 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
207.81.84.149
In Reply to: Why do people watch Tarantino? posted by Victor Khomenko on January 29, 2006 at 07:26:07:
As was pointed out to me about Reservoir Dogs is the reversal of humanit which DOES exist in this society and which most simply do not want to discuss. Early in that film their some guys who are at the core monsters who seemingly are run of the mill ruffians arguing over the merits of whether and why to tip a waitress. They aregue over such issues as to why the other guy gets the name Mr. Black while he's stuck with Mr. Pink. They are at the reservoir of society - junk yard Dogs.Now I was not overly impressed with Reservoir Dogs because for me that's still not enough to hang your hat on - so yes as a commentary displaying this part of life in a "raw" manner is unnerving but for me it is a rough copy for Pulp Fiction. Pulp novels have charicatures of real people interlacing with oneanother. Pulp Fiction is more accessible because it's inhumanity is presented in an outside looking in approach - it's theatrical as the pieces move in and out weaving in the absurd (the watch) with the fantastical (the case) with an underlying theme throughout that it's never too late to redeem yourself no matter how sleazy you may be. Consider that virtually every character in Pulp Fiction is walking a line of redemption to either take it for yourself or give it to another.
The failed boxer (what does an uneducated boxer who pummels people for a living do after a sub standard career in boxing?), the gang leader where honour among thieves is more important than the respect for life, the two centeral hit men (one in it for the job, the other trying to justify what he's doing) Tarantino's character who has tried to get out of the life and shacks up with a good girl, but his past associates look him up, the fixer (a sociopath), the bored gang memeber's girlfriend who's redemtion comes from a bag of pills -- she has it "all" but she has no freedom - if and when she tries to leave she'll be killed, the taxi-driver who needs excitement through other people's lives, the bank robber thrill seekers starting out their road to criminality.
Sure there is senseless murder -- but this is coming from people who live senseless lives...some of them are trying to make it make sense. Though some argue the merits for Reservoir Dogs as the better film so one day I shall see it again.
Regardless of the subject matter -- Tarantino is a master at what he does and the thing I would do if you don't like what he writes about is not to view it. You now have a good idea what he is intereested in - so you know that his next movies will likely also be about this. Smart people don't waste their time reading the 12th novel from an author they hated the first 11 times. And no matter what anyone says to you -- is it really going to make you LIKE a Pulp Fiction? At best you may be able to understand why people do but is that even important?
Follow Ups:
I don't need anyone make me love the PF, and frankly, loving something or not is not really the whole subject of learning - I do not expect to love every bit of news on TV, and yet I watch it every day.Besides studying what a particular director is doing there is also the social aspect to all this - one would be well served to have awareness of what his society lives and breathes. I do not expect to discover huge sellout crowds at the new Bergman work, and I know what the AMC-16 smells like during the onslaught of teenager hordes when Friday the 375657 is in town... all those represent part of the society portrait, and as we know it is not the most pretty painting at the local gallery.
So I simply don't get all those questions: "Why do you even watch those?" I do because they are part of the culture... plain and simple. I do not watch for enjoyment, not anymore than I watch the latest Middle East news.
I have never seen Tarantino's work in a theater, and probably never will. What's available free on the cable is just fine with me. But as I stated many times before, every time I see his work I lament the wasted talent, the talent that comes through clearly enough in many small episodes.
However, this post was not about Tarantino. It was about what moves people to see the gore, the scum, the brutality and all that senseless violence in his movies. It was about the viewers, not the maker.
I do not buy for one second that "argument" that all those things happen in life. I am fully aware of what does happen, but I am also aware of beauty, love, devotion, dedication, kindness that also exist in life. So the artist's choice of subject does reflect his choices, his preferences, much more than it reflects the realities.
The same could be said about the viewer. I suppose those who say we all have dark side to our persona are right, and given right situation we all would show it? Passively, in the dark room, or actively as prison guards abusing other human beings... I do not see much distinction between the two.
There is no question that Tarantino has such dark side, and being able to do something about it, he is. As I said - his choice.
But what exactly moves people to watch Michael Madsen doing his gratuitous sadistic best?
THAT is what I would like to know.
Is there a line between that and watching the human beings torn apart by lions? I fail to see that line.
Well you ask relevant questions are we seeing Pulp Fiction to be voyeurs on the sufferring of others or to see the gore etc?" I don;t think I can satisfy you with an answer though because I think everyone has a line. I saw Good Will Hunting and the people behind me got up and walked out because of all the swearing -- they felt the film crossed the line with innapropriate language while until they said it I did not even notice. Am I decensitised to it? Possibly or possibly I expect these kids to to talk like that and it does not bother me in the context of their conversations.Films can be argued to be a societal dark side release valve -- people go to see the evil of the world out there in the parts of town they usually always avoid. Still that does not really provide a reason why such a thing motivates Tarantino - clearly though these people fascinate him and he gets to bring them to life for the rest of us. Pulp Fiction is not to be taken seriously -- it is a blown up larger than life with a root in reality. Black Comedy.
There is a scene in this film in a Car where Travolta is talking to an informant in the back seat and they're joking around -- the car goes over a bump the gun goes off and basically blows informants brains all over the back of the car with bits of brain in Samual Jackson Hair. Every person in the audience roared with laughter. Think about that (I did) as I was one of them laughing the hardest. Think about what Tarantino managed to do with a scene that by any normal situation would be truly appaling. Tarantino managed to evoke the opposite response than the expected to take you into the opposite world from which every person in that theater likely belongs and successfully brought us into their world.
Our society has become fat and lazy and because of technology we believe we are somehow morally superior to the poor sods living in huts in other countries or in the poor neighbourhoods. Tarantino brings us into this world and sheds the safe holier than thou morality we have and gets to the base impulses. These people were born without Freud's concept of the Super Ego.
Film allows us to get close to these people to see into their hemisphere and view of the world and then when the lights go up we can walk away. I think Tarantino does leave us with optimism that some of these characters have grown. Samual Jackson primarily.
Tarantino has a lot of meat usually to digest in these films and he's usually saying something about something.
The fine line of how much is too much or why show the gore is for each person to assess for themselves. Dawn of the Dead (1979) is one of my favorite films because the stomach turning gore and Zombies at the begining of the film are eventually pitied and even forgotten by the two thirds point and by the end seem to be the only civilized part of society left. The violence and the Gore are serving as an allegory for the densitization and zombification of the consumer mentality. I can never walk through a mall without a slight chuckle at the idiocy of our "let's buy something so it will make us happy approach" -- the truly disturbing or Horrifying aspect of that film was the Romero was right about his predictions back in 79 and it has pervaded into the fabric of Western Culture. That is what is truly stomach turning not a zombie eating a guy's intestines. (err though I don't recommend eating Spaghetti while watching Dawn of the Dead).
Not a Tarantino film, but a scene in 'Casino' left me replused, the
one where two men were beaten to death or near death with baseball bats and thrown into an open grave. I know there are probably those
who have greater tolerance for that scene and then some who actually
relished it, perhaps due to sadistic tendencies. Some of the Mafia
tortute-violence stuff can be a bit heavy at times to me. ~AH
That 45 minutes long brutal rape scene's got to be... irresistable to those who feel rapes happen in real life.
True but perhaps we would not let so many criminals off with a light sentence if people knew what a Rape was actually like.The fact that some sicko watchng a movie would get off on that is a non-issue since sicko's don't need much. This is art immitating life not art inspiring life. (though I have not seen Irreversible).
The dangerous thing is that people keep blaming violence on rock bands like marilyn manson or some movie they watched. Marilyn Manson was blamed over and over for the Columbine shootings -- and it turns out the boys never owned any of his music! It's convenient but it's unfair. And while Manson's music is nto at all to my taste -- he seems like a well spoken and quite intelligent individual who promotes THINKING not murdering. Too many illiterate boobs in the Republican party that need to take some English literature courses and understand poetic forms that what is said is not always literal. But that's asking a lot when one considers the Monkey they elected president
"But what exactly moves people to watch Michael Madsen doing his gratuitous sadistic best?THAT is what I would like to know."
Movies can provide an oppurtunity to explore the darker side of hman natue from a safe place. Also movies like Pulp fiction offer a lot more than gratuitous violence. If all you see is the subject matter you are missing what makes those movies terrific.
"Is there a line between that and watching the human beings torn apart by lions?"
Yes, a very significant one." I fail to see that line."
Many people do. here is just one significant difference. no humans were torn apart in the making of Pulp fiction. here is another one. The audience knows know humans were torn apart in the making of Pulp fiction.
Why do people go to amusement parks and strap themselves into cages that are literally dropped off a ledge and fall hundreds of feet? I know the answer, do you?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
