apologies

[ronchalant]

To those expecting a punchline in my last post. Didn't mean to get all philosophosically on your asses back there.. It happens.. but be assured, we now return you to your regularly scheduled nonsensical Ron. That other ron has been taken care of, in that Pulp Fiction kind of way

Comments

Pulpy

[pyromantic]

Yes I agree that you can't compare the two films, but then you also can't make the statement that he has fallen so far or whatever. When a directer is striving for something completely different and totally stylized like Kill Bill you can't make that statement. As a matter of act I'll make the opposite statement and say that he has come so far. A film like Pulp Fiction (which by the was I do probably like more than Kill Bill) is entirely dialog driven. Those type of films are they easiest to make...i.e. The Suburban Truth Distributors. Look at any Kevin Smith movie and trust me I am a fan, but his films take no talent to create as far as directing goes. Writing yes Kevin Smith is talented but not as a director, he even admits that. So back to our man Quentin...I think that he has grown a ton and progressed as a director because now he can do films like Kill Bill. You have to admire his vision and his nostalgia and the fact that he could make a flick with little dialog, when you compare look at his other films.

Re: Pulpy

[ronchalant]

I give/gave Tarantino credit for the style of the film - it is visually and stylistically impressive. But in my opinion, it fell short in terms of entertainment value of both Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs. When I say he's fallen from Pulp Fiction I mean that he has taken a strong portion of his overall package away in regards to the dialogue. From a directorial standpoint, controlling viewing angles and points of focus to give the best dramatic and cinematic effect, Kill Bill was, indeed, impressive. But overall, in my opinion, he has fallen far short of the standard he set in his previous films.

My statement that he has fallen is purely based on my opinion; I'm not saying anyone who disagrees is wrong. But the strengths of Kill Bill is not what I hold valuable in a movie, therefore in my opinion he has dropped off. I respect Kill Bill, cinematically, but that doesn't change my opinion that his previous films were, overall, much stronger.

Re: Pulpy

[dubss]

wait i'm confused (nothing new there) you're saying that compeling dialogue takes no talent to create or movies that have it are easy to direct. because i think that not only is writing good dialogue require incredible amount of thought but to shoot a movie that is all talk and still make it exciting is even harder than taking shitty dialogue and putting a lot of exagurated action and camera angles.

Re: Pulpy

[pyromantic]

Films that are totally diologue driven are the easiest to create. The idea here is the lack of subtlety and other technical things that are not needed when making a movie totally centered around talking. Kevin Smith movies are the easiest things in the world to direct, he'll even admit that. And no I never said making interesting diologue was easy...I said directing it was easy....and it is. You watch my last film, it was not difficult to create, it was all diologue. Basically we could kinda just fuck around and make an interesting film with interesting diologue as long as I had some kind of vision

[maxcelent]

since everyone is comenting on this piece, i feel compelled to do so as well. . . now if only i had a brain