comment #1

Sabina E says ...

He's not a cringing coward. He's very brave. He's actually heroic if you consider his point of view on the subject.

that was the only thing he said, which made a lot of sense and is very true.

comment #2

Geoff says ...

He's walking a very fine line. I had to re-read that second paragraph because he actually says, "...and I set it up for you to enjoy it."

comment #3

Raccoon says ...

Reading this reminded me of Jeff's terrific line the other day about Tarantino sticking a finger up his own ass and then sniffing it ... anyone who believes that Tarantino has anything left in the tank creatively needs to read and re-read that quote.

comment #4

BurmaShave says ...

So basically he made a pastiche of the morals of the DIRTY DOZEN and then forgot the DIRTY DOZEN?

comment #5

DeeZee says ...

Cronenberg tries show-tunes.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118007249.html?categoryId=15&cs=1
Oh, Seth, you so crazay!
http://www.thrfeed.com/2009/08/family-guy-abortion-episode-video-.html
More proof that Wall Street 2's gonna suck.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i12c12e20214456f3b8565d5c8116ecce
Bryan Singer wants his own Serenity.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i7fa7a60767d78439fd3baf5904a8e717
Blockbuster Video is in dire straits.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i7fa7a60767d7843958a24b65780e118c
John Cusack's no Brad Pitt, but I still bet Shanghai will do better than IB. assuming Harvey's not going through his usual marketing plan of sabotaging it, because of the Asian cast...
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i2e9044066d727a1a089a1e7d5045aab1

comment #6

p.Vice says ...

I can't imagine the sound of Tarantino calling someone chickie-poo.

comment #7

Cde. says ...

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/tarantino-nazis/2

Read his comments on Red Dawn. The man is very clearly nuts.

comment #8

MilkMan says ...

QT is in love with the sound of his own voice.
He's a Psychotronic capsule reviewer with a sugar daddy.
His ideas are fresh but his schtick is stale.
He never knows when to shut his mouth.
If he stopped talking so much he might actually hear himself and start asking questions and do something different.
But he can't.
His movies are only going to get talkier and talkier.
If his brain was really as big as his mouth he wouldn't be questioned about his maturity.
He's always explaining what his movies are about.
Thanks, Quentin. We wouldn't know anything if it wasn't for you.
Genius is boring when it is enthralled with itself.

comment #9

scooterzz says ...

DEE ZEE - that first link is about david cromer NOT david cronenberg...do you even bother to read the worthless shit you put up?

comment #10

DeeZee says ...

scooter: My bad on that one.

comment #11

MovieBob says ...

Having actually SEEN the damn thing now...

Why, exactly, are people dwelling on the violence? It's ONE ultra-violent scene right at the start, a few nasty beats here and there, but for the most part it's a spy/espionage thriller mainly staged as a serious of conversation pieces where multiple characters try to see who can convincingly lie about their true identities/motives for the longest time. It's the first Tarantino movie you could easily "do" as a live stage-play.

And for what it's worth, both the executed Colonel and Zoller being fully fleshed-out as recognizably human - even LIKABLE (if incredibly naive in Zoller's case) "counts" in terms of not making it easy. It's a revenge-is-sweet movie where the good guys are vengeful Jews and the bad guys are Nazis and Nazi collaborators - to most audiences, suggesting that Zoller is is human/likable AT ALL will be more than "uncomfortable" enough.

comment #12

jackfly11 says ...

Raccoon - "... anyone who believes that Tarantino has anything left in the tank creatively needs to read and re-read that quote."

And anyone who thinks QT has dried up needs to wait until they actually see Basterds to make that call. As one of the readers who has actually SEEN the film, Wells couldn't be more wrong on this one. The fact that people are eagerly joining the QT dog-pile seems to only validate that Wells opinion is what they wanted and expected from the movie. But it's astonishingly inaccurate.

I think most of the posters on this blog will be surprised at how excellent and genre-bending Basterds is when (and if) they see it.Strange to see Wells pound the drum so heartily for an empty hat-and-gun exercise like Public Enemies but miss the rich characters and beating movie heart in Basterds...? I'm very very surprised actually.

comment #13

jackfly11 says ...

I should add one more thing.

If the movie was ONLY the baseball-bat-thumping, Nazi-chewing action film that is being sold in the trailers I would've been pretty damn disappointed. As MovieBob mentioned above, the violence in question is a pretty small part of the 2 1/2 hour running time. Ironically, most people will be posting their disappointment next weekend that the movie didn't have nearly as much violence, mayhem and Basterds as expected...

And that's what makes the movie so damn good!

comment #14

Rob Thomas says ...

I thought his comments about "Jackie Brown" in that same interview were very enlightening. I had always assumed he had soured on that film because of the middling critical and lousy commercial response, and vowed never again to do anything "serious."

But he makes it clear that he was getting sick of "Jackie" while still in post-production, because it wasn't entirely HIS from the get-go. No matter how much he tried to make it his own, it clearly still rankled him that the source material came from somebody else.

I find that kind of depressing, because I'm one of those who believe he does need to do some collaborating/adapting to rejuvenate himself at this point, rather than keep dipping in the same well of exploitation-film references. And he's clearly dead set against ever doing that again.

comment #15

corey3rd says ...

"because it wasn't entirely HIS from the get-go."

as opposed to Kill Bill that was so original without lifting from other films.... rather steal from hundreds than admit you took from one

comment #16

openid.aol.com/highsierrafilms says ...

There's an Alain Resnais retrospective at the LACMA Bing Theater in October. It's their last retro before shuttering, though it's possible the international outcry over the decision to shutter will cause them to rethink. Why do I mention? You all seem like well-meaning folks who care about film and I'd like to help focus your attention on a filmmaker worthy of your fervor for filmmaking.

comment #17

pablobondi says ...

The problem with IB is that it sounds completely boring, like his last movies, Nazis being tortured and long speeches aren't enough to make a good movie. Tarantino looks like an immature person. I hope I'm wrong

comment #18

Craig Kennedy says ...

"Maybe it was because I've been watching nothing but festival movies for the past week and a half, but it's so relentlessly blunt, so absurdly violent in a '70s exploitation vein, so visceral and depraved and elbow-deep in jungle blood & guts that I loved it.

Every time a head got sliced or blown off, I laughed or let go with a big "yawww!" So did the mostly-male audience which applauded at the end. Everyone had a great time. I felt relaxed with these guys...bonded."

--Jeffrey Wells enjoying Rambo with the popcorn munching gorillas, 1/27/08

http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/2008/01/rambo_relish_1.php

comment #19

Craig Kennedy says ...

"It's a movie in which brutal death happens every which way, and by this I mean stupidly, callously, carelessly, plentifully. I began to hate it early on for the way it takes almost every character down (including ones Tarantino appears to favor) with utter indifference. Kill this one, kill that one...this is too much fun!"

Jeffrey Wells, feigning moral horror at Inglourious Basterds, 8/11/09

http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2009/08/jew_dogs.php

comment #20

DeeZee says ...

Bob: I think the issue is that those guys are being killed simply by association, not because they actually committed war crimes.

jackfly: The lack of violence turns the movie into a wank-fest, since no one in a war-zone would have time to plan a movie screening or converse about the stars of that era. But then this is the guy whose main concern after 9/11 was the Wachowskis still making more movies; so waddya expect?

Rob: "it clearly still rankled him that the source material came from somebody else."

That's a first.

corey: QT hates upholding copyright laws. ^_-

Craig: Rambo doesn't torture. Nor does it turn him on to kill a gang of thugs, no matter how much they deserve it. He's a man's man, while the Basterds would probably be running a Japanese-American interment camp, if they weren't fit for active duty.

Anyway, I like how he's still taking credit for the "experiments" in Pulp Fiction, w/o mentioning Roger or Godard. I'm also surprised he used the word "groovy".
As for his "fuck-those-consorting-with-the-enemy" comment, I wonder how feels about Dresden...