Quentin Tarantino, yay or nay?

easyrider said:
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.
Click to expand...

This reminded me of complete Yoda speak, so I happened upon a Yoda translator, and put this nonsense in it. Thought it was appropriate due to your weird Star Wars 'thing'.

"As a bone no dry. Felt it, surely you must have, hmm...
At least once in your life for a split second moment?

You from seeing the absurd your distractions prevent...Like blinkers on a horse in a race.
Step back and embrace the absurdity of it all and then, finally see, you can. Yes, hmmm..."
 
Tummy said:
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.
Click to expand...

Kevin B Lee states that QT is an auteur.

That in itself would do you know harm including a reference to that article in your bibliography.

The rest of the article is moot.
 
easyrider said:
Kevin B Lee states that QT is an auteur.

That in itself would do you know harm including a reference to that article in your bibliography.

The rest of the article is moot.
Click to expand...

You cannot dis-guard the rest of the article if you are using it as a reference, there is a total lack of reference and sources in the essay which significantly weakens your position if you're using that to back it up.

I would not even bother using that in the Bibliography as wider reading, certainly would not as a reference or source in an essay. I would be shot down by my professors for using it.

It might 'do' at a Key Stage level, not in academic practice. You would use the article, which I provided on your behalf, in an academic setting. For one, it clearly is a researched and referenced article and draws upon the legacy and (by extension allows you to draw upon what is 'meant' by an Auteur) engages with the initial Auteur theory of Truffaut.
 
Converge said:
This reminded me of complete Yoda speak, so I happened upon a Yoda translator, and put this nonsense in it. Thought it was appropriate due to your weird Star Wars 'thing'.

"As a bone no dry. Felt it, surely you must have, hmm...
At least once in your life for a split second moment?

You from seeing the absurd your distractions prevent...Like blinkers on a horse in a race.
Step back and embrace the absurdity of it all and then, finally see, you can. Yes, hmmm..."
Click to expand...

It's Albert Camus.





 
Tummy said:
You cannot dis-guard the rest of the article if you are using it as a reference, there is a total lack of reference and sources in the essay which significantly weakens your position if you're using that to back it up.
Click to expand...

The opening would be the focus.

His opening statement. That's the whole point. In order to get the marks to cherry pick.

I would not even bother using that in the Bibliography as wider reading, certainly would not as a reference or source in an essay. I would be shot down by my professors for using it.

.
Click to expand...

Disagree...

I've got my degree.

Linking to a BFI article where the author states QT is an auteur is pefectly acceptable.
 
Converge said:
And? Does that automatically discount it and you from sounding pretentious when all we're talking about is Quentin Tarantino?
Click to expand...

Apologies....Didn't realise that the pretentious police were about...:rolleyes:

Guess what? I can sound pretentious all I want.:D

And don't devalue QT you philistine ! :D
 
easyrider said:
The opening would be the focus.

His opening statement. That's the whole point. In order to get the marks to cherry pick.
Click to expand...

The academic article I posted on your behalf, does the same thing, more marks for cherry picking good academic sources ;).

easyrider said:
Disagree...

I've got my degree.

Linking to a BFI article where the author states QT is an auteur is pefectly acceptable.
Click to expand...

Pleased for you, so are you actually involved in Academia or do you just have a degree? Is it specifically in film?
 
Tummy said:
The academic article I posted on your behalf, does the same thing, more marks for cherry picking good academic sources ;).
Click to expand...

One can cherry pick academic journals etc...

But the marks derive from an argument that challenges current thinking.

With P.E.E

Always use a conclusion and and bibliography.:p
 
Vonhelmet said:
So the criticism is not relevant to those who choose to disregard the criticism?

That's tautologous, so I am going to assume that's not what you mean.
Click to expand...

Logic doesn't come into it.

As said.

QT is an auteur. He's not making films to serve the audience. He's making films to please himself.

If you like it then that's fine if you don't...it matters not.

I can buy into it or not...I can like it and say that I do not....I can say I hate it and say that I like it....

QT only agenda is to create something he wants.
 
Ok, so criticism of Tarantino doesn't matter to Tarantino. This has been apparent for a long time. However, Tarantino is not here, so we can criticise all we want, because it seems there are plenty of people who do think it matters.
 
Vonhelmet said:
Ok, so criticism of Tarantino doesn't matter to Tarantino. This has been apparent for a long time. However, Tarantino is not here, so we can criticise all we want, because it seems there are plenty of people who do think it matters.
Click to expand...

Yep

Doesn't stop it being futile.

I guess it's a bit like armchair discourse of Claptons guitar playing...from people who can't even play guitar.

Clapton doesn't give a flying **** what anybody thinks of his playing....

He's above such nonsense.

Of course people can validate their own inadequacies by critique but it's delusional.

QT being here or not is inconsequential.
 
Could it not be said that it is Tarantino's failing that he won't listen to criticism?

Validate their own inadequacies... What rot. I can't build a bicycle, but I can tell a good one from a bad one.
 
easyrider said:
What are you basing your decision on?
Click to expand...

Riding bicycles...

Or how about I can't cook a roast dinner, but I know a good one, on account of my extensive experience of eating them.

I'm not sure where you're going with this, particularly as someone who watches and criticises as many films as you do.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom