a time in... Hollywood.
@@crobeastness Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is so boring it hurts.
@@Lerppunen how is that even possible to say? It's so exciting, I had to take my sweater off in the theater.
@@crobeastnessBy far? Not a chance. Pulp Fiction, Inglorious Basterds, Kill Bill and Django are all far better films.
@@Skrenja I'll give you pulp fiction and inglorious bastards. We just have a difference of opinion there, but kill bill and Django unchained just aren't on that level.
Do you know the movie Love Exposure (2008)?
A absolute masterpiece.
Interesting, wacky movie, but Himizu is Sion Sono's masterpiece.
There's nothing like it, the best movie of the past 15 years that I've seen. Amazingly, the story is an autobiographical allegory for his apprenticeship in gay porn and religious/terrorist cults. It also seems like a comment on America's "perverse" influence on Japan that the Christian tradition ironically enables.
Sono sort of picks up Tarantino's torch of pop-trash pastiche but with a palette more informed by horror, porn, and Shoujo. He approaches cinema like a digital age anarchist poet, and thus his muse may misfire to yield more successful experiments like:
the riddle that "solves" the faux noir of *Suicide Club* and expanded upon in *Noriko's Dinner Table* , an enigmatic yet empathetic way of addressing Japan's suicide epidemic that Sono calls an "invisible war"; *Strange Circus* references _Mulholland Dr.'s_ feminine doppelgangers for a depraved psychodrama; *Guilty of Romance* makes a similar adaption of _Belle de Jour_ ; *_Tag/The Chasing World_* is like _Kill Bill_ but with relevance (gamergate).
@Richard Santanna will check that one out! I tend to only watch movies with my mom lately so naturally i have to preview his films beforehand on my own time ┐( ͡~ ͜ʖ ͡°)┌
@@funoolesbian4225
My favorite movie of all time.
I need to see more of his movies ...
I only saw Exte and I wasnt a fan of that one ...
i would love to see you review Lost River. i believe Ryan Gosling directed it and it’s got that synth/dark but beautiful tone to it.
I respect your opinon on Tarantino, but i love his movies and it took time to understand Inception and now i love that movie.
Great video Maggie and take care and stay safe 👍🏻.
When you talk about Tarantino and his lack of restraint, That is exactly how I feel about Wes Anderson With his latest films.
Tarantino is one of few directors I will actually go to a movie theater for these days. In the era of bloated franchise blockbusters, endless comic book movies, and reboots, his movies are a breath of fresh air. Tarantino movies have something you rarely see today: good characters and an interesting story.
Yeah he may not be a genius, but who do we have left in Hollywood?
(yes, I know, we have a couple more, but not that many)
@Snehil Shrey
Yes but Tarantino isn't an indie film maker.
@Snehil Shrey
One could make a good case that he is 👍 More so than an indie film maker which he only was at the very beginning as a director.
But ultimately whether he is a 'blockbuster' director doesn't matter. He is not an indie film maker.
@Snehil Shrey
No but you brought in indie film makers.
@Snehil Shrey
Yes but I think it was implied he was talking about mainstream cinema.
Maggie- have you ever seen The Sopranos? It’s long (I generally prefer films over TV) but it uses that Lynchian psychological filmmaking language with creative effective dream sequences and whatnot. I’m sure not the only one who would love to hear your thoughts on this!
It's her favorite TV show, mentioned many times.
@@BatDevilSpawn yeah - only a newbie would ask this question
Saw Inception at the cinema with 2 friends, one said it was best film he'd ever seen, one said it was good, basically a heist, and I didn't have any feeling for what was happening, beyond the spectacle. I re-watched years later to see if I was just having bad day, but I still felt the same. The character were cool, but they were just characters, I didn't feel invested in them. And the motivation of helping out a super rich guy (so super rich they make a point of showing he was rich enough to buy the airline when they hit a hurdle with the airplane plan), to stop another rich guy getting a monopoly. I later watched a reviewer say that you had to be invested in the lead, and for some people that included being invested in the whole cast, and those that weren't, then the whole thing would fall apart. I guess that's what happened to me.
Inception is a deconstruction of a heist movie. It reverses the objective, but otherwise the plot is rather similar and it easily fits in the genre. I think that is the core of its genius. And the movie is fabulously put together. You got the motivation wrong too. The motivation is to gain freedom. Saito offering him freedom in exchange for the heist was the inciting event.
@@ssssssstssssssss I'm not sure I did (you didn't need to expain the heist part part, I had mentioned that), But I'm not watching it a 3rd time, because I still don't care about any of them. action and the idea was fantastic, but that wasn't enough for me. I need to care about them. Same feeling with Tenet too.
Maggie are you going to read the new Tarantino novel?
What did you think about Zola??
it struck me when you talked about promising young woman how impactful i've found i may destroy you a 10 part drama series that delves deeply into sexual assault and rape - suggest you see it - i as a man increased my awareness of this sensitive area by watching - tarantino - i am a big fan but ultimately he is an entertainer and you can watch his movies from differet vantage points, different degrees of expectations and analyse them at different levels - i find it difficult to judge his work by ranking but i am saddened that he has hinted that his next project could be his last - extended vs theatrical - i wish i had time to see all the extended versions - cage - his best work is his early work - leaving las vegas being 5 star but also work with coppola - moonstruck, captain corelli's mandolin etc
Look some of his films have a similar rhythm of: talk talk talk FIGHT talk talk talk FIGHT.
Death Proof is probably him at his meanest & leanest. An unapologetic genre film that doesn’t aim for anything loftier, and has all the attitude.
Most of his films could quite easily transfer to the stage which would be interesting.
I think 80’s movies get dismissed/shit on way too much by people who consider themselves cinephiles. If you look past the cheesy fun vibes you’ll find real substance in films like the Breakfast Club and Predator
Those movies have subtext, but only because the writers are simply following the Syd Field blueprint that requires theme and subtext to qualify as a passable script. But there is nothing groundbreaking, innovative, or insightful about those movies.
Tarantino knows how to make good movies and has a lot of knowledge about the art form. I think what keeps him from being "great" in my opinion is his juvenile take on violence.
Please explain how you feel that he has a juvenile take on violence?
@@Valkonnen Tarantino sometimes uses violence to get a laugh which always makes me uncomfortable. He strikes me as the kind of guy that as a kid would put a firecracker in a frogs mouth just to see it blow up - then laugh.
@@michaelz9892 He's imitating the gratuitous comic book violence first seen in films like "The Wild Bunch". Younger people can't possible get all his references, so I understand how you may see it that way. It's not his intention.
Tarantino IS overrated. I am so glad you have raised this topic. It is true that Pulp Fiction is a seminal movie in film history and became extremely influential but 27 years later, you would expect Tarantino to stop remaking it instead of turning out Pulp Fiction Goes To Hollywood. He just doesn't seem capable of saying anything beyond some very clever dialogue. Take The Hateful Eight, for example. It's like Reservoir Dogs becomes a Western. It goes on for 3 hours! What is the point of this movie? Why keep rehashing old ideas?
You have to say dialogue and set pieces of brilliant filmmaking are still Tarantino's strengths but tonally and thematically, he is one-dimensional. Think of Scorsese as a comparison. He made Mean Streets in 1973 and went on to do The Irishman in 2019. Whatever you think of the two films, you have to say he has changed and matured.
Comparing "Inception" do David Lynch dream sequences is just silly. I do not for a second believe that Nolan was trying to accurately depict dreaming. This is a movie about moviemaking! Their objective is to put on a show for their mark, and inspire an emotional reaction. Added to which, the people on Dicaprio's team have functions very much like a film crew: Producer (Gordon-Levitt), Production Designer (Page), Financier (Watanabe), etc.
I was just about to write a comment about this. The dreams in Inception are designed to be realistic and logical so that the team can accomplish their mission. The dreamer is not meant to realize they are dreaming.
Perhaps he actually should've made a movie about film making then 😉 I agree that as a movie about dreams it was quite boring, uninteresting and far too logical/ rational. Really overrated movie imo.
@@mabusestestament Tenet is more dreamlike than Inception
@@mabusestestament exactly dreams aren't logical
Nolan is great but Inception is a blatant Paprika rip off
I rewatched 'Jackie Brown' a few days ago and it is an extremely good but still flawed film. It's so true what you say about watching Tarantino films in your youth and feeling the "Woh! This is sssso cool!" factor!
What struck me on this rewatch, was that I felt myself wishing somebody other than De Niro had played the Louis role. He is very good but just De Niro being De Niro, with the greatest of respect. To be honest, the person who stuck out on this viewing and I thought did a great job and hardly ever seems to get a mention, was Bridget Fonda. There was not a moment I felt like she was acting for the camera and the way she taunts Louis before her sad demise in the car park is very affecting. Hey, seeing her in this has even made me want to go back and check out 'Single White Female' for a laugh, possibly. I must watch 'Reservoir Dogs' too and find out how that stands up these days. I have a feeling I might be a little bit nitpicky on that one
'Inception'. I never saw it as high art and there are things about it that certainly could have been done much better. I just take it as a Mission Impossible/ James Bond style heist movie with a neat 'dream' concept thrown in. As far as dreams and the way they feel is concerned, I have had some very hyperreal ones recently, where when I have woken up I am like sh1t, I want to go back there. I wasn't feeling, as far as I can recall anything other than I was in my normal 'every day' awake world
Here is another hot take: Most Oscar bait films and Oscar nominated films are mediocre and forgettable.
I completely agree with that, nomadland especially is one that I just couldn’t fathom why people thought it was so amazing.
@@zakrowe1301 It didn't always used to be that way. I blame Harvey Weinstein and his campaign legacy. It's still being felt. On top of that the academy is snobby. People don't like snobs.
Although the only awards I agree with was Lord of the Rings, the movie took too long to make with an unforgettable journey
@@davideoliveirapinheiro1096 Jesus Christ...guess the Oscars were never cultured
Not a hot take
7:55 very true. Promising Young Woman reminded me a lot of Under the Silver Lake, but where instead of toxic femininity it's about toxic masculinity. Ironically enough Under the Silver Lake got a lot of shit for actually going into those themes.
I love Under the Silver Lake
I love these videos. If you can bear it, I’d love to see a review of The Hobbit trilogy
I dunno if I can bear that. >
@@deepfocuslens Understandable, I haven’t been able to put myself through watching them again after being so depressed when I first watched them
The only time I ever want to see those films again is an edit of the three all together that's only about 2 hours
Hot take:
The Hobbit movies > Lord Of The Rings movies
@@mabusestestament That is the hottest take I've ever heard, and if it's sincere I need an explanation
Inception is just a movie where Leonardo DeCaprio spends the whole Movie saying the word - "Moll"
I felt that most of the dialogue in Deathproof was atrociously inane. Some of the scenes were way too drawn out, and were painful to sit through.
I rewatched it recently and didn’t even pay attention during most of the first half. The only thing that was interesting in that section was Kurt Russell. The second half I really like, but it’s easily Tarantino’s worst. I would still call it a good film overall, though.
It's a cool flick with a great villain but There was no reason for that movie to be over 2 hours. It could've been so much better if it was 95 mins give or take.
So on point on Tarantino... I saw pulp fiction when I was about 13 or 14 ... and it was the first time I started to see Film as Art rather than just entertainment... I went to film school because of him... but exactly like she says... when you become more well versed on film... you start to dislike him more and more... totally on point
Yes! You should absolutely see Inception again.
I'd click on your review so fast.
Anyway though, I think in the movie, Nolan explored the dream world while sticking to realism. And an argument can be made that this makes the dream world not as interesting as it is in Surrealist Cinema but I don't think Nolan was going for Surrealism. If Surrealism, especially in films, seeks to mimic the state of the unrestrained mind, to dive deep into the subconscious, to recreate the process of dreams in film form, then Nolan's filmmaking style is quite the opposite of that: it is a deconstruction, taking the medium apart to uncover its mechanics. I don't think any self-respecting cinephile would call Inception the best dream movie ever made. For me, that's Mulholland Dr. and Paprika is a dangerously close second.
Inception is a sci-fi heist thriller movie where dreams are used by the director to explore the nature of the medium of film such as the process of filmmaking and how films work on the audience.
Could it have been better? Definitely. In a lot of ways. But I don't think making it more like a Surrealist film is one of them.
PS: Really love your videos though. Please keep doing this. You've inspired me to think about films more critically and my love for cinema has only deepened from watching you. I'm a critic and a writer/director and this channel has been of great help. Thank you!
why are people acting like they never had realistic-looking dreams when talking about inception? you never just walked down a regular looking street in your dream?
@@crobeastness Realistic is fine, its dreaming about things that look exactly the same that rarely happens. Even when I dream about my own house, things look different in the dream than they do in the real world.
@@crobeastnesswell no
Retry: He's not overrated but I would definitely say he's highly overpraised. His movies are just very dialogue heavy and to a lot of people that comes off as being good in and of itself. His movie Once Upon a Time In Hollywood is overrated in my opinion and has the same feeling as Wolf of Wall Street which I feel is overrated as well. This is odd because Leo is one of my favorite actors, and Scrosese is one of my favorite directors. I would not be surprised if we find out 10 or so years from now that he left most of the movie up to AD's and didn't do a whole lot himself because it feels way too off for it to be a Scorsese movie. I also don't understand all the overacting and comedic tone to the movie. But since I had to redo the comment I don't think anyone will see it anyway lol.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood was my favorite Tarantino film since Pulp Fiction. I like how he mixed genres together in RD, PF and OUTH - a true post modernist filmmaker. The problem with all of his other films - and why I disliked them - is because he focused solely on the subgenre, instead of mixing the subgenres together with drama/comedy at its core. If you don't Blackexploitation, you're not going to like Foxy Brown. If you don't like Kung Fu movies, you won't like Kill Bill. If you're not into Western or War films/period pieces, you won't the Hateful 8 or Inglorius Bastards. I found his films far better when the sub genres were mixed in, rather than when they were the central idea.
Good stuff
Love this.
I was watching True Romance yesterday and was literally thinking the same things.
He's pretty amazing in that he's self made and forged his own way to do what he wanted and what he loves.
Yeah and with some of his movies its like he's making the movies from a fans perspective. I find many of his movies to be too long but would still rather watch them than most of the other crap that Hollywood produces. Don't think he ever topped Pulp Fiction.
One could say the same is true for Kevin Smith.
tarantino's best movies were before he was allowed a huge budget which is what happened after kill bill.
inglourious basterds and django unchained were okay but lacked the finer film noir aspects of his earlier films.
the hateful eight is essentially a rehashed version of reservoir dogs.
I was a big fan of Tarantino in my teens, but after high school I immensely started to dislike him due to his cockiness, & arrogance. I have only started becoming a fan again recently when I saw The Hateful Eight. I thought it was fantastic & I love the isolated winter blizzardy atmosphere, & his use of Morricone's unused score from The Thing really added to the suspense (Morricone's score for the film itself was fantastic).
I missed out on seeing it in cinemas due to personal reasons, so I made sure I saw Once Upon a Time in Hollywood as soon as I was able to, & I loved it so much, particularly the ending. I then caught up with Inglourious Basterds & Django Unchained. I liked them, but I did start to feel the lengths. Surprisingly, I felt Hateful Eight & Hollywood didn't feel too long for me. They're also my favourites.
I think he has matured more than his early days. The Tarantino of the 90's couldn't have made Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, which has a moving ending for me (after the massacre I mean, with Rick Dalton meeting Sharon).
I've gone back to Reservoir Dogs after not having seen it in years, & although I enjoyed it, it also felt a bit sloppy & amateurish. The writing is what makes that film. I would say he is overrated to a degree.
i thought Inception was alright, but it tried way too hard to be deep & confusing, when I found it relatively easy to follow. The ending I thought was just basically taken from Blade Runner, but without the memorability of it. Other directors that focus on dreams, or have dream like atmospheres (like Lynch, or Bergman), handled dreams much more artistically brilliant than Nolan did.
I respect Nolan more for a technician & his passion for celluloid (I'm a still photographer & LOVE film), rather than for his films themselves. I can enjoy them, but I don't think he is as thought provoking or deep as people make him out to be, although I enjoyed Tenet very much. I loved it the first time, but I saw it again, & although I still enjoyed it, I felt it wasn't as good the second time knowing what to expect.
I actually agree about the LOTR theatrical cuts. Especially the two towers. The two towers just flows much better with the theaterical version than the extended version . I do think Fellowship is the best extended cut though. But I love the LOTR films so I'm a little biased lol
He may be formulaic and this may sound unpopular but i like directors that can stick to the strengths while presenting something within it
I agree with that. That's what I'm doing as we speak. I think that stuff hurts your feelings. More on that, please.
Overrated ??? Yes, He's a walking plagiarist with the exception of Pulp and True Romance.
Inception isn´t great in showing how dreams are, but it never really attempts or even claims to be.
It is much more about cinema, film history and film making than dreaming. So it´s "levels" are more about movie set pieces which are constructed and constantly influenced and manipulated by the heist team, who is also the film crew, who are also the actors in their own films. It´s an action/espionage thriller which rules of reality is constructed with some concepts of lucid deaming and subconscious, but without really making it to the style of the movie.
I still like Inception and it never fails the grip me. But I totally understand that it doesn´t has to be like that for everyone. All Nolan films are a question of if the viewer will follow the rules which are the viewer is asked to accept. And if you don´t accept and follow, the magic falls apart.
Nic Cage is an Icon
me too ... I dig deathproof as my 2nd favoriteo... my fav is pulp fiction bar none ... kill bill's theatrics and look are so steller , hard to conpare
I didn't think he was overrated until I saw The Hateful Eight (unmitigated garbage).
I like most of his stuff but not all of it. I think his best work was his first three films, the only one I really thought was great after that was Inglourious Basterds. He has a very unique style and some amazing dialogue and gets fantastic performances from his actors but he can be self indulgent. If you're going to make a film with little to no plot it can't be knocking on the door of three hours long.
Remember when people were gushing about Tarantino being a video store clerk? We focused on the “you dont have to go through the system” angle, which is positive, but somehow missed out on the rather obvious in retrospect result that his films were going to be pastiche-heavy, if not dependent. Does he have a nuanced, mature take on ANYTHING?
Pair the comment about him being a child who never grew up with Kevin Smith and you have the abominable man-child, one of the worst social developments in recent times. Ever wonder how Friedberg and Seltzer were a thing? They are the logical descendants of that trend QT and KS started in the 90s- “hey remember that thing we saw? That was cool.” Also known as the entire premise of Stranger Things. Chris Farley parodied this phenomenon on SNL, except the character was a joke. He wasn’t meant to be an inspiration. We’re going to look back on his dialogue and cringe, if we’re not already.
I didn’t see Jackie Brown until late in my life and I probably prefer it most. It was an actual movie/story with little pastiche and no cartoonish (meant as a descriptor, not pejorative) elements, no self-referential masturbatory dialogue. Someone wrote in a comment that Death Proof was his “leanest and meanest” and another comment said it was 2 hrs long. Seriously??? If you’re gonna make a grind house homage that shit needs to max out at 90 minutes. Masturbatory is the correct word.
And not to start an art vs artist thing yes he fucking well knew about Weinstein. His remarks on Rogan were so weak. You didn’t want to bite the hand that fed you, or you’ve got your own demons.
Nicolas Cage was great in Rumble Fish. Rumble Fish is awesome, easily one of my favorite favorite movies. 🤘🏻
“Rumble Fish” is the best movie ever made in my opinion!
Totally agree
Yo your hand gestures are maaad mesmerizing
She's a piece.
Ethan Hawke said Nic Cage was the only person to do anything new to the craft of acting from his generation.
About Tarantino - it's much simpler - he was great while he had a great editor... he's had to seek out a totally different kind of greatness since she passed and has only started to find it fairly recently.
02:57 yes this is how i feel about many filmakers even the greastest, sometimes less is more
extended versions, especially for movie series like Lord of the Rings.....more people have access to those type of movies...
If I was in the habit of calling anything overrated, I'd say yes unflinchingly (Although one of the uppermost comments saying he's adequately rated among cinephiles but everybody else overdoes it....that's a pretty darn good size up of the situation).
But I'm really not, so it's not an interesting angle to attack him from for me. Basically I think even his best films are far from being apart of "best ever" conversations, while also at least being better than a lot you might compare them with, it really depends what we're talking about there. But at the heart of Tarantino worship is something I just don't really relate to in general, which is giving a modern thing more credit than it really deserves. Most of the time whenever I see an older influential thing I don't think, oh hey somebody like Tarantino did that better, or oh hey I like this because it inspired somebody like Tarantino. I just instead shift my admiration for that thing instead, because any devotion the "inspired" thing had I come to realize has been misplaced. I've found many people don't think like this and that's why they're in a position to find works I may deem derivative more impressive than I or others like me might.
these are all the questions and topics I care about film wise
Yes
The subject matter of Once Upon a Time could have created an incredible one.
Love your take on Inception. Nolan is humorless and cold in way that sucks all the air out of most of his movies.
I love QTs new direction, but I love westerns.
Hard agree with everything you said about Tarantino being able to adopt and evolve the more 'trashy' and truly 'bad' films like Death Proof. I think the more scratchy textures, rough language and excessively violent nature of earlier cinema - extending from the 90's and its more relaxed attitude to polish and structure because of the lack in technology, all the way up to grindhouse's incorporation of an almost honest nudity in its flawed and crummy finish hits exactly up his alleyway. Tarantino's filmography pairs exceptionally well by being unapologetic, just as he lives by his own rules and his own way. Being not devoted to self referential work, its enabled to be a simple and honest cheap film and sits nicely on its own pedestal just as Tarantino does among his contemporaries.
See, I grew up in the 70's and completely understand. You were born later, so you just simply do not. You would need to reference all of the films that we've seen . You are reading way to much into something like "Grindhouse". Both Filmmakers were doing an obviously over the top version of what a grindhouse film is . He isn't making films for people your age, because we are in a different time. Violence and sex are now on every cable series or movie, and BTW much worse than things that were banned when I was a kid. So when you see violence in one of the many films that feature it, you are desensitized.
@@Valkonnen i’m confused on what part you’re disagreeing with from my comment, because my intention was to show that Death Proof was a movie Tarantino made for himself, not for other people or like you said, people born after like myself. The rest of his filmography is taking from, or emulates, the motion pictures he saw in his childhood - while Death Proof exists to be exactly it. It’s his version of a movie he would’ve made, if he was the age he was making Death Proof for a childhood Tarantino to see.
That’s why i’d argue it’s generally considered a lesser entry to his works; we don’t have grindhouse anymore and that’s why I liked it because it was in spite of that.
Thank you for commenting on my Tarantino post. I really like your channel because you take film seriously. My personal favorite living directors are David Lynch, Paul Thomas Anderson, Lars von Trier, Béla Tarr and Michael Haneke . This probably explains why i cannot take Tarantino seriously.
Satantango rebooted by Tarantino would be interesting, especially the opening. Samuel Jackson would emerge from behind a dilapidated shed and exclaim "I've had it with these motherfucking cows in this motherfucking farmyard in this motherfucking East European country."
Michael Haneke is overvaluated
@@thomascuriel7611 Why?
@@pbarnette Because is a pedant.i hate the Control TV in Funny games. Why it's interesting?
@@thomascuriel7611 Is it only Funny Games you have a problem with?
11:11 That's exactly what happened to me. He was my favorite until I was exposed to Bergman, Kurosawa, Hitchcock, Bunuèl, Kieślowski, Mizoguchi, Ozu, Ray, Tarkovsky, etc.
Not overrated. But almost like an actor who is typecast, but prefers that way. Sorta like DeNiro or John Wayne. Tarantino has his tropes and you know what you're getting. But doesn't even really try going out of his comfort zone.
Nicolas Cage is so iconic in Kick-Ass
Extended editions of LOTR is the only way to watch
The first half of Deathproof is superb.
Interesting points! I have an idea for a video, maybe you could do a list of pretentious directors (not necessarily overrated). I'd say for example Darren Aronofsky is pretentious (imo)
He’s overrated by the general audiences. People say he’s the best director writer around and sometimes of all time but I think Coen brothers and Billy Wilder are better
Is Billy Wilder a great director? Don’t get me wrong, I love his movies but not particularly for the direction. That said, he’s such a great writer that it makes up for his less-creative directorial effort.
@@matthewmoore1757
Look at his direction in Sunset Boulevard.... it’s actually very good
I know what you’re saying though. I feel like both Wilder and the Coens don’t draw attention to their direction without it being boring.
Coen Brithers are hit and miss in my opinion.
@@mabusestestament
So’s tarantino
@Ruly manatee
Yeah, probably
I literally adore Pulp Fiction to death. I also really like Reservoir Dogs and H8full Eight and Once Upon a time in Hollywood. I dig Tarantino as a director
I'm not sure he's overrated (it depends on what that word means in context), but I've personally never been a big fan. On the other hand, I've got nothing against him. He's passionate about what he does and his love of cinema is infectious. His approach to filmmaking, dialogue, etc., however, just doesn't do it for me - high effort, solidly produced curios just conventional enough to be attractive to mass audiences.
Just curious even the kill bills ?
@@metalfacemoviereviews8979 I didn't want to ramble on too much, but in actual fact - no, I rather like the Kill Bills (though I'm still the rare person who prefers vol. 1 to vol. 2).
Long story short, whenever I re-watch a Tarantino film, it's always either Reservoir Dogs or the Kill Bills.
I think what sets Kill Bill 1 apart for me is that it's less talky and more kinetic, if that makes sense. Tarantino lets the action do more of the talking in that one, and it's just a bit of a different side of him that I found amusing and entertaining. Part 2 went back to ye olde dialogue deluge (though I still like it).
I take it the Kill Bills stand out for you as well?
I agree. He has 2 great movies I love, the rest is fine.
yeah
Promising young woman played like it was written by a 13 year old girl, for 13 year old girls
Inglorious Basterds and Pulp Fiction are my fav Tarantino movies.
Nolan is in a way a YA Kubrick.
My favorite movie is the Hateful Eight, but for me, as a director Deathproof is his best film.. hear me out.. the stunts were real speeds, real stunts, for a lot of the camerawork it was Tarantino operating the camera. He wrote the damn thing, he curated the soundtrack... and sitting in an audience watching where no word of a lie ever woman in the cinema was on their feet cheering... a reaction like that speaks volumes.. Oh and Kurt Russell as Stuntman Mike... genius!!!
Oh please don't take this thebwromg way, I respect your opinion
He’s a fantastic writer director but I feel his best films are behind him now. Hateful Eight and OATIH were just okay. He never makes a boring film.
Jackie Brown is my favourite of his movies though.
Back in the 90s i would say not at all but today yes Tarantino definitely is overrated. I've since lost respect for him tbh in how he chose to portray Bruce Lee in such a cheap and exaggerated manner in order to justify his one character at the end of that OUATIH movie he did.
@Kath Octogon Yeh she gotta have been upset, it must have been hurtful for her.
i still don't understand how tarantino ranks 'death proof' as his least favorite film when you can clearly see that he had a lot of fun making it.
Drastically!
Yes, it's not that he borrows stuff from other movies (other directors do that). His movies are just often overlong, boring with dialogue that has little point (this is after Jackie Brown) and pointless scenes. The violence in his movie never bother me because they are usually what is to be expected and isn't anything special. Kill Bill vol.2 was so frustrating to sit through and some of the dialogue I felt I was actually watching something that was mimicking Trantino.
Tarantino's strength in my opinion is in his dialogue. I'm always hanging on to every word his characters are saying. My favorites of his are still Django Unchained and Pulp Fiction.
and yet it's also his downfall.He glorifies in movies that should be lean or mean.....And the longer they get, the more dialogue should be cut.
The last four movies could lose 45' minutes each easy. And they would still not measure up to some of the classic mean movies.
Peter Jackson/ Spielberg/ Tarantino all have a serious problem with killing their darlings.
Same for Fury Road......
What dialogue? You mean a bunch of dummies in a warehouse lol Lets just tell it like it it is: Tarantino is an imitator of imitators and of garbage from the 70s, and his films are pathetic dumb garbage on the same level as Marvel movies wtf🤦♂️😅😂🤣
One of Taratino's greatest dialogue scenes was from a movie that Tarantino wrote the screenplay for, but didn't direct. The Sicilian scene from True Romance.
I think Inception is my favorite Nolan movie - but even I always thought it could have been more "dream-like"
Yeah the irony is that that movie is far too rational.
Interstellar is my favourite Nolan film. I’ve been meaning to go back to memento aswell.
I think Tarantino is a genius in his own cinematic language. I think his scripts are excellently done. I still think Pulp Fiction is his masterpiece. The Hateful Eight, Django Unchained, Reservoir Dogs, and Basterds are amazing. I loved Once Upon a Time in Hollywood a lot, a lot of what was shown was brilliant, but I notice he neglects some aspects in order to elevate others: he insists in calling the Manson familiy hippies (they where far from being hippies) , and the overall biased insulting perception of Bruce Lee. Flawd or not, Bruce Lee is a cherished asian figure who worked very hard to find his place and Tarantino made him a buffon to elevate Cliff Booth. It was like humilliating Jane Fonda to make Sharon Tate look good.
some his characters call them hippies and from afar they would appear that way to most people. I bet the book version has a lot more characterization of the Family, which he seems very interested in. His depiction of Lee is apparently based on the impression American stunt workers had of him. Apparently he was quite abusive and disrespected them for being trained in cinematic fakery and not martial arts.
I love QT films, but there is more form than substance. I don't feel like he had anything to say until Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
I hate this thoughtless cliché critique 'style over substance' - when done right, style IS substance and not everything should be obligated to be deeper than that
I cannot disagree more.
@@pbarnette good for you.
Thank you, someone has to say that. That critique is used so arbitrarily and poorly that it might as well not be used at all and we'd be better off. Kinda like calling things pretentious. Style IS substance, the depth that cinema can reach will always be based on the power of the single image and of the visual language, tarkovsky isn't deep because there's a lot of "meaning" to be taken out of the five minutes long shots panning over grass, he's great because of the experience that his stories give. Most of what people throw under this dumb umbrella of "style" are actually the fundamental tools of cinematic storytelling.
I've made many arguments for why style informs substance well, in good films with pronounced aesthetics. But as you said - it only works when it's done right. Figuring out how and why it works is the more interesting argument, and the more difficult one.
You’re absolutely right. The division between “style” and “substance” is basically an artificial one. One becomes part of the other so often that those categories just melt away, in my opinion.