Once you embrace the absurd and realise everything is pointless, point can then be manifest.
Take a read of my Nihilist thread.
Quentin Tarantino, yay or nay?
- Thread starter jsmoke
- Start date
Once you embrace the absurd and realise everything is pointless, point can then be manifest.
Take a read of my Nihilist thread.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,749
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
No dry as a bone.
Surely you must have felt it...at least once in your life for a split second moment ?
Your distractions prevent you from seeing the absurd...Like blinkers on a horse in a race...
Step back and embrace the absurdity of it all and then you can finally see.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,668
An auteur 'directs a film in a way that conveys the director's personal creative ideas or styles as if they wrote it themselves'.
As if... implying that they did not.
Tarantino actually did most of the films he directs, so by definition 'Auteur' cannot apply.
If he directed another writer's work, then sure, but not his own.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,668
From your second link above:
"The Oxford Dictionary defines an auteur as ‘a film director who influences their films so much that they rank as their author’... "
But again, he already IS the author, so that doesn't count. Someone else has to write it first. Basic logic.
The other two are about Auteur Theory, which generally differs from or conflicts with the actual definition of auteur anyway, but is more subjective than anything else.
In some ways, so long as the director changes things around enough from the concept as written that they end up with an almost completely different film, that makes them an auteur... technically!
Tarantino does have considerable genius evident in his work... but ^that's not it!!
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,749
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
I've just laid down a £10 bet that Easyrider says that The Oxford Dictionary is wrong and that ttaskmaster's opinion is pointless anyway.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 5,207
I think some of his films are brilliant - like pulp fiction and reservoir dogs, but didn't really like kill bill 1 & 2. I did like inglorious ******** to a point, but felt it lost its way in the final third, and django unchained was a bit 'meh'. I haven't seen hateful eight or Jackie brown.
I love his writing, directing, casting, in pulp fiction and reservoir dogs. For me both of those films are masterpieces. Oddly, I saw Pulp Fiction before reservoir dogs, and thought seeing pulp fiction first would make reservoir dogs seem less special by comparison, because pulp fiction was so good, but I was completely wrong.
I love his writing, directing, casting, in pulp fiction and reservoir dogs. For me both of those films are masterpieces. Oddly, I saw Pulp Fiction before reservoir dogs, and thought seeing pulp fiction first would make reservoir dogs seem less special by comparison, because pulp fiction was so good, but I was completely wrong.
Auteurs can be writers.
Watch this video
http://nofilmschool.com/2015/03/whats-auteur-complete-breakdown-provacative-rebel-theory
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/auteur
Definition of auteur
1
: a film director whose practice accords with the auteur theory; broadly : director c
2
: an artist (as a musician or writer) whose style and practice are distinctive
http://jackhylan.net/Tarantino/tarantino.html
Last edited:
The article has no credentials for the author, nor any referencing or sources?! What.
Where does the author engage with any theories about the status of Tarantino as an Auteur?
Still, not references.
Ok, officially bored by you once again. I'll do your homework for you; Here is a wonderful essay from the Journal of Popular Culture where this subject is discussed 
.
Link.
(You can login through any academic institutions login ).
.Link.
(You can login through any academic institutions login
).He states he is one from the off.
** steady on with the personal comments easy - you should know better ***
I win again...
Next
He states he is one from the off.
*****
I win again...
Next
Ah you cannot read. I said I was doing your homework for you.
Nor have I said that Tarantino is not an Auteur, I merely pointed out the fact that despite his status as an Auteur (which is up for debate, I even provided you with an academic source, so you know what ones looks like), it does not render him immune to criticism, or his films which was your original point;
Seriously. You preach that you're involved with academia? I honestly fail to believe that at any level.
I never said he was immune to criticism....nothing is immune to it.
The point I was making that the criticism didn't matter...
I fail to understand why you don't get it TBH.
You need to start thinking outside the shackles of what you think is expected. Or you'll end up with a Desmond.
Also; now you know what an academic sourced article looks like
You are allowed other sources you know ,aswell, when doing a degree...
Absolutely you are. However, I would be shot down for providing any source (as a serious piece of evidence) if it fails to source or reference its information - and no, the tacked on filmography to the end of your second article does not count.