Funkyterrance wrote: Haggis_McMutton wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:That's a good point. Tarantino increasingly tries to compensate for lack of talent with controversial subjects/themes. All his stuff is so cheap and obvious but it caters to the masses and therefore popular and sells.
You really think Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown etc are cheaper and more predictable than all the cookie-cutter, fairy-tale ending, virtually indistinguishable blockbusters hollywood wheels out every year?
No, they are obviously a higher quality of movie making than the stuff you are referencing, mostly I believe due to Tarantino's dedication to his craft. He is good visually but so are many of those indistinguishable blockbusters. But in depth yeah, I think his movies more or less average. I mean, do you gauge someone's level of genius by what they choose to work with or by the skill with which they work it?
If Tarantino would focus on his stronger points like cinematography for art's sake(I think he excels at this) and stop trying so hard to be thought-provoking(hes too blatantly obvious to be a success at this) then I would probably like his movies a lot more.
His movies are but a vehicle for his charicters and NO ONE
has better charicters!
Mr Blonde, Vincent Vega, The boxer guy and his nemsis, Bill, Julien, Alto Raine, Hans Lander... Come on funky, you really can't dispute that?
The only one that's come close is George Lucas and he's trying to make family movies so it's different.