Tarantino suggests modern era tied for worst ever

[They Live]

That is literally a central component of every single film that the guy has ever made.

So, no...

I don't really buy into that he is saying "Not..." that.

"That..." is his bread and butter.

It is so funny your trying so hard.

Tarintino films are meant for people who grew up in the 1970's and their "Golden Years" is the 1990's. Basically his films are all timeless. It is like depending on who you are or what you do makes all the difference.

If he want to make films directed towards Hollywood types and the stereotypes of that world, then let him. It probably works in "his" favor because maybe he wants to make that kind of film.

At least it is not a comic-book characters being torn to shreds, with performers who have no love or respect for the material, just to harvest dollars.

Yes I watched X-men, Transformers, Batman, just to see that girl strip down and be suggestive. I did not watch any Tarantino film for those things. I doubt their is a film where any of the characters are in sexual heat being displayed in bras, or swim-suits on camera for the sake of having that character up for display. Most are well dressed, in suggestive tasteful innuendo poses, and actually look something decent and not just cute.

Tarantino films are a different kind of fish. Not just mindless cash grab. Yes I went for StarShip troopers so I could see her dart-board-bumped-mapped-harden ****, and not to see plastic-giant-insect push a needle into somebodies head just to speak through a human, or watch printing-limb reconstruction technology that is not being utilized in the real world. Like Starship troopers great and all but honestly %99 was those pair of **** my dad allowed me to view. Just like "American Warewolf".

He is correct they are not films worth anything they are cash grabs. Like all those lame Syndicate-Organized-Crime films. Just pure cash grabs that peaks your interest.

[Agent Z]

It is so funny your trying so hard.

Tarintino films are meant for people who grew up in the 1970's and their "Golden Years" is the 1990's. Basically his films are all timeless.

Making films aimed at people born in a certain decade is the opposite of timeless.

He is correct they are not films worth anything they are cash grabs. Like all those lame Syndicate-Organized-Crime films. Just pure cash grabs that peaks your interest.

Every film ever made is a cash grab, because all films are products meant for consumption. Tarantino is not making movies as a hobby.

[They Live]

Not looking at Tarintino for a moment.

"Toys" > Any licensed comic book or and or most sci-fi movies
"Blade Runner" > Any licensed comic book and or most horror movies
"Toys" > "Blade Runner" > Anything from both the DC and Marvel Universe combined.

Why?

It is original. It is infinite. It is universal. It exsist in our world and take place during any year you want it to be.

Only without a world with trees, grasslands, vehicles, and blue-skies.

Our world > Anything you, I, or the next persons invents. Because we draw from it.

Because Toys did Blade-runner inside one scene.

Tarintino can work with our world without making it look crappy while still knowing that terrible _____ exist.

All these Super Hero films gives us a bunch of moments that are more like memes while selling people the idea that is okay your life sucks so we made you watch half an hour of people in spandex trying not to laugh too much knowing how much the ticket price and time stolen from the audience is actually worth.

With Tarintino you know it is going to be auwwwhwhhhhh rriiiigghhhtttt, but with ____ ( insert comic book character story that has been altered without an continuation ) your like "Why am I here again".

Making films aimed at people born in a certain decade is the opposite of timeless.

Every film ever made is a cash grab, because all films are products meant for consumption. Tarantino is not making movies as a hobby.

You know and the world knows you could watch any of his films and not feel sick afterwards unlike most of the movies he is obviously against.

A. Watch Two-gangsters take a wall of missed bullets only for shots fired to miss v. Hulk throwing around Duce Biggalo look-a-like, and makes quotes about god.

B. See a walking cellular phone brand ambassador run around screaming followed by "Tricks is for kids" line v. Miraculous loophole followed up via badguy prison by some guy with horns too small for his head

C. A woman with a gun for her leg being hailed as the new Mary, v. Wolverine Viagra joke while somebody 1/3 his size takes on direct clone of his with more bulk then he has.

D. A scientist obsessed over his ball collection or a bunch of ______ characters having an argument over each other like school children resulting in mindless argumentation.

Any if not most of his films could work in almost any time on this planet. Those blah blah comic book films are mishmash cartoons and suggestive content that is viewable one time and one time only. In fact what I do is would put the media on my computer and edit out the part I want to replay over and over again. Make a gif or animated video with or without the sound. WithTarintino movies you do not even need that because of the amount of time just to perform one simple action.
All you need is photos, you do not even need GIFs, MP4, or whatever. Tarantino saves more room on your Hard drive.

[Agent Z]

You know and the world knows you could watch any of his films and not feel sick afterwards unlike most of the movies he is obviously against.

If by "the world" you mean you and Tarantino.

A. Watch Two-gangsters take a wall of missed bullets only for shots fired to miss v. Hulk throwing around Duce Biggalo look-a-like, and makes quotes about god.

B. See a walking cellular phone brand ambassador run around screaming followed by "Tricks is for kids" line v. Miraculous loophole followed up via badguy prison by some guy with horns too small for his head

C. A woman with a gun for her leg being hailed as the new Mary, v. Wolverine Viagra joke while somebody 1/3 his size takes on direct clone of his with more bulk then he has.

D. A scientist obsessed over his ball collection or a bunch of ______ characters having an argument over each other like school children resulting in mindless argumentation.

Any if not most of his films could work in almost any time on this planet. Those blah blah comic book films are mishmash cartoons and suggestive content that is viewable one time and one time only. In fact what I do is would put the media on my computer and edit out the part I want to replay over and over again. Make a gif or animated video with or without the sound. WithTarintino movies you do not even need that because of the amount of time just to perform one simple action.
All you need is photos, you do not even need GIFs, MP4, or whatever. Tarantino saves more room on your Hard drive.

If you're trying to argue that Tarantino's movies are timeless because they're less cartoonish than superhero films, I've got some land on the moon to sell you. The guy doesn't even like working with real world history when making a film based on real life events as seen with Once Upon A Time In Hollywood. The difference between Tarantino and superhero film directors is that the latter aren't deluding themselves into thinking their stuff is taking place in the real world.

[They Live]

If by "the world" you mean you and Tarantino.



If you're trying to argue that Tarantino's movies are timeless because they're less cartoonish than superhero films, I've got some land on the moon to sell you. The guy doesn't even like working with real world history when making a film based on real life events as seen with Once Upon A Time In Hollywood. The difference between Tarantino and superhero film directors is that the latter aren't deluding themselves into thinking their stuff is taking place in the real world.

I am not arguing anything. What history? Tarantino work is actual original pieces of art, that tells a story in a fashion, that is actually believable, and does it without marth-dump-trucking some random piece into the film itself. These Comic book films are not even colorful as Tarintino's world, but in fact bland, full of too many details like a Picasso painting and forces you to watch midgets on sets that do not even care or consider what they do is acting. It is like they are being paid to stand around, say some lines, and do the gesture dance. All the for-fill the marketing of paper-plates, Purim/Halloween costumes, and, cookie-cutter made figures being sold in stores led by staff with the IQ of "Do you want a drink with your order". You could take most of his films, smile and be like that was fun, close your eyes listen to the dynamic music, and sound cues, while being intoxicated by the limitless quietly spoken lines that leaves in "no way". Not just her insert character, make something interesting to put inside a GIF and let it sell itself. They will spend hours at end just to view that small portion of that scene featuring something before they realize "What I am doing huhh"

I am pretty sure if Spider-Man creator was around and was ask this question. Tarantino movie that is original and not some remake, port, or compounded children book or whatever Comic book movie.
I doubt Stan Lee would be like Spider-Man....only leading with the fact that Marvel had to give him the resources to make Stripperella and other tid-bits just to make a Spider-Man movie. Which is the only reason why his face popped up all this time during the movies premiere. He would be like "dude seriously they are just doing it for the cash grab have you been drinking too much coke"

Like zomgsh Wolverine magically becomes old despite him and Sabretooth literally being old as the ice age or something along those lines. He needed to down all that Viagra to compete with tweens.

[Agent Z]

I am not arguing anything. What history? Tarantino work is actual original pieces of art, that tells a story in a fashion, that is actually believable, and does it without marth-dump-trucking some random piece into the film itself. These Comic book films are not even colorful as Tarintino's world, but in fact bland, full of too many details like a Picasso painting and forces you to watch midgets on sets that do not even care or consider what they do is acting. It is like they are being paid to stand around, say some lines, and do the gesture dance. All the for-fill the marketing of paper-plates, Purim/Halloween costumes, and, cookie-cutter made figures being sold in stores led by staff with the IQ of "Do you want a drink with your order". You could take most of his films, smile and be like that was fun, close your eyes listen to the dynamic music, and sound cues, while being intoxicated by the limitless quietly spoken lines that leaves in "no way". Not just her insert character, make something interesting to put inside a GIF and let it sell itself. They will spend hours at end just to view that small portion of that scene featuring something before they realize "What I am doing huhh"

I am pretty sure if Spider-Man creator was around and was ask this question. Tarantino movie that is original and not some remake, port, or compounded children book or whatever Comic book movie.
I doubt Stan Lee would be like Spider-Man....only leading with the fact that Marvel had to give him the resources to make Stripperella and other tid-bits just to make a Spider-Man movie. Which is the only reason why his face popped up all this time during the movies premiere. He would be like "dude seriously they are just doing it for the cash grab have you been drinking too much coke"

Like zomgsh Wolverine magically becomes old despite him and Sabretooth literally being old as the ice age or something along those lines. He needed to down all that Viagra to compete with tweens.

There is nothing original about Tarantino's work. By his own admission, he just recycles crap he watched as a kid. His Django Unchained is a remake of a western film from 1966.

The rest of your comment is just incomprehensible gibberish that attempts to be criticism.

Tarantino has a long history of trying to make films within established brands. He's tried to or expressed interest in making movies like The Man From UNCLE, James Bond and Star Trek. He is not original when it comes to his output or his desires.

[DanMad1977]

I am not arguing anything. What history? Tarantino work is actual original pieces of art, that tells a story in a fashion, that is actually believable, and does it without marth-dump-trucking some random piece into the film itself. These Comic book films are not even colorful as Tarintino's world, but in fact bland, full of too many details like a Picasso painting and forces you to watch midgets on sets that do not even care or consider what they do is acting. It is like they are being paid to stand around, say some lines, and do the gesture dance. All the for-fill the marketing of paper-plates, Purim/Halloween costumes, and, cookie-cutter made figures being sold in stores led by staff with the IQ of "Do you want a drink with your order". You could take most of his films, smile and be like that was fun, close your eyes listen to the dynamic music, and sound cues, while being intoxicated by the limitless quietly spoken lines that leaves in "no way". Not just her insert character, make something interesting to put inside a GIF and let it sell itself. They will spend hours at end just to view that small portion of that scene featuring something before they realize "What I am doing huhh"

I am pretty sure if Spider-Man creator was around and was ask this question. Tarantino movie that is original and not some remake, port, or compounded children book or whatever Comic book movie.
I doubt Stan Lee would be like Spider-Man....only leading with the fact that Marvel had to give him the resources to make Stripperella and other tid-bits just to make a Spider-Man movie. Which is the only reason why his face popped up all this time during the movies premiere. He would be like "dude seriously they are just doing it for the cash grab have you been drinking too much coke"

Like zomgsh Wolverine magically becomes old despite him and Sabretooth literally being old as the ice age or something along those lines. He needed to down all that Viagra to compete with tweens.

Quentin? Is it you?

[Gaastra]

He is intitled to his own opinion of course even if i roll my eyes at it. The guy who made kill bill a live action anime and a movie about vampire hookers can't talk about real in films, however.

[Kirby101]

"Toys"? Are we talking about the 1992 Robin Williams film is better than Blade Runner?

[ed2962]

Auteur theory is basically Hollywood's Great Man Theory.

I wouldn't go that far. The idea behind auteur theory is that the director has such control over a film that you can recognize his style or influence. There's lots of guys from Russ Meyer to Ed Wood and beyond that could be considered auteurs, but no one thinks of their movies as "great films".

[ed2962]

There is nothing original about Tarantino's work. By his own admission, he just recycles crap he watched as a kid. His Django Unchained is a remake of a western film from 1966.

The rest of your comment is just incomprehensible gibberish that attempts to be criticism.

Tarantino has a long history of trying to make films within established brands. He's tried to or expressed interest in making movies like The Man From UNCLE, James Bond and Star Trek. He is not original when it comes to his output or his desires.

Don't forget his first movie Reservoir Dogs was basically remake of an Asian film called City on Fire.

[ed2962]

He would be like "dude seriously they are just doing it for the cash grab have you been drinking too much coke"

Are they drinking this type of coke? "Snortin' whiskey and drinkin' cocaine..."?

[Jokerz79]

I get where Tarantino is coming from since he hates conformity in film. Also, Tarantino is definitely a scholar of film yet like many film aficionados he becomes smug about the films he sees as less art and more commercialized. When in film school I knew a kid who despised Spielberg. Why? Because he gave the audience "Happy Endings" and never challenged them. I remember laughing at the time Saving Private Ryan had just come out not too long before this and I said, "Yeah we all wanted to see that bastard Tom Hanks die".

But for me the 80's was one of the best eras in films just google a year and films like "1982 Films" and it's not one good movie or two it's like one or two dozen truly fantastic or fun movies.

[Gaius]

Man who jumped on the NFT trend criticizes the preference of profit over art in modern Hollywood.

[JBatmanFan05]

I think Tarantino would have been better to say (something I think he's already said before in the past): I really miss 70s cinema.

That's a view I can understand in a lot of ways without heaping hate at the 1950s and 80s cinema. For all the bad, there was also a lot of lasting cinema (globally) from those decades, as others as posted about.

I and probably others think American cinema in the 1960s wasn't so hot (early 60s was awful). So why did Tarantino leave that decade out? Steve McQueen alone can't save the 60s.

As far now, I definitely side with Tarantino a good bit. It's harder to defend Hollywood as it is right now, it really is. Our best blockbusters are relatively weak films. It's tough. Of course there's still some great films. But they're lower and lower budgeted and fewer see them. It feels like streaming shows have overtaken cinema in terms of boldness and quality. It's a tough time.