Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The 9th Film by Quentin Tarantino

I don't know, I didn't go in a Burger King.

Reply
A[quote name="Bailey" url="/community/t/159473/the-9th-film-by-quentin-tarantino/90#post_4322538"]I just don't get the premature hand-wringing when you have no idea what the movie is going to be like.  If you've lost faith in him as a filmmaker, that's another matter entirely.  But he's 8 for 8, in my opinion.
[/quote]

Where I'm at as well. I genuinely believe that H8 is his masterpiece and even something that I'm wasn't too crazy with (Inglorious Basterds) is still a damn fine film. And while I get the concerns that Tarantino won't be able to "tone" it down for...whatever this movie turns out to be, I think people using YMRT's episode on the Manson family as reference for how the story should be told, seem to forget that a lot of what whent on during that was (very darkly) humorous and outright absurd, something that fits right into Tarantino's wheelhouse.
Reply
A[quote name="Moltisanti" url="/community/t/159473/the-9th-film-by-quentin-tarantino/60#post_4321806"]I'll be honest, if I was fishing buddies with the writer of THE YAKUZA I'd be dropping that name all over these boards. It'd be "Paul and I" this and "Paul and I" that all the live long day.
[/quote]

Leonard! That was Paul's brother Leonard Shrader who wrote Yakuza! I think he died about ten years ago, which would make your fishing trips more with him more... pungent than usual, I'd imagine.
Reply
Quote:

 Where I'm at as well. I genuinely believe that H8 is his masterpiece and even something that I'm wasn't too crazy with (Inglorious Basterds) is still a damn fine film. And while I get the concerns that Tarantino won't be able to "tone" it down for...whatever this movie turns out to be, I think people using YMRT's episode on the Manson family as reference for how the story should be told, seem to forget that a lot of what whent on during that was (very darkly) humorous and outright absurd, something that fits right into Tarantino's wheelhouse.


It's funny that you bring up the dark comedy of this time, because the last couple of nights we went to a performance of the musical ASSASSINS where the central characters are all successful or failed assassins of American presidents. It's a masterpiece, but it's also incredibly funny, and it knows when to go for laughs, and when to snap back to the seriousness of it. Of course, since one of those assassins is former Manson girl Squeaky Fromme, it got me thinking a lot about this project.



I keep thinking about ZODIAC a lot - how that's a fun, technically marvelous film, full of wit and fine performances, but right as you're lured in, Fincher hits you with that lakeside murder. Close-up, in your face, tense, no music. It reminds you that true crime can be fun, all this wild speculation, but these are actual crimes, that happened to actual people. And it's hard to forget for the remainder of the film. It's one of the reasons why that movie is so great. A lot of the Manson revival has been about just this - about reminding readers and listeners and viewers that Manson isn't a kooky cult meme to be slapped on trading cards - he was a person who committed monstrous, violent acts.



Finally, I keep thinking about the quote "one death is a tragedy, thousands are a statistic." I think that might be why some people are having trouble with this project. We get to know the black and Jewish characters in DJANGO and BASTERDS, but the Holocaust and American slavery are nevertheless painted in these broad terms. Yes, he will occasionally drill down into the horror of it (as with Django), but you get the sense that it's more a historical backdrop for him. There are moments, moreso in Basterds than Django, where you feel the weight of the millions killed, but they are few and far between. And snap forward to Manson, where his name is linked with not just his followers, but the specific names of the victims. I wonder how Tarantino is going to handle all of this. 

It's a lot to handle for him, a lot to juggle. But I think I'm going to revise my opinion on it from outright "no, no, no," to cautious - very cautious - optimism. I do think Tarantino has handled the shift from pitch-black comedy to horror and trauma well in the past - I always have to keep Jackie Brown in mind - but as I've said before, I think his recent work displays a polish and sheen that still concerns me.

home taping is killing music
Reply

So apparently this has been floating around a bit since the Tarantino-Manson news broke.  This is (apparently) the off-screen voice of Tarantino asking a question at a Q&A for a Manson-themed documentary; his question would probably not put those who are worried about his approach at ease...





Seems to at least imply he's not averse to a conspiracy theory take on the murders.



At first I wrote this off as Tarantino having a bit of a laugh; knowing that the news of this project has been big talk over the last couple of days, he might have been provocative just to get people talking... then I saw that the video is from last fall.

Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by neil spurn View Post

Leonard! That was Paul's brother Leonard Shrader who wrote Yakuza! I think he died about ten years ago, which would make your fishing trips more with him more... pungent than usual, I'd imagine.


They both wrote it, although the script that was used for the film was revised by Robert Towne. Paul screwed Leonard on the writing credit.



A Question of Authorship: The Yakuza

Reply
A
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post

So apparently this has been floating around a bit since the Tarantino-Manson news broke.  This is (apparently) the off-screen voice of Tarantino asking a question at a Q&A for a Manson-themed documentary; his question would probably not put those who are worried about his approach at ease...

Seems to at least imply he's not averse to a conspiracy theory take on the murders.

At first I wrote this off as Tarantino having a bit of a laugh; knowing that the news of this project has been big talk over the last couple of days, he might have been provocative just to get people talking... then I saw that the video is from last fall.

Seems like a relatively innocuous question to me. He's just wondering if Tate was specifically targeted by Manson or if the Family chose them at random.

Reply
Quote:

Originally Posted by AtomTastic View Post
 

Seems like a relatively innocuous question to me. He's just wondering if Tate was specifically targeted by Manson or if the Family acted on their own.


I think it's fairly innocuous, too, but I can see why it would make some people uneasy.

Reply

The Cielo Drive house was previously occupied by producer Terry Melcher and visited by Manson. Manson believed Melcher had fucked him out of a record deal, which is why he sent his followers to the house - now occupied by Tate and Polanski - in the first place. I don't know why you would ask if Tate was the target unless you're leaning into the Satanic stuff.

home taping is killing music
Reply
Quote:

Originally Posted by avian View Post
 

I can't understand how slavery and the Holocaust are okay subjects for Tarantino, but a serial killer in the sixties is just too raw.


I think the difference would be that in Basterds and Django the Nazis and slave owners get punished in quite cinematic ways. I doubt he can do that with a Manson movie.



I'm still open minded about this movie because QT has never made a movie I didn't like.

I've got good news and I've got bad news. The bad news is that I have lost my way. The good news is that I'm way ahead of schedule.
Reply
AI'm open minded. All worrying will probably be for naught (I don't know if worrying is even correct. Wondering? That's more like it.). But I have this weird "the murder scene is revised history and like Straw Dogs shot with an LSD haze but Tate survives and goes to a church to ask god for forgiveness for what she's about to do to them in return and then Tarantino unleashes his remake of I Spit on Your Grave's revenge half" image of what I think he COULD do with it. And then you find out at the end of the movie that the "revenge" movie was only a movie that the movie's version of Polanski made as catharsis. Because don't Tarantino's movies have a movie movie-verse and a REAL movie-verse? And this could occupy both?
Reply

So no one's wondering if maybe...just maybe...Tarantino is actually trying to make something that's outside of his usual comfort zone?



I think back to that opening farm scene in Inglorious Basterds...and you know, I'm not worried at all. Cause that shit was grade-A horrifying in the worst way.

Reply

I'm extraordinarily skeptical... but I'd love to be surprised. I'll put it that way.

Reply
Quote:

Originally Posted by Codename View Post
 

So no one's wondering if maybe...just maybe...Tarantino is actually trying to make something that's outside of his usual comfort zone?


I thought that as well, especially with the news that it will be a story about Hollywood in the late 60s.  I recall an interview where Tarantino said Paul Thomas Anderson was a friendly rival, so part of me wonders if that might be his Inherent Vice, only with more disembowelings. (Plus, the Manson race war stuff will let him use the N-word a lot, which seems like a prerequisite at this point.)

Reply

Yeah, Tarantino basically said that THERE WILL BE BLOOD inspired him to get off his ass and start making the movies he'd been talking about making.

home taping is killing music
Reply
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mangy View Post
 

I thought that as well, especially with the news that it will be a story about Hollywood in the late 60s.  I recall an interview where Tarantino said Paul Thomas Anderson was a friendly rival, so part of me wonders if that might be his Inherent Vice, only with more disembowelings. (Plus, the Manson race war stuff will let him use the N-word a lot, which seems like a prerequisite at this point.)



Yep.  Had similar thoughts regarding PTA and Inherent Vice.

Reply
AAny news on this?
Reply

Ron Howard has taken over directing duties.

Reply

No.



However, Tarantino was on Facebook today raving about Roger Moore's performance in CURSE OF THE PINK PANTHER, which is pretty damn cool (the raving and the performance).

Reply
Quote:

Originally Posted by AtomTastic View Post
 

Ron Howard has taken over directing duties.



The director we deserve but not the one we need right now.



So we'll wait.

Reply

https://www.thewrap.com/quentin-tarantin...exclusive/

Reply
Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry Woodward View Post
 

https://www.thewrap.com/quentin-tarantin...exclusive/


Feels like part overreaction to HATEFUL EIGHT's leak, part ego trip ("I'm making the big shots come to me!").  As long as the movie ends up being good, I don't really care.

Reply

It could be that whichever studio he chooses also gets his 10th and possibly final film.

Reply

QT knows he's a valuable asset.  Why should a studio benefit from the QT stimulus package without offering something impressive in return?

Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted 7/12/17 by Barry Woodward View Post
 

I just so happen to be Facebook friends with Paul Schrader, and he had this nugget to share from Tarantino himself: "My script isn't about the Manson family, but it's about Hollywood in 1969 and they are in it."



"There has been a lot of press that the script focuses on Charles Manson and the murder spree he orchestrated, but I'm told that is akin to calling Inglourious Basterds a movie about Adolf Hitler, when the Nazi leader was only in a scene or two.



I'm told that the script has strong commercial appeal, and if there is a film of Tarantino's it can be best compared to, it would be Pulp Fiction..."



https://deadline.com/2017/11/quentin-tar...202199806/



#Number9 #OnceUponATimeInHollywood #PulpFiction69

Reply

Hot take:



Tarantino taking on a project about a man who exploited women in pursuit of fame and fortune so close to Weinstein is either going to be very good, or very bad.

home taping is killing music
Reply

I am convinced Quentin Tarantino morphed into Angus Scrimm seemingly overnight.

Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

Hot take:



Tarantino taking on a project about a man who exploited women in pursuit of fame and fortune so close to Weinstein is either going to be very good, or very bad.


I recall Tarantino saying he rewrote Hateful Eight a bit after Ferguson. I wonder if he's rewriting this now.

Reply

Margot Robbie would be perfect as Sharon Tate. Getting the chance to see Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt interact (maybe?) or have intersecting storylines with Samuel L. Jackson, whatever, sounds excellent.



Music to my ears, though, is that this evidently more like Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown. It's a bit strange to say it but those are pretty much Tarantino at his "straightest," so to speak, and I'd like to see him err more toward, say, David Fincher with a dash of Wes Craven than Robert Rodriguez or Sergio Corbucci with this one.

Reply
AGive Rose Byrne a blonde wig and she'd make a worthy Sharon Tate if Margot Robbie is unavailable.
[Image: 400]
Reply
AWould be interesting if Tarantino was the dp on this one. I really like the look of Death Proof, and that seems like something that'd work for a Manson movie.

[quote name="Mangy" url="/community/t/159473/the-9th-film-by-quentin-tarantino/100#post_4395241"]I recall Tarantino saying he rewrote Hateful Eight a bit after Ferguson. I wonder if he's rewriting this now.
[/quote]

If I remember right that was just a change to one line with regards to a specific location or something.
Reply
I don't see Tarantino dropping Robert Richardson.
Reply

Yeah, when you've got someone of that quality at the ready, you go with him, especially now that we're squarely in the "Prestige Tarantino" era.



If he ever wanted to do something smaller and more stripped-down (and genre-y) again, it would be interesting for Tarantino to shoot his own movie.

Reply
AQuentin Tarantino on His Upcoming Film: ‘It’s not Charles Manson, It’s 1969’

Not really a whole lot that isn't already know, but it is him saying it himself now. Sounds like it's going to start shooting in January. Was that already known too? I can't remember.
Reply
AIt's news to me, but it makes a lot of sense if Tarantino shoots early next year for a Christmas 2018 release. Three years between films has been his pattern for a while now.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)