i'd like to point out that neither of the two directors are flawless. let's look at the pro's and con's.
tarantino: +resevoir dogs,true romance, pulp fiction
+/- kill bill, kill bill 2, jackie brown
- from dusk til dawn, natural born killers, it's pat, four rooms
rodriguez: + sin city
+/- spy kids, el mariachi
- spy kids 2, spy kids 3, desperado, once upon a time in mexico, from dusk till dawn, four rooms, shark boy and lava girl, from dusk till dawn 3, the faculty
all i know is this: when this movie drops, i will go INSANE from all the morons talking it up.
Originally posted by manorastroman
i'd like to point out that neither of the two directors are flawless. let's look at the pro's and con's.tarantino: +resevoir dogs,true romance, pulp fiction
+/- kill bill, kill bill 2, jackie brown
- from dusk til dawn, natural born killers, it's pat, four roomsall i know is this: when this movie drops, i will go INSANE from all the morons talking it up.
When talking about QT as a director when do you mention projects that his written but hasn't directed? Seems unfair to judge in that manner especially with projects like Natural Born Killers in which Tarantino only came up with the story
I also didn't see the need to "point" out anything because I think we are all aware that they aren't flawless. Also why would you go insane? Especially since there's reason enough to be hyped about the project.
"only came up with the story"? that's a pretty big only. i included projects that either director had significant creative influence over, which means wrote and/or directed.
and the entire post was basically my way of saying that there most certainly is NOT plenty to be hyped about. this movie looks like it will be a LOT more natural born killers/from dusk till dawn and a lot less pulp fiction/sin city.
they're giving in to their worst instincts.
Originally posted by manorastroman
"only came up with the story"? that's a pretty big only. i included projects that either director had significant creative influence over, which means wrote and/or directed.
Writing a story doesn't mean shit if you aren't writing the script or directing the project. Anyone can come up with a good story and have it totally F'ed in the A, if some one doesn't come up with a good script or have the vision to direct it properly. Plus, saying that you only added the projects that QT had significant influence doesn't mean much, considering how small a career that is thus far.
Originally posted by manorastroman
and the entire post was basically my way of saying that there most certainly is NOT plenty to be hyped about. this movie looks like it will be a LOT more natural born killers/from dusk till dawn and a lot less pulp fiction/sin city.they're giving in to their worst instincts.
I don't think it looks like any of the films you mentioned. It's a totally different project. I doubt QT was going for Pulp Fiction when he was doing this and I doubt RR was going for Sin City as well. Besides mentioning their previous works does little to support your case because it shows that these men are well within their limit to produce this project.
what? qt DID do the script for the projects mentioned, so apparently that whole paragraph of yours "doesn't mean much".
of course it doesn't look like the projects mentioned, being that there are no vampires or prison escapes to speak of. i mean to say that "grindhouse" is most likely going to be a logical extension of both director's "grindhouse" stylistic tendencies. said tendencies are the reason why their bad movies are bad.
Originally posted by manorastroman
i'd like to point out that neither of the two directors are flawless. let's look at the pro's and con's.tarantino: +resevoir dogs,true romance, pulp fiction
+/- kill bill, kill bill 2, jackie brown
- from dusk til dawn, natural born killers, it's pat, four roomsrodriguez: + sin city
+/- spy kids, el mariachi
- spy kids 2, spy kids 3, desperado, once upon a time in mexico, from dusk till dawn, four rooms, shark boy and lava girl, from dusk till dawn 3, the facultyall i know is this: when this movie drops, i will go INSANE from all the morons talking it up.
Let's see:
Quentin Tarantino
Reservoir Dogs - 9/10
Pulp Fiction - 10/10
Kill Bill - 9/10
Jackie Brown - 10/10
True Romance - 3/10
Four Rooms - 3/10
From Dusk 'Till Dawn - 4/10
Natural Born Killers - 2/10
Robert Rodriguez
Sin City - 9/10
Spy Kids - 4/10
Spy Kids 2: Island of Lost Dreams - 4/10
Spy Kids 3D - 6/10
From Dusk 'Till Dawn - 5/10
Desperado - 7/10
Once Upon a Time in Mexico - 8/10
El Mariachi - 5/10
While everything Tarantino directed got an excellent rating from me, I'm going to guess that I'll love Death Proof. Robert Rodriguez is decent enough to pull off his half, as well.
Originally posted by manorastroman
what? qt DID do the script for the projects mentioned, so apparently that whole paragraph of yours "doesn't mean much".
Oh really?
Shows how much you know.
Originally posted by manorastroman
of course it doesn't look like the projects mentioned, being that there are no vampires or prison escapes to speak of. i mean to say that "grindhouse" is most likely going to be a logical extension of both director's "grindhouse" stylistic tendencies.
If this is an extension of their stylistic tendencies I still don't see how that makes this film bad.
Originally posted by manorastroman
said tendencies are the reason why their bad movies are bad.
Make sense and I'll address it.
http://allmovie.com/cg/avg.dll?p=avg&sql=1:132230~T3
yes, really. and even if his creative role in nbk isn't "significant" enough, that does nothing to the rest of the awful screenplays he's written.
was there nonsense in that paragraph? the "grindhouse" influence is not a good one, therefore that influence extending over the whole of the project is a bad thing. seems pretty simple to me.
Originally posted by manorastroman
http://allmovie.com/cg/avg.dll?p=avg&sql=1:132230~T3yes, really. and even if his creative role in nbk isn't "significant" enough, that does nothing to the rest of the awful screenplays he's written.
That's incorrect. Have you even seen the opening credits? Under who had written it, QT's name is not mention.
Originally posted by manorastroman
was there nonsense in that paragraph? the "grindhouse" influence is not a good one, therefore that influence extending over the whole of the project is a bad thing. seems pretty simple to me.
WTF? Are you even aware of what the influence behind Grindhouse is? B-grade horror movies. That B-grade influence over the work is turning out great, as far as the trailer looks. The movie looks gritty, gory & fun just like B-grade horror film. So, for me at least, influence is not at all a negative thing. BTW, the way you presented before did indeed not make sense.
Originally posted by manorastroman
it appears as if you enjoyment of snakes on a plane creates a fundamental gap in taste that cannot be bridged. impasse, then? i suppose it has been since inception.
My perception of just went from idiot to complete moron. Have you even bothered to ask what other movies I enjoy? Or even bothered to check my profile? No, but I can expect that from a moron, can I?
It looks more like early John Carpenter than anything, and nobody goes to a Tarantino movie looking for a solid screenplay. They go for dialogue. If you're looking for anything else, you're barking up the wrong tree. Their tendencies, and how YOU feel they are reflected in his work would put you in the minority when it comes to fans of cinema in general.
If it's something you don't like, don't bait others, the aforementioned "morons" such as myself that may, to your surprise, have a "legitimate" reason for liking the film. Live and let live.
This is no place for discounting other people's opinions based on a prejudice. Besides, Ya Krunk'd Floo is our resident esotericist.
wow, that was weird. i wasn't saying anyone who likes grindhouse is a moron. in fact, nothing of the sort has ever been birthed from these fingertips. but it IS true that several morons will like the film, and will shove it down my throat. legitimacy is irrelevent.
and why the hell would i ask you what other movies you like, or check your profile? on this issue, your enjoyment of snakes on a plane reflects why you will likely enjoy grindhouse, where as my abhorrence of snakes on a plane indicates why i likely wouldn't enjoy grindhouse.
and i DO go to tarantino for a solid script. his direction as never struck me as tremendous.
Originally posted by manorastroman
wow, that was weird. i wasn't saying anyone who likes grindhouse is a moron. in fact, nothing of the sort has ever been birthed from these fingertips. but it IS true that several morons will like the film, and will shove it down my throat. legitimacy is irrelevent.
Originally posted by manorastroman
all i know is this: when this movie drops, i will go INSANE from all the morons talking it up.
Legitimacy is only irrelevant to people who already have their minds made up as to how they view certain people and their subsequent views.
and why the hell would i ask you what other movies you like, or check your profile? on this issue, your enjoyment of snakes on a plane reflects why you will likely enjoy grindhouse, where as my abhorrence of snakes on a plane indicates why i likely wouldn't enjoy grindhouse.
Yes. Why would you? You've already evaluated the guy's tastes, drawing parallels between two TOTALLY incompatible movies. From my 3 years here, I've found that it's a lot easier for some to just go with whatever there is to work with, for fear of being wrong in their estimation, because they've either made their mind up.
In my debates, I've seen it go both ways, and with you yourself being shrouded in mystery with a blank profile, while empty, speaks volumes.
did you quote my post without reading it? i have no interest in this guy besides this topic, and despite what you may think, TONS of paralells can be drawn twixt snakes and grindhouse. so to quote you...yes, why would I?
this is very odd. i never gave any indication that i was marginalizing this guy's taste, nor that i even conceited to know his taste. that was all assumption on his part, and yours.
i'd hate to patronize you with elementary logic, but just because i said morons would talk it up does not mean all who talk it up are morons.
i doubt the conclusion "i don't really care what my image is on this forum, and don't care to spend time on a profile" takes up volumes.
by the way, legitimacy is ONLY relevant to those who have their minds made up.
Originally posted by The Core
and nobody goes to a Tarantino movie looking for a solid screenplay. They go for dialogue.
I must say I agree to some degree. Hey, That rhymes! 😱
Originally posted by The Core
If it's something you don't like, don't bait others, the aforementioned "morons" such as myself that may, to your surprise, have a "legitimate" reason for liking the film. Live and let live.
He can have his opinion, I'm not against that. It's the way he presented his argument and the logic behind it is what I was about. If I was really going in to lash out at his opinions, I would have attacked what he thought about QT and RR movies.
Originally posted by The Core
This is no place for discounting other people's opinions based on a prejudice. Besides, Ya Krunk'd Floo is our resident esotericist.
You didn't compare me to YKF now did you?
Originally posted by manorastroman
wow, that was weird. i wasn't saying anyone who likes grindhouse is a moron. in fact, nothing of the sort has ever been birthed from these fingertips. but it IS true that several morons will like the film, and will shove it down my throat. legitimacy is irrelevent.
Several morons will like any given thing at any give time. It's all subjective
Originally posted by manorastroman
and why the hell would i ask you what other movies you like, or check your profile? on this issue, your enjoyment of snakes on a plane reflects why you will likely enjoy grindhouse, where as my abhorrence of snakes on a plane indicates why i likely wouldn't enjoy grindhouse.
No it doesn't, no it doesn't in the least. Especially in this case where the only thing these two have in common is their B-grade-esque quality. Plus, even that's represent in two different ways.
Originally posted by manorastroman
and i DO go to tarantino for a solid script. his direction as never struck me as tremendous.
Fine. The latter is a matter of opinion.
Originally posted by manorastroman
did you quote my post without reading it? i have no interest in this guy besides this topic, and despite what you may think, TONS of paralells can be drawn twixt snakes and grindhouse. so to quote you...yes, why would I?i'd hate to patronize you with elementary logic, but just because i said morons would talk it up does not mean all who talk it up are morons.
i doubt the conclusion "i don't really care what my image is on this forum, and don't care to spend time on a profile" takes up volumes.
by the way, legitimacy is ONLY relevant to those who have their minds made up.
I read your post; and you can't draw parallels without prejudice, given "Grindhouse" doesn't even exist. As for the profile, I couldn't care less. It's just an unfair advantage, and if anyone goes the route of digging up dirt on you via old posts, you'd probably scream "stalker", although we can only get to know you through your Catch 22 trap. I could do it now, as a matter of fact, but that's not the kind of person I am.
Legitimacy is irrelevant to people who have their minds made up. Why would they take the time to listen if they made their minds up based on a singular observation. It's relevant to freethinkers because they're willing to observe and use the influence to express their own opinion.