I've got a couple questions (that don't necessarily have right or wrong answers, per se - I would just like some feedback), regarding the films of Q.T.
1. This one is up there with, synching up 'Dark Side of the Moon' with 'The Wizard of Oz' (i.e. it's been discussed to death). But I read something new regarding 'Pulp Fiction' and the infamous contents of the briefcase. Apart from the theory that it contains Marsellus' soul, I've also now read the stolen diamonds from 'Reservoir Dogs' were in the case. Personally, I like the ambiguity, and I think that was what Tarantino really intended. Thoughts? I will say, crossing possible plot lines into other films isn't new... is it? (see exanple #2)
2. In the opening scene in 'From Dusk To Dawn' (which was written by Q.T.) not only do we see a glimpse of Sheriff Earl McGraw (from 'Kill Bill') the clerk in the store is reading a magazine entitled, 'Bride'. Coincidence? Two future references to a film that was YEARS down the pike? I can't believe that Tarantino had that much forethought.
Well I wouldn't put it past him first of all to do any of this however, the contents of the brief case glowed gold on his face which would suggest to me that the contents weren't diamonds. The second question I'm not too sure about but I did hear of it.
So,,,, the next one might have Charlie Brown in it? (Kill Bill reference)
Actually, I would love to see a movie on:
how the Crazy 88's got their name.
what or how whatever is in the case got into the case
Uma's training with Master what's his name (my ex took my copy of Kill Bill V.II)
Spaz, I like those ideas - personally, I find 'Kill Bill, Vol.1' the greatest film of all time - someone told me that the Japanese version of the big '88' vz. Uma fight scene is completely in color (which doesn't do shit for me as I am color blind) - on the upside, only 5 more years until some newfangled Special Edition 10th annv. DVD will be available, right, RIGHT?
Also, (and I think this was just Q.T. flappin' his gums) he hinted at the possiblity of a 'Kill Bill, Vol 3' in years to come with Vernita's child vowing revenge on Beatrix. Wishful thinking? Yeah... probably.
Definately. Mike's demeanor was drastically different in the second half. His car wasn't death proof. He wasn't out to kill the chicks, just fuck with em. Its the second experience that turns him into the killer of the first.
I've always liked the tiny umbilical cords Quentin ties together from one movie to the next. I have a few theories:
1) I have a theory that the sword Bruce Willis finds and uses to kill Zed in the gun shop in Pulp, is actually a Hattori Hanzo, perhaps even Budd's (in keeping with his original intentions, I imagine Bud's hanzo sword being pawned and hocked its way into zed's store).
2) I think Mr. blond's shaving blade that he uses to torture the cop in Reservoir Dogs is the same one that somehow ends up in Uma's boots in Kill Bill part two which she uses to cut her bonds in the coffin. Come to think of it I think they even wear the same cowboy boots. I think Budd and Mr. Blond are the same person in alternate universe/timelines (both share a deeply embedded sense of honor when it is due; Mr blond endured prison instead of ratting out Cabot, Budd is the only one willing to recieve his comeuppance from the bride and admits "that woman deserves her revenge"). I think since Bud sympathizes for The bride's revenge mission, his alterego Mr Blond sends her the boots n' blade as a means to escape and carry on.
3) The Bride ends up inheriting Clarence Whurly's "Elvis" sunglasses from True Romance (She finds them on Buck in the hospital after killing him and puts them on as she escapes). I call them the "pimp killer glasses" because Clarence and the Bride are both wearing them after they've both killed a pimp (Gary Oldman played a pimp in Romance and, in Kill Bill, Buck was pimping his female comatose patients off to his friends)
4) This is a little far-fetched but I always thought Zed and Buck were related like cousins or something. Makes sense to me. They're both hill billy rapists and both have a penchant for over the top car key-rings and modes of transportation(Zed's chopper and Buck's pussy wagon).
5) Out of sheer self-indulgence I like to think Quentin Taratino is essentially the same character reincarnated as every other character he plays in his movies; He keeps dying but Hell keeps spitting him back up into the real world because they can't stand listening to his annoying, constant yammering down there. At one point Hell tries to be creative and spits him into Desperado, Robert Rodriguez' Universe, but he gets killed there too.
6) Quentin himself has confirmed that Vincent Vega and Vic Vega (Mr Blond) are in fact brothers. He also entertained the notion of a movie idea with the two of them together in a back-story setting, road-trip style a la the Gecko brothers in first half of Dusk til Dawn. This bloodline might also support the theory of Marcellus's suitcase being the diamonds from Reservoir Dogs. Vincent Vega might have gotten knowledge of the suitcase's existance when he heard his brother was killed in the heist.
There are more I cant think of right now, Im sure there's probably some website that has shit like this but I never look to them since its much more fun coming up with this stuff on your own.
At the very end of death proof when he falls down it says "The end."
I stopped watching at that point.
From what I have read, a few seconds latter, during the credits, it goes back to the last scene and Abernathy lands one final blow that makes the First part Second and Second part First argument not work.
Wait - so chronologically in 'Death Proof' the second part happened first, and the first part happened second? Hmm, I had just assumed Stuntman Mike got a new car. Dammit, now I'm gonna have to watch it again - and not just for the tire to the face.
For me Quentin Tarantino is far from the genius that he is made out to be by so many. I find several of his movies to be mediocre at best. He relies too much on gratuitous violence. I don't think he has as broad a vision as say Spielberg. And if you want to make fun of me for saying Spielberg is a good director then feel free. He's made a couple of duds, but I think he is far superior to Tarantino from the point of view of versatility. Tarantino makes pretty much the same film over and over again. From Dusk 'til Dawn quite frankly sucked. And I will distinguish myself (and probably simultaneously villify myself to the vast majority on this thread) by saying I didn't like Kill Bill at all. I haven't seen Kill Bill II & have no intention to. There was no story, the movie in large part consisted of a series of vignettes of people dying in extremely bloody ways. I get that it wasn't meant to be realistic . . . but it didn't have much point. I don't think there is anything masterful or artsy about depicting extreme violence in aesthetic ways. Blood letting on snow . . . people having their heads cut off and the blood spraying all over, or an anime version of a character hiding while her family is slaughtered don't do much for me.
Having lived in Japan for over a decade I saw mild-mannered middle aged men in business atire engrosed in manga filled with gore, sado-masochism, and rape. Can't say that any of it wowed me. If that is your bag . . . then whatever.
Having said all that I have to say I liked Pulp Fiction & Resevoir Dogs.
kill bill 2 is very different. i personally preferred it for basically the same reason that you werent happy with kill bill 1. personally i dont know why people like the first more than the second. if you did like some tarantino movies you may want to give kill bill 2 a chance.
I grew up watching the old revenge westerns. All the really old Clint flicks were nothing more than Clint getting shot up and then unleashing hell as revenge once he survived.
I think Kill Bill Volume I was awesome. It so brought me back to my childhood on Saturday afternoons watching Clint flicks.
When the music to the lonely shepherd kicked in at the end of Kill Bill, I was in love with the movie.
Part of Tarentino's problem is that he expects a wide audience to like all the things that he likes. He does not make movies that will appeal to commercial audiences. I'm still shocked that my almost 70 year old dad loved Pulp Fiction.
Grindhouse movies made no money cause they were terrible. They were cheap movies with little or no plot filled with blood and sex to cover the plot holes.
He may have enjoyed the experience, but a major audiences stayed away for a reason.
I really liked Grindhouse although I can clearly see why others would not. The sad thing is, that it is great that a studio would support non commercial movies, but I imagine the Weinsteins will pass on anything like this in the future which is really sad for the fringe movie lover.