Hooligans Sportsbook

Movies and TV

  • Start date •
  • Replies
    13,837 Replies •
  • Views 1,009,411 Views
Follow
Mudcat
.

To have proper catharsis, you need to have the villains do horrible things and Tarantino does not skimp on the puppy kicking.



I feel like you could definitely make a case that Tarantino treats his audience as a bit stupid - but not by preaching. He does it by having these blatant manipulative catharsis deals that are so clearly designed to have the simplest minds clapping like seals.

.
Click to expand...

yes yes thats what it is. the oversimplification of stuff that bare a resemblance to actual events. Preaching would be much better. This is pandering to and celebration of jolly ignorance mixed in with the love for gratuitous violence. ugly stuff.
 
I see an important difference between Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained.

Django starts right in with the absurdity. Right from the first note of soundtrack, we are told a grain of salt should be taken at all times.

However Basterds presents itself as much more real-world.

That's why (for me) the ending of Basterds where we just blatantly alter known history in the name of trying to emotionally manipulate me like I am some kind of simpleton ---> it taints everything up that point. Django's absurd ending is just a consistent continuation of all that came prior. It might as well be Sin City. It's a fairy tale.

Even though I consider Basterds to be a much better movie for 95% of it, it ends up with a lower rating from me.

But yeah, I wish Tarantino would cool it with the simpleton stuff. He showed in Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs that he has other tricks up his sleeve. In these more recent movies, he still creates an interesting enough journey and presents some really original scenes and ideas - but as far as overriding theme, he has gotten bogged down with THE BIG REVENGE and I don't understand why.

I wonder if that's all he's going to do now. The hints I have gathered about his next movie seem like he could be going there again.
 
Matty
Tarantino makes movies to have fun, not necessarily to pass a message. He's a formalist, not a preacher.

Relax and enjoy.
Click to expand...

enjoy what? Why is watching people exterminated enjoyable? I could understand if there's an important point to be made, or something factual that needs to be learned.
I admit that anything WWII related is a very sore spot for me with dumbamericans.
 
Mudcat
God no. The point of Django is not to preach. The point is revenge/catharsis. Tarantino loves that shit and to do it, he needs villains. In Inglourious Basterds it was Nazis and in fact Hitler. In Kill Bill, it was a subtler deal with Bill and a few minions along the way. In Django, it's slavers.

To have proper catharsis, you need to have the villains do horrible things and Tarantino does not skimp on the puppy kicking. Nazis do Nazi stuff, slavers do slaver stuff, and they suck.

But the point is not education - it's comeuppance. To my observation, it assumes no preaching is needed. It starts with their sucking as a given.

Crash is a massively different kettle of fish.



I feel like you could definitely make a case that Tarantino treats his audience as a bit stupid - but not by preaching. He does it by having these blatant manipulative catharsis deals that are so clearly designed to have the simplest minds clapping like seals.

I wish Tarantino would settle down with that (as I wish he would worry less about making constant nods to crappy older movies).
Click to expand...

Ahh, right. Forgot it was Tarantino. Never hated a Tarantino film; they are always somewhere in the B- to A- range for me. Will have to watch it one of these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.