ONE STORY TO ONE FILM PLEASE QUENTIN.

Also in answer to your earlier question: Kill Bill 2 is crap because.... it's lame as fuck, the mystique and character interest we had in KB1 is blown with the cheesy tacky film noir wannabe intro, Bud, by far the most interesting out of the vipers is wasted utterly, as is Daryl hannah in the crappest wankfest to schlock fight ever, and as to your "well filmed action sequences that actually DIDNT GO CGI OVERKILL" which ones?

The one where madsen shoots her in a doorway?

The one where Uma and Daryl Hannah fight in a caravan so cluttered and badly filmed you can barely see what happens, until the eye-gouge?

The one where she kills bill with a few spastic hand movements while they are both sitting down?

or was it the utterly retarded Pei Mei sequence where a grown man manages to stand on the end of someones sword? I'm sorry but that was the moment QT mixed the genres too far, why not throw in some zombies and Zeus throwing lightning bolts at someone?

Then just to add insult to injury the retarded I'm pregnant, lets be nice assassins to each other moment that read like an episode of Charmed? Sorry but Kill Bill 2 was a pile of shit compared to Kill Bill 1.

You people are nuts if you think QT has it in him to make a kick-ass WWII movie. Look, I loved Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown, but the guy's a one-trick pony.

Watching Kill Bill was the equivalent of sitting down and letting QT spooge all over your face. If that floats your boat, fine, but don't pretend there's some meaningful relationship and tender lovemaking going on there between the viewer and QT.

I can appreciate the martial arts, the snap-zooms, and homages just like everyone else but Kill Bill is still shit.

Same goes for Death Proof. Kurt Russell is awesome and the shocking vehicular homicide was stunningly shot, and the ending is hilarious, but it's still a highly shitty movie.

This crap about QT deciding to write characters for the actors to inhabit is nothing new. Seriously, look at the dialogue in Death Proof. Every single character is interchangeable. Every single character sounds like QT. It's the same patter full of pop cultural references and nods to obscure vintage music. It wouldn't surprise me if QT simply records conversations he has with his buds and then just transcribes the shit into his scripts.

There are tons of worse directors and movies out there, but QT's are particularly disappointing because of his obvious talent. The guy is, unfortunately, all surface and no substance.

There was a time when I'd have been excited about Inglorious Bastards, like back in 1998 or so, but these days I have no faith in QT. I hope to God he can surprise me one last time.

Here ends the lesson on coolness.

Inter-fucking-changeable.

Anyway, in case he comes back I'll make the points I'd intended to make in response to his rising to the bait.

Since he's started filibustering every thread on this site (last three months) he has had strong opinions on every topic. His most recent passion was that "Indy 4 was going to kick our asses".

Given that fact, I don't think he should be going so far out on limbs with regard to upcoming projects.

I sort of enjoyed both Kill Bills and while a lot of Death Proof put me to sleep, I think Kurt Russell put in an Oscar worthy performance. I mean, c'mon, Stuntman Mike is one of the greatest characters of all time and even if that has everything to do with Kurt and nothing to do with Tarantino, I'm still glad we got the movie so we could savor that performance.

And then when Death Proof was over Planet Terror came on and that woke me up with it's preposterous mayhem and Rose McGowan's ass and Jeff Fahey's delicious performance.

QT is an egotistical prick but at least he has managed to entertain me on a few occasions which is more than I can say for M. Twilight.

Quentin Tarantino makes movies that, *gasp* dare to have a sense of style, and all of a sudden, he's "self-indulgent." Plato was right: beware the sophists.

I recognize Tarantino's flaws, but the fact that he's still influencing Hollywood in a massive way (how many times has the iconic O'Ren Ishii and the crazy 88 march been copied already?), and is still one of the few directors that has an unmistakable style earns him more than a little slack. Consider also that Tarantino is one of the last truly involved directors, writing, directing, overseeing production style, music, etc., he doesn't just shout orders, catch a few takes, and then retire to his trailer to count his checks. . . At least he cares enough about his movies to "self-indulge" in them.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, all the people so recently enamored of proclaiming Tarantino a "hack" and "self-indulgent" will be there the day Inglorious Bastards opens, with bells on; because, even if you hate him, at least Tarantino is interesting, which is more than you can say for a strong majority of the other film-makers out there.

A three-disc extended version money-sucker can come later.

Unfortunately it just doesn't work for me in the end. It seems to dramatically lose steam in the third act. The ending is great (I remember people really hating the long static shot of her driving, but I liked it; a similar idea was pursued in last year's Michael Clayton, the idea of seeing our protagonist anti-climactically just moving on), I just really tend to wander in the lead up to the hand-off at the mall.

I agree about DeNiro, though. I absolutely loathe how self-parodying his gangster shtick has become. The "Analyze This" movies sicken me, and the "Fockers/parents" movies aren't much better. But he was great in Jackie Brown. I would say it's probably one of his best roles, one of few in which he doesn't mug terribly.

This Tarantino hate is mind-boggling; the man makes 4 great films, one of them being an honest-to-god classic (Pulp Fiction) that made a permanent impact on independent film and you can't give him the benefit of the doubt because of Death Proof?

You people are insane.

Pulp Fiction = great (and slightly overrated)

Four Rooms (segment) = crap

Jackie Brown = fucking boring

Kill Bill Vol. 1 = lame (and fucking overrated)

Kill Bill Vol. 2 = boring as hell

Death Proof = fun (mainly due to Kurt Russell)

I agree that this is (by far) the best flick Tarantino was involved with.

The "hate" isn't hate... it's disappointment in a director that had so much potential, and maybe even still does.

RD and Pulp Fiction are cinematic classics. They changed the way films were made, at least certain films.

But QT didn't evolve... he devolved. It's not about self indulgence... it's about self awareness. In RD and Pulp, QT had no true status. RD gave him some but as far as true recognition and attention, he had none until after Pulp. So his influences serviced a story.

After Jackie Brown, his influences were inserted to service an ego. A big declaration of "Hey buddy, look what I love." Kung Fu theater. Shitty grind house flicks. Look at me. Look at me. It wasn't self indulgence that changed so many people's outlook on QT, it was his self awareness.

In BOTH Kill Bill movies, pay attention and see that almost each and every moment is self aware. Blatant "look how cool this character is talking". It's bullshit. It's bad cinema. Now, I won't condemn people for liking Kill Bill and Deathproof. I like plenty of bad movies too. But make no mistake, those movies aren't the cinematic equivalent of RD and Pulp. They don't even come close.

Paul Thomas Anderson evolved with There Will Be Blood. He started working on his next project and stopped because he realized he was making the same movie he always did. So he gambled. THAT'S a fucking director.

That said, I think QT has the potential to do the same. MAYBE with this new flick. Thank God there'll be no 70s crap. He's done that.

But this whole two movie to tell one story means the guy is a loose cannon with too much freedom. Too much freedom usually leads to crap in cinema. Look at Indy 4. Raiders was great because they were working on a small budget early in their careers with plenty to lose. With Indy 4 they had a limitless budget with nothing to lose.

So QT, if you're out there... just fucking tell a good story with good characters. Forget about sounding cool. Forget about declaring with your hand down your pants how much you like this or that. Just tell a fucking good story. And don't cheat it by making two movies. There are hundreds of classics that told classic stories within one film.

It's chicken shit to do it in two. Show us again how you can work the camera, write the script, and edit a movie that is compelling and risky.

There is not one instant during Death Proof, for example, that you buy that those women listen to the music they talk about and sing along with or that they've seen, much less appreciate, the films they talk about.

Since Jackie Brown, I've believed that QT occassionally needed to be intoduced to a somewhat voracious and intractable editor. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy (most of) his stuff but I can see how people might be given to calling it self-indulgent at times.

Also, _Dickblood, I'm really not trying to chase you from TB to TB and start shit with you, but you've hated all of Tarantino's movies except for From Dusk Til Dawn & True Romance? Are you fucking kidding me? I'm incredulous here because I can't imagine anyone in their right fucking mind hating on Resevoir Dogs and then trying to say they think FDTD is a better movie. Personally, I wanted to press eject and shit on the VHS right after Salma Hayek's transformation and I still don't think I would have missed anything. As far as True Romance goes, it would have been a great, great movie - had it been handled by anyone other than Tony Scott.

Again, just my opinion.

Try again. Try harder.

I'm looking forward to Inglorious Bastards, but this split-in-two thing is bullshit.

I suppose that that is precisely what T & R were going for with that movie, in a pre-Grindhouse way, but I've always harbored some ill will toward Dusk and I can sum it up in two words that mean much to me, and hopefully I can explain them in a way that will make sense to anyone else and not just make me sound like an ass - dancing extras.

In any action scene in a genre movie, specifically a 'hand-to-hand combat' scene, you have your protagonist(s) and the adversaries they are immediately combatting. Then, just behind or around them, a group of costumed extras, just dicking around making goofy faces, instead of, you know, presenting an immediate threat. I hate that shit and FDTD is full of it!

Petty grievance? Yep. Do I care? Nope.

Of course, I'm way too lazy to back this up with fact so take it accordingly.

However, I was pretty annoyed by the "grindhouse" bullshit myself, considering that I hadn't ever heard anyone use the location as a descriptor in that way before T & R did so. It was always just exploitation and slasher and blah blah blah for me. I mean, my cherry-breaker in that way was Charles Kaufman's Mother's Day, at the Blue Sky Drive-In, circa 1980, but did you catch me going around for the rest of my life calling anything even vaguely similar "Drive-In-style movies" like it's actually a recognized genre? I say thee nay.

But it will probably take years before we finally get that Grindhouse DVD. Still waiting for the complete Kill Bill.

The teenage asian schoolgirl killer was far more believable as a badass than any of Bill's girls...Viveca Fox? Really? Are you fucking kidding? She's the male equivalent of a fucking dork. Lucy Liu? Well, she's so crazy beautiful and hot that she can be whatever she wants..altho she was far more a believable badass in her limited screen-time in the theatrical version of 'Payback'.

Jackie Brown was boring. True Romance is genius. Pulp Fiction is also excellent but after that? Haven't seen Death Proof so can't say but QT isn't as much a 'zeitgeist' of cinema as he thinks. But this isn't new is it?

As far as DVD release, Japan's already got it, all 6 discs of it, but I guess there's still no domestic release date. And yeah, I'm still waiting for the unedited Kill Bill release (coincidentally, also available in denomination of yen).

Regionless players FTW!

It's fucking simple: did you like it? Yes? That's fucking awesome!!!

Did I like it? No. That's fucking awesome too!

Why is that confusing to you? Why can't you just let it go and realize that some people like shit and some don't and smart or fucking whatever doesn't have dick to do with it?

What's next...where's my full length feature film? My screenplay being made into a widely released movie? I can't find one of QT's films boring without 'not getting it'? Bollocks on you Captain Pretentious! This is the same fucking excuse everybody uses to defend their opinions on movies. Notice how those who found it boring didn't castigate you? (i didnt anyway). Yeah...so who you trying to convince it was an 'adult film' eh? Me or you?

And plus, an "adult film"? As opposed to what? A children's film? Or do you mean to imply Pulp fiction was targeted for teenagers? Uh huh, right.

Oh and I forgot RD which is a fucking crazy movie and has one of my favorite all time Kietel lines "Toby Won? Toby chan...fucking Charlie Chan??". Classic.

"Excessive indulgence of one's own appetites and desires." (American Heritage Dictionary)

"Indulgence of one's appetites, desires, or inclinations; -- the opposite of self-restraint, and self-denial." (www.selfknowledge.com)

As usual, M-O-M, you fail at the English language, for as you can clearly see, your definition is completely off-base whereas the true meaning of the term more than adequately fits Mr. Tarantino like a glove.

I'm not surprised regarding your views of QT as you are without question the talkbacker with the easily most predictable taste in films who has ever deigned to post on AICN.

You're also a well-known, tremendous hypocrite and an arrogant, condescending asshole.

That is all