Many, many apologies for not having this post up sooner. You can have until Friday, March 14th to post your comments.
Readings:
John Pierson and Kevin Smith, "Dogs"
Ella Taylor, Reservoir Dogs and the Thrill of Excess
Reservoir Dogs Press Conference @ Toronto Int'l Film Festival
Question:
After reading the three assigned articles, and watching Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, discuss why you think that Quentin Tarantino had such a profound effect on the face of the American independent cinema. Make specific mention of one of the articles, and at least one scene from one of the two films.
19 comments:
I believe Tarantino had a huge effect on American independent cinema for many different reasons. The first time I saw Pulp Fiction, I was speechless by the end of it. It was like no movie I had ever seen before, and I wanted more of it. I had the same feeling at the end of Reservoir Dogs and it is no coincidence, Tarantino has a certain vision that when combined with his love of violence and mentality of not caring what people will say or think about his films that make him truly unique as a director. For instance in the second article written by Ella Taylor, she has a perfect quote from Tarantino that best describes "Reservoir Dogs" and the characters in it, "it's that there is no committee saying yes, no, he can't do that because that would make him unsympathetic. I think that while the characters come across insanely brutal, they also come across insanely human."
This is the trademark of Tarantino moives, even though they are characterized as "action" movies, they bring out many different emotions. For instance in Reservoir Dogs, you are laughing at the start as Tarantino describes his take on the meaning behind Madonna's "Like A Virgin" and it feels like an up-beat comedy. But by the time you are in the warehouse with Madsen dancing with his razor to "Stuck In The Middle With You" you feel naceous. As described in the second article, "'I sucker-punched you' says Tarantino, all but jumping up and down with glee. 'You're supposed to laugh until I stop you laughing.'" Tarantino toys with your feelings form beginning to end and that is something that is not done to his extent these days. Taratino proved to me that even in a movie where a man has his ear cut off, it can be considered a great independent film.
One reason why I think Quentin Tarantino had such an effect on American Independent film is because he’s all about the violence, but he does it in a very constructive format. “Reservoir Dog is laid out like an exquisitely pace piece of pulp fiction, divided into chapters and moving back and forth in time to explain the characters and the action”. The term pulp fiction literally means novels that are intended to be a good read, often exciting, titillating, and thrilling, which Tarantino’s movies contain. The content is for pure entertainment and the violence is without remorse, but the way he introduces us to the characters allows us to read into their personalities, thus putting a twist on the standard structure of action films. I’m not a big Tarantino fan because it’s too torturing, but I can appreciate it for its artistic style. Just the title itself, Pulp Fiction, is enough to clue the audience in on what they’re getting themselves into.
One particular sequence is the very beginning in the warehouse where Mr. White kept blaming himself for Mr. Orange’s dilemma and defended him during accusations because supposedly Mr. Orange took a bullet for him. We are aware that there’s been a shooting and the cops are after them, therefore we assume that Mr. Orange was shot by a cop. However, during the flashback we are shown the real shooter who is an innocent bystander who was merely defending herself during a car hijacking. This scene is very disturbing because we know Mr. Orange is a protector of the law yet, he kills an innocent bystander rather than be killed himself.
Tarantino had a huge effect on the American Independent cinema scene because he managed to not only release a successful movie but change the way that this genre is perceived forever. By mixing the genres together you get a new look at just what the action movie can be. One thing the second article seems to say alot about Tarantino is that he is this immature boy, but I see him as being a great influence on independent film makers because of his "anyone can do it" attitude, of which Rodriguez made so famous. I mean you still have got to have some sort of talent of which Tarantino has got a whole lot of. It is interesting to me that this movie did so well in an environment in which Hollywood was reining supreme. But Tarantino managed to get out of that rut by crafting these two excellent movies.
One scene that everyone seems to talk about including the articles is the so called "torture" sequence. Now I don't really know too well what other scenes of this caliber were like back when this film was made, but when compared to todays standards its really nothing. Take Saw for example there is more gore in the first 10 minutes of that film than in the entire movie of Reservoir Dogs. The thing that is incredible was that it was in a movie that was so widely recognized by both the industry and artsy crowds.
Quentin Tarantino Made such a big impact on the independent film world because he made a film that was in the genre of what was thought to be only Hollywood material and crossed the border by making something more then the action, something personal and realistic. Violence being the main ingredient of an action film, Tarantino took violence to a whole different level. The scene, in Reservoir Dog, when the cop is being tortured by Mr. Blonde (Madsen). Ella Taylor explains the scene as "it may even be pure art." As we watch the ten minute real time torture scene we are forced to stick it out with the cop. Creating reality, with no obvious jump frames we are forced to take in the torture and nothing else, there is nothing else to distract you. When the camera leaves the actors and focuses on the wall of the warehouse we only become more in tune with the sounds of torture, allowing our minds to imagine the slicing and dicing. Tarantino takes the idea of a genre then makes it his own. Disregarding any of the so called rules that Hollywood has placed on their genre films.
Tarantino had a profound effect on American Independent Cinema. First of all, he did what he wanted. He did not conform obviously to classical Hollywood style of narrative but even to the idea of independent film. He even says in his interview that he made Reservoir Dogs for himself, and everyone is invited. He just has the attitude that he wants to shake things up a bit, do things different. An independent film does NOT have to be an art film. It can be whatever you want it to be.
One of the biggest things that has caused his success in independent cinema is his use of characters. In both films, Dogs and Pulp Fiction, Tarantino uses hugely famous actors (Harvey Keitel, Uma Thurman, John Travolta, Steve Buscemi). These actors are taken out of their usual highly scripted roles and placed into a role that they create. Tarantino gives them a character to become, rather than to play. There are numerous times in Pulp Fiction, including when Vincent Vega crashes his car with Mia Wallace, where you can tell dialogue is improvised on the spot. They were given a scene, and they made it happen because they were in their character. Michael Madsen said the same thing about Dogs. He says that when one of the actors would slip up, another one would be there to help get them back on track. They didn't have to stick with the exact same dialogue each time. They just had to be their character. I think that is what makes Tarantino so influential in American independent cinema. His ability to create a character and allow it to come into its own through the film is uncanny. He always creates memorable characters with real personalities. Because the actors become the characters rather than act like them.
I think Tarantino has made a big effect on American independent cinema because he mixed genres so smoothly, and in ways others could never even think of doing. He mixes bloody, brutal action scenes with comedy that make you laugh and cringe at the same time. I can't think of another movie where I could do that, especially, acceptably do that. I am speaking, specifically to the scene in Reservoir Dogs where Mr. Blonde tortures the cop and cuts off his ear. I found my self tapping my foot to the music in joy and holding my hand to my mouth in disgust as the cop on screen was squirming in pain. I believe that scenes like these make Tarantino a memorable director. Not to mention, he has perhaps the most amusing dialogue scenes I've ever seen. I could watch a full length film of just people sitting at a table and talking and never get bored.
I think that one reason he's become so big was due to he violence he uses. In the articles they mention how he is not ashamed and does not make overlying excuses as to why he uses violence. He uses it because he enjoys it and he doesn't need to have a social issue presented in his film to make it acceptable.
Tarantino's affect on independent cinema today was profound. From the fact that he was able to attach an accomplished actor in Harvey Keitel to his first feature length film to the fact that his first turned out so successfully that his next project had several huge stars working at reduced rates. His work greatly changed what independent meant. He showed it could mean working within the studio structure, and still produce something very un-Hollywood, but still very cool. He showed that simple things can change how a viewer interacts with a film. Take the torture scene. If "Stuck in the Middle With You" by Steeler's Wheel wasn't playing in the background with Mr. Blonde dancing and singing along, the scene would be unbearably demented and disturbing. While underneath it is still these things, it almost becomes comedic relief in the film. You find yourself laughing at someone permantly disfiguring another person! That is the impact Tarantino had. He can force unexpected emotion out of any viewer.
One reason that I think that Tarantino has had such a profound effect on American independent cinema is because he masters the technique of merging comedy, horror, and heavy dialogue together. When I watched Pulp Fiction, the scene in which Uma Thurman unknowingly snorts the heroine substance was horrific enough for me. Even though a movie about heists is a bit too ‘dark’ for me, Tarantino manages to captivate most audiences in at least one moment or scene of his film – if not with violence, then humor, and if not with violence or humor, dialogue brings the crowd in. He captivated me, and I think a lot of people by instilling humor into otherwise regarded ‘tragic’ scenes. For example, in Pulp Fiction as Uma Thurman is brought to the dealer’s house to receive an injection that will ‘heal’ her, a touch of humor is added (good for those viewers that cannot take too much intensity) when the girlfriend starts nagging.
It is impressive at how Tarantino gets away with such heavy dialogue in an action movie –both in Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs. Perhaps it was the way the scene was filmed, but the scene in which the band of men were debating over tipping was captivating. In a typical action film, the men would be speaking of plans or details of the next ‘operation.’ It was quite a turn in an action movie, and much unexpected.
In the Ella Taylor article, Tarantino said, “violence is a cinematic thing.” Tarantino sees violence as a part of cinema. I think it is interesting he said that ‘we grow so numb to images of brutality.’ In so many movies, brutality has no point and is just done to get the viewer’s blood pressure raise a little. I think Tarantino thinks of brutality as natural and as just playing a role in the plot of the film, unlike the “Saw” series where brutality is the actual plot.
Lastly, I think that giving his actors freedom to become their characters really makes Tarantino a success. They are not limited to the sentences on the script, down to every word. His actors have become the film’s characters and expand the dialogue and actions as they see fit. It is very admirable that Tarantino aids his actors in become the characters, such as in setting up a farce heist so actors could actually feel what it would be like.
I suppose that what stands out to me as independent filmesque about these two Tarantino films would be the structure and/or the shots, although both, and especially the ones he's used, are the same structures and shots one could find in any of the 70's renaissance films. This would be because they are the films that had inspired and eventually turned Tarantino into a film maker. I dunno thatnce should have much to do with what makes an independent film, clearly if that film has artistry in its structure and storytelling. The way Tarantino has arranged the structure of his story in both films I think shows a level of intelligence and premeditation far above what any violent film fixated on gore would have. Tarantino's dialogue, which I consider to have fallen off over the course of his career, was very sharp and on in this film. Another aspect of a film that wants to be taken more seriously then just a "shoot 'em up."
I like this style however, and to me, the shots that I think make the film independent are the long shots. For example the conversation that we watched a second time in class between White and Pink or the shot where we follow Blonde outside to his car in pursuit of a gas can and then back in. This following shot of course begins inside ofr a while and then ends after being back inside for a while longer. Its been addressed in class how the cuttin and editing of a film can be determining factors in Indie or Hollywood and I say you would have seen more dramatic cutting and angles and such in that scene in a Hollywood film of that time.
I think Quentin Tarantino had such a profound effect on the face of the American independent cinema because he gave the audience something that hadn’t been seen much or to the same extent in prior independent films, gratuitous violence. Not only does Tarantino show the audience unnecessary violence, such as the scene where the police officer’s ear is cut off in Reservoir Dogs, but he also combines shocking moments such as this one with a clever scripts and dialogue. One moment the audience is laughing and the next they are cringing as they watch someone’s ear chopped off. According to Tarantino, it’s so the audience learns to invest and feel for the characters. Either way, the combination of content was pretty new to independent cinema.
In addition, Tarantino’s narrative structure seems pretty revolutionary for the times. While the concept of the “flashback” is nothing new to the viewer, the way he tells a story is pretty interesting because the viewer doesn’t fully grasp what happens until half way through the story. In Reservoir Dogs for example (and PF), starting from the beginning we see a series of scenes and pieces of a narrative but we don’t fully comprehend them until later. As Tarantino says in Taylor’s essay “There’s a complexity to a novel that you don’t get in original screen plays. A novel thinks nothing of starting in the middle of its story. And if a novel goes back in time it’s not a flashback, it’s so you learn something…What I’m doing as the narrator is rearranging the order in the way I want you to get the information. He adds that “I’ve always thought that the closer we can hitch movies to books, the better off movies will be. This statement sums up his distinctive way of story telling and creating a mood. Perhaps his style is his own because of way the way he initially conceptualizes a story.
In my opinion Tarantion is also quite vital to the face of independent cinema because of the way he “rips off” different film genres. For example he’ll take many ideas from the mob/crime genres but make it his own by making it over the top, by adding gratuitous violence and combining it with humor. In the interview with Tarantino, he mentioned that the audience sometimes doesn’t know whether they should laugh or not. I think this is important because it shows how Taranatino’s works challenges the viewer in a way that hadn’t been done. Is a scene hilarious or just sick? Only the individual can decide, but the controversy alone is important. Conversation is often what makes films worth seeing. If there is nothing to talk about, the film most likely isn’t be worth seeing
-jacob feiring
I think one of the main reasons Quentin Tarantino has had such an impact on American independent cinema is because he blends genres. Out of all the genres that he crams into both “Reservoir Dogs” and “Pulp Fiction,” the most prominent, of course, is action. As Ella Taylor said in her article, “Tarantino loves to toy with the forms of his beloved action genre: with his favorite themes of professionalism, loyalty and betrayal; but most of all with us, flipping us from laughs to sympathy to horror and back again – he’s the maestro of mood swing.” (page 42). There are numerous times in both films when there is clever and humorous dialogue is being shot back and forth while in a gunfight.
I think a segment that demonstrates this mixture of genre is in “Pulp Fiction” with Uma Thurman and John Travolta. It first starts out as a sort of romance, set up like an uncomfortable date in a 1950’s diner. The segment then takes a turn when a dance sequence is presented to the audience. After the “date,” Uma Thurman overdoses on drugs, turning the story into a drama. The story then turns into a comedy, when the wild and crazy drug dealer tries to bring her back to life. Four genres are covered in just one segment in the film. It also has one of Tarantino’s favorite themes in it as well: loyalty. Will Travolta’s character have an affair with his boss’s wife? Will he let his boss’s wife die from the overdose? Although it is constantly argued that Tarantino creates anti-art films by using excessive violence, there is really more to Tarantino’s films then just over-the-top violence and blood.
--Anne Snyder
The thing that strikes me most about Quentin Tarantino and his effect on independent cinema is the way in which he stylizes all of his films. In both Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, there is a certain feel to the film that just tells you it is Quentin Tarantino. As Kevin Smith states in his interview with John Peirson, "It’s like every movie you ever want to see. It’s like the movies you wish they were making more of. Dialogue, good-looking violence, great characterization, good actors, we’re like whew!" Kevin Smith, being also a very individual director, gives Tarantino praise for coming and doing his own kind of thing.
Tarantino brought the violence to the independent world, and that is the biggest effect I believe had. And is the reason he did not win Sundance for Dogs, because of the violence and it being something that most judges of independent cinema were not used to. Tarantino had huge actors in both films, and some of the best dialogue and scripting work I have ever seen. The opening scene of Reservoir Dogs, with the camera going around in a circle as they have the great conversation is still one of my favorite scenes of all time. And, it is 100% Quentin Tarantino style. He did what he wanted to do, continues to do what he wants to do, and pushed the boundaries of independent cinema to new levels.
Quentin Tarantino had a profound effect on American independent cinema with his films Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. For a long time before these two films were made Independent films were all about love and relationships and revolved around dialogue and conversations. Quentin Tarantino brought action and violence into the mix with these two films. It was not a little bit of violence, but it was prominent in both films and was very graphic. Even though it had these elements the films still revolved around dialogue. For example in Reservoir Dogs, Tarantino never shows the actual robbery but the actors talk about it so you know what has happened. When asked about why he did not actually show the robbery Tarantino states, that it gives suspense to the film in the first half but by the second you forget about not seeing it because the plot is going a different way and the audience is more concerned about the new elements that have been added. Another way that Tarantino has affected American Independent film is the prominent drug use in Pulp Fiction. In all the films that we have seen before they have never shown someone taking drugs and it has never been a big part of a film. In Pulp Fiction, the actress is actually seen doing drugs and is shown having an overdose. That is very influential in both Independent film and Holly wood film.
I think Quentin Tarantino changed the face of American independent cinema because his films aren’t your run of the mill films that we think conventionally think of as independent. They are very violent and action packed, yet at the same time, they also have well developed characters, and great soundtracks to go along with them, just like Kevin Smith said in the article “Dogs”. “Reservoir Dogs” and “Pulp Fiction” are movies that are now imbedded into mainstream culture, even outside the film community. I have heard the ear cutting off scene referenced in many songs, most recently one that came out a year ago, which is over a decade after the movie was released. I cant tell you how many of my friends still think its funny to order a royale with cheese at McDonald’s now and then either. I can’t think of too many other independent films that have had that sort of impact. Maybe all movies should include gruesome body modifications or something.
I think that the one of the reasons why Quentin Tarantino had such a profound effect of the face of American independent cinema is that people of the independent cinema community felt that his genre of film resembled too closely to mainstream Hollywood. I think that a lot of people were offended, or shocked by the violence in his movies, and that many of the people in the independent community felt that violence was not art. I felt that the tone of Ella Taylor’s article Quentin Tarantino’s Reservior Dogs and the Thrill of Excess was very confusing. At times it seemed as though she did appreciate Quentin’s ability to mix the mood of the film, by either making the audience laugh one minute, or by making them be horrified the next. Like in the scene in Pulp Fiction, when Uma Thurman’s character overdoses on drugs and John Travolta’s character takes her to Lance’s house so he can give her a shot of adrenaline straight to her heart. During that scene you are horrified by what is going on, but at the same time you are laughing, because the situation is also very comedic. However, other times in the article, it seemed as though she was resentful or spiteful towards him, because of the amount of violence that Reservior Dogs contained.
I feel Quentin Tarantino had such an influence on the independent cinema because no one ever saw a movie like Reservoir Dogs before. Independent cinema never saw action and violence like that movie had. Sundance was so shocked by it; they didn’t even reward him for the movie. Usually, the independent film was about dialogue and plot. Don’t get me wrong, this film had great dialogue between the characters and the plot was well done. But on top of that, the bloody violence and action was what made it even better. His vision created a universe of violence not caring what happened really to the characters. Just like him not caring about what people think of his films. His characters couldn’t care a less about what you thought of them. One great scene is in “Pulp Fiction” when John Travolta has a gun to a guys head in the car and they go over a bump in the road and he accidentally pulls the trigger; killing the guy. It is so unexpected, and shows that any one can die in a Tarantino film, no matter what feelings you have created for him/her. Bryan Pechacek
Finding any one reason why Tarantino and his work has such an influence on American indy cinema is impossible. There are plenty of varied reasons, many of which may or may not be agreed with by critics and others in the industry. There seems to be a fascination with violence that permeates his films; violence and it's effect on the humanity of the characters within the films. He allows his characters to simply be what they are without necessarily forcing them one way or another. In Taylor's article, he is quoted as saying "I don't know what these guys are gonna do. I set up the situation..."
The brutality in Reservoir Dogs is counterbalanced by the humor of the film, to a certain extent. Tarantino certainly isn't the first director to blend humor, violence, romance and other emotions and genres, but he is showing that it can be done without compromising any of the individual genres. They may not always mesh perfectly, but the contrasts that are shown are a hallmark of his work. A film that has 10 minutes of graphic torture as well as 10 minutes of discussion of Like a Virgin spans such a variety of genres that it has become post-modern in it's attitudes. Tarantino may not have gone to a film school, but he is showing that he has as much of an understanding of the theory of cinema as most formally educated film students.
I think Quentin Tarantino had a profound effect on American independent cinema because he was willing to different inside of the box. Pulp Fiction has a very different structure, but at its heart is just made up of bits and pieces of older movies. Kevin Smith says that you can "blame the press" for the success. I think this is partially true, and it makes me wonder about motivation behind the press. Pulp fiction was a film that had a lot of established names compared to most independent films, who were at least not nobodies. Also the funding for this film is not entirely as "independent" as most films, being made around the time when Mirimax was bought by Disney. So it would seem that Disney intervened in a company to take a movie that was made for relatively small amounts of money and used its weight to influence the press and turn it into a very profitable movie. At the same time however, I thoroughly enjoy the film. It took me a few watchings to put the story together, but that allowed me to pick up on mored subtle details within the film, and I thought it was a very well made film if not at least a well formulated elaborate set of intertwining stories. I think Quentin makes references things that he enjoys and at the time of reservior dogs and pulp fiction they were the right ones that people knew and enjoyed. I feel that in his later years he has strain to more obscure references that have lost the feel of pulp fiction or reservoir dogs. WHile I do not question his talent to write a believable dialogue, I still would say that part of his success is do to his luck and being in the right place right time.
The reason i believe Tarantino had such a profound effect on Cinema was the way he was able to blend all different kinds of elements such as comedy, action and horror while also mixing elements of different styles and use of pop culture. As the article by Eli Roth points out in Reservoir dogs Tarantino made a film that blended all elements of cinema genres and he did it in such away you could see that he had alot of respect and knowledge of previous source material and enough creativity to put them all together.
What is often said to be one of the most shocking scenes in cinema was the ear cutting scene in Resvoir Dogs when Micheal Madsen character Mr. Blonde cuts off the ear of a helpless police officer. This scene using music from a throwback era of 1970 robber movies, and takes an event such as torture and death and makes it morbidly funny. A similar scene that uses throwback humor is the rape scene in Pulp Fiction. After Bruce Willis escapes his captures and the mafia boss is taken in the back room Bruce Willis is seen looking through the pawn shop picking up several b movie cliched weapons such as base ball bats and a chain saw. He finally picks a samurai sword and uses it to kill his captures. These two examples are all extremes in which Tarantino shines well and is most likely to be remembered best for.
Post a Comment