movies

[Vidor]

Tarantino is making a bloody and violent movie to indict his audience for enjoying blood and violence?

Why doesn't he make a romantic comedy or a children's movie then?

[thrill]

I don't think it's hard to understand, but maybe it is for some people.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

I don't think it's hard to understand, but maybe it is for some people.

I am having trouble understanding how you indict people for their moral failings by granting them access to their moral failings in exchange for them making you stinking rich. Sounds like a pimp or worse to me.
And I don't see how that would be an effective way to fight or right such failings. Just looks like an exercise in arrogance and cynicism.
So, yeah, I guess I'm some people too.

[thrill]

It's not an indictment of a moral failing. It's starting a conversation about examining our natural human relationship with violence.

[JL21]

I think the point of the nihilistic violence in Hateful 8 is an indictment of his audience, rather than an attempt at some larger historical point about racism or misogyny.

I suppose it could be both, but I definitely think it is an attempt at a historical point about racism, misogyny, and really just what TTM said- the victors tell the stories of history, they get to be the hero no matter how atrocious their victory, etc... I'm pretty sure QT has even referenced that this film fits in with Django and Basterds as a revisionist history trilogy of sorts. Having seen it over the weekend, I think TTM's analysis is dead-on.

But again... if true, that doesn't preclude your point from ALSO being true. Because that's also a traditional m.o. of Tarantino. Hell, it was part of the schtick that drew everyone to him in the first place in the 90s.

[thrill]

But again... if true, that doesn't preclude your point from ALSO being true. Because that's also a traditional m.o. of Tarantino. Hell, it was part of the schtick that drew everyone to him in the first place in the 90s.

I view the last three period pieces as parts of a whole. Basterds was relatively guilt-free fun. Django was fun but shone a light on the actual atrocities of our collective history. 8 had moments of obvious spotlight shining (The only time a black man is safe in America is when white folks are disarmed) but to me it was mostly about the ugliness of abject violence and how we feel less comfortable about it when every character is complex and flawed and we can't ignore the flaws. The three films were a descent into base violence. He slowly stripped away the nobility of it until all he showed was naked instinctive reaction. Fear, vengeance, bigotry and misogyny.

[Vidor]

I don't think it's hard to understand, but maybe it is for some people.

Well, thanks for the condescension. I guess I could be condescending as well and wonder why you can't see how hypocritical it is for Tarantino to make a gory and violent movie that purports to indict his audience for liking gore and violence.

[Vidor]

I don't think it's hard to understand, but maybe it is for some people.

I am having trouble understanding how you indict people for their moral failings by granting them access to their moral failings in exchange for them making you stinking rich. Sounds like a pimp or worse to me.

ding ding ding

FTR I am not a Tarantino hater--"Kill Bill Vol. 1" was the worst piece of garbage I've ever paid to see in a theater but "Pulp Fiction" and "Reservoir Dogs" are both all-time classics and "Inglorious Basterds" was pretty good too. And for that matter I haven't even seen this new movie. But personally I've never cared for the idea that a director can "indict" or shame his audience by showing them the things they want to see and getting paid for it.

[Fat_Bulldog]

I watched Roadhouse again over the weekend.

Don't [expletive] with me for a few days.

[ghostrunner]

It's not an indictment of a moral failing. It's starting a conversation about examining our natural human relationship with violence.

I have to say it doesn't work for me either. Which is fine. Though I feel like any halfway contemplative person should come to those thoughts on their own, whether it's Star Wars, the Godfather, or Kill Bill. If in fact that's what QT seeks to do, it's as if he can't get over this revelation and apparently wants to keep pushing that gospel, like he's the eternal college student who just got exposed to existentialism. It's not so much whether it's hard to understand, but whether it's something even worth pondering. For me it isn't. It's similar to a Christian wanting to have a conversation and challenge me on my lack of faith. I'm way past that point by now, to the extent I don't even think about it. I'm on to other questions. So I guess my internal response to it is similar to Mormons or Witnesses at my front door.

Though I still suspect that QT is 65% a kid in a candy store when it comes to movie violence.