In Reply to: RE: I'm a big fan and I was quite disappointed posted by Peter H-son on November 27, 2007 at 07:49:48:
"Ineptitude becomes personal style. Repetitive and unimaginative direction becomes theme."
That is a bit harsh. And I don't think it comports with any theory of the "film auteur" which I know, or is even relevant to it.
Now there is bad film-making. It it is certainly possible for a director to be inept, repetitive and unimaginative. But I don't think that's the case here. I see a thematic consistency in this film, a very deliberate and almost cagey dramatic development.
I had the distinct feeling that the director was toying with the audience all the way through -- was this a mere grindhouse exploitation movie, or was there something more serious afoot? I thought it was important that the audience was being asked to pick out the realism from the mere cliche, the possible from the implausible, the serious from the absurd.
It seemed to me to be Tarantino's clear intention to put the audience in this position. It all seemed part and parcel of choosing to do a grindhouse flick in the first place -- to force us to draw a line between what we were entitled to react to emotionally, and what we weren't. In this fashion, I think Tarantino set about to say something about the nature of cinema itself, why we bother with it, and how it relates to actual experience.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: I'm a big fan and I was quite disappointed - halfnote 22:01:05 11/28/07 (3)
- RE: I'm a big fan and I was quite disappointed - Peter H-son 10:30:36 11/29/07 (2)
- RE: Who are these french fanboys? - halfnote 21:44:18 11/29/07 (1)
- RE: Who are these french fanboys? - Peter H-son 04:16:10 12/02/07 (0)