Top 5 Quentin Tarantino Films

For a number of reasons, over the last few years, I have managed to rewatch all of Quentin Tarantinos films. Pulp Fiction, Grindhouse, Inglourious Basterds and the Kill Bill films I purchased on Blu-ray, so this factored into the rewatching. Indeed, all his films are stunning in hi-def.

It has truly highlighted how good a filmmaker Tarantino is. I wrote a post on Flickering Myth about defining his career in two chapters - the first three films as one chapter whilst the final three projects (I don't think you can really separate Kill Bill because, though it was separated into two, it was conceived as one project, filmed back-to-back) as the most recent chapter. Due to this, I am only choosing the top 5 films from a total of 6. Which one is left out? Grindhouse. Or Deathproof if you really want to separate it. And I really like the film - and prefer it to Planet Terror - but it simply doesn't have the depth of the other films. So, lets shoot through this Top 5...

5. Reservoir Dogs - Simply ground-breaking. We are in the Top 5 and we are splitting hairs amongst all of these. The film would have a solid 8.5 out of 10 - with the next 4 films slightly higher. The first watch, I think, is almost as if you are joining the gang in a conversation - you want to hear what they have to say. It doesn't matter whether it is about Madonna or tipping, because the conversation is "important" to the participants. When we get into the heist you are thrust into asking "Who is the rat?" and, from then, the story has you hooked. Unlike Tarantino's other films, it is short - and, as fast-paced, its a great film to rewatch, and show others. You see how his genius shines through in every facet of the film - from his own conversational manner, the film references and the obsession with pop-culture.

4. Kill Bill Vol 1/Kill Bill Vol 2 - Both these films seem to be more and more ignored since their release. I personally remember, on a first-watch, that Kill Bill Vol.1 was non-stop action, samurai-sword-fighting and hand-to-hand combat whilst Kill Bill Vol.2 was slow and plodding. There is parallels and contrasts between Eastern and Western filmmaking, themes and philosophies - but there is so much more to the films. I re-watched the films recently and both films stand-up. Kill Bill Vol.2 moreso, as suddenly the depth of the film shines through. It many ways, as much fun as Kill Bill Vol.1 is - and it is so much fun - Kill Bill Vol.2 takes itself seriously. It is important where Beatrix Kiddo (Uma Thurman) comes from - and it is important where she is going. And Bill (David Carradine) is a part of both. How do you deal with something that you hate, but is inextricably linked to you - like a family you dislike or a past you don't want to face.

3. Jackie Brown - The most recent watch, it stands so incredibly strong. The film is held by Samuel L. Jackson's Ordell Robbie. Jackie Brown (Pam Grier) herself is central as it is about her escape from a criminal lifestyle, but it is Ordell who is what we watch. His murderous, criminal and deeply-rooted selfishness is what drives the film - as we know he is capable of anything to achieve his own ends. Having said that, he is likable and approachable - and people trust him. It really is crazy to compare this stunning performance to his comic-book characters which, in comparison, seem so bland. Then there is Robert Forster, Michael Keaton and Robert DeNiro - subtle performances that reverberate throughout the film. You know, behind those Jack-Nicholson-eyes of Keaton is a character who is attracted to Jackie, who is desperate to be a good cop and who is young and naive. A brilliant film which is vastly underrated.

2. Inglourious Basterds - Think is Tarantino's epic film. The scale of this film feels bigger than any of its predecessors. Kill Bill is big in scale, but the story is personal. This is dealing with World War II - and it rewrites the story. An exploitation film that exploits the deep-desires many of us feel for the horrors of the War. But, amongst the cliche-Tarantino 'exploitism', is also incredible sequences - such as the opening scene with the French farmer or Christoph Waltz and Brad Pitt 'making a deal' in the final act. These are sequences which are exquisitely shot and incredibly well-written. In term of sequences, I think many of these sequences are the best in Tarantino's entire filmography.

1. Pulp Fiction - Out of respect, you cannot ignore how perfect-a-film this is. Fluidly cutting between stories, out-of-sequence, but subtlety paying-off sequences with a clear connection to another sequence. The set-ups are cliche gangster-stories - the bosses-wife, the ducking-boxer and the hold-up - yet all end in the most unexpected way. You have no idea where these stories will go - and when the twist hits, mid-story, not only is it unexpected, but generally it involves a character form a different story. Tim Roth and Samuel L. Jackson or Bruce Willis tied-up alongside Marsellus Wallace (Ving Rhames). Each character has such well-rounded characteristics - the pop-belly, the 'square' Uma Thurman highlights or the 'Royale with Cheese'. Instantly unforgettable and iconic moments in cinema history.

A-Z #6: All About Lily Chou-Chou

You can pick up hundreds of DVD's for a buck each - it doesn't matter. Its never about quantity, its about quality. A-Z is my way of going through my collection, from A-Z, and justifying why I own the films...

#6 - All About Lily Chou-Chou

Why did I buy it?

Initially, I watched this at the Aberystwyth Arts Centre back in my Uni Days of 2002. It was a random film that I was recommended and advised to watch at the cinema and after I watched it a close friend told me how he absolutely adored it. He truly thought it was incredible. At the time, I thought very little - I was not really aquainted with international cinema - let alone Japanese cinema but something stuck. Moreso, it stuck when I watched Kill Bill Vol. 1 and, as The Bride runs her hands across the samurai swords the incredible song by Lily Chou-Chou plays. I remembered the track vividly from the film and reawakened my interest. I bought the film from Fopp and watched it a few months later and realised how great it was.

Why do I still own it?

This is, on one-side a story about teenagers; the bullying and love-life that accompnaies a teenagers life. But, more interestingly, on the other-side, it is about music and the escapism of music. The almost spiritual experience when a song seems to pull out emotion from deep down. That buzz you get when a crescendo peaks, the warm feeling when a chord shifts - and your praying for it to be a satisfying move - and it really is - your tempted to raise your hands to some sort of spiritual plain. When you see your favourite band and they play the one track you have heard hundreds of times in the quiet of your bedroom ...

All About Lily Chou-Chou captures and explores that - and this is why it shall stay in the collection.  

Remember - you can always email The Simon and Jo Film Show directly using this email: simonandjoshow@gmail.com

We are also on Twitter  and Facebook.

Grindhouse (Robert Rodriguez/Quentin Tarantino, 2007)

"You see, we're both going left. You could have just as easily been going left too and if that was the case, it would have been awhile before you started getting scared. But since you're going the other way, I'm afraid you're gonna have to start getting scared... immediately!"

Introduction

Only recently was this released on blu-ray - the 'experience' with all the trailers (opposed to the separate releases which have been available for years). I was tempted to buy them both separately, but I held out - I bought it yesterday and watched it last night and I am whacking a analysis up now. Lets be perfectly honest - the 'experience' is the only way to view these films - don't you dare waste your time with the longer cuts! It made financial sense to break them up (damn you America! "three hours - no, I can't do it") but, artistically, this is the only way to view Planet Terror and Deathproof.

Last year, my favourite film of 2009 was Inglourious Basterds - some may disagree. I heard only recently how what was good about The Social Network was how classical it was in approaching the theme - no references to previous films, no constant pop-culture 'in' jokes - think of Scott Pilgrim VS The World - just static shots and clear story-telling built on an incredible script. Grindhouse was a labour of love from two filmmakers obsessed with film - and not just cinema as an art form, but self-referential cinema. I have a funny-feeling that could be a genre all unto itself. Scott Pilgrim, Pulp Fiction amongst many others are the starting points - the doors that reopen a genre again. What is different with Grindhouse is the deep love that both Tarantino have for the exploitation genre - blaxploitation in Jackie Brown, heist movies in Reservoir Dogs. Could you argue that the Grindhouse combo is taking those homages to the next level - verging on parody. I think so.

So, Machete trailer has passed and the Grindhouse experience has truly begun...

Planet Terror

I think that you split the two thus so - Planet Terror is a 70's exploitation film parody, whilst Death Proof is a 2007-movie with the attributes of an exploitation movie. This is a great way to explore the films (what a shame my 11-15 year old film-club can't enjoy this!) and, therefore, mentally analyse the genre. Without watching anything from the genre! You watch the Planet Terror and understand the nature of exploitation and, three trailers later, you get to see what would happen if such a film was made today - because the 70's nostalgia is much more apparent in Planet Terror than in Death Proof.

Planet Terror presents a world whereby a gas has leaked out and is infecting - 28 days later style - the populace. I think what Roderiguez does so well is choose what he wants to pay homage to - and simply does it. The down-and-dirty nature of expoitation means that the use of a 'missing reel' adds comedic effect - and clears up multiple plot-points without actuall showing what has happened. How did Marley Shelton's Doc join the group? How did the strip-bar owner join the clan? why does Michael Biehn respect El Wray? What exactly was El Wray a part of? I might even go so far as to assume Roderiguez splits everyone up - purely to make the missing-reel that much more ridiculous.

Rose McGowan is well-cast too - her not-comedic comedian schtick, the whole idea of 'playing things straight' fits perfectly in the film - a film whereby everyone plays it straight. It does feel a little too much - a small part of me wishes the film ended on the escape from the texan grill ... but alas it does not - ploughing into a breakout-from-jail final act whereby we find Bruce Willis, has in fact, killed Osama Bin Laden. Well done to you Bruce. Ridiculous, tongue-in-cheek, exploitation at the height of parody.

Death Proof

I prefer Death Proof. I know not everyone agrees with this but I think it ties in with my [potentially misplaced] attitude to comedies. Planet Terror is clearly comedy, whilst Death Proof less so - as I said, this film played is neccessarily played straight in Death Proof not for comedic purposes but for the story. When an explosion happens in Planet Terror you laugh - it is so ridiculous. When Zoe Bell is on the front of the car  you are gripping to your seat. It is the type of crazy-stunt that, I assume, these type of films offer - and a modern take is so much more gratifying. The Tarantino-references are not a problem either. We know that Inglourious Basterds has a character who is a film critic, we are suprised at the knowledge Samuel L. Jackson may posess about television series - but it is clear that in an entire double-bill obsessed with exploitation films, we will get a reference to other movies. And we do - Vanishing Point amongst other motor-head fuelled-filled films - "Gone in Sixty Seconds - and the original not that Angelina-Jolie shit". I really am perplexed at how people didn't like this part of the film - its Tarantino at his best. He makes some fantastic references and points you, as a viewer, into a back-catalogue of films to watch post-viewing. Believe me, if Vanishing Point is on TV, it is Tarantino who has inspired me to watch it. Thank you QT. 

Spectacular Double Bill

What is brilliant about these films - is the playful attitude towards cinema. Cinema can be entertainment - believe me, my Dad see's film as purely entertainment. A lot of people think that contemplating philosophy is simply too much - the multiple layers in The Dark Knight, the socio-economical issues that underpin This is England is simply too much. Batman is action film. Horror is just a 'scary' movie - no deeper subtext. Well, I think this is where Grindhouse comes in... it expects nothing. It is purely entertainment - and its nice for us film-junkies to know the references and to explore them more - but these films do this without any force. Simply by watching - and enjoying - the movie, you are soaking in the references. It is just  zombie-movie, it is just a car-chase movie ... but those who care... know the history and this simply makes us love the films more. No waiting around, no expectation or neccessary prior-knowledge - you can get scared - "immediately". 

Remember - you can always email The Simon and Jo Film Show directly using this email: simonandjoshow@gmail.com

We are also on Twitter  and Facebook.

Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

Now, gentlemen, around this time you could ask whether you're real or fictitious. I, however, think that's too easy, so I won't ask that yet.

Introduction

It has been quite a quiet few weeks - end of term, Christmas, Podcasts of importance ... many nights considering what would be and could be my Top Films of 2009 and, to be honest, the idea of deciding on a best film of the decade is too daunting to consider. Off the top of my head - and I am sure I will forget some - I am thinking The Village, The Lord of the Rings and, to go a bit international, I might throw in Amelie in there. Fact is, I decided as Best film of 2009 as Inglourious Basterds. It was tough - and for a while, Woody Allen's Vicky Cristina Barcelona got a look-in. I didn't want to go all pretentious and choose a film that, though good, I was unlikely to see again (Thats Anti-Christ and Kinatay out the window) and then again, I didn't want to choose anything too, though enjoyable, was nothing new or groundbreaking. I felt IB was a film that did break new ground - in Tarantino's unique way - while at the same time was highly enjoyable. Anyone who has had a listen to the podcast knows, Let the Right One In came close but this nabbed it mainly on the grounds that I didn't see its quality coming at all. The pulicity was mediocre but I left the cinema thoroughly entertained and enthralled about the future of Tarantino!

Opinion/Analysis

There are very few auteurs in cinema at the moment. A director who - from the first reel - has their name stamped all over the film. These directors often write the films also - possibly from other source material - but they make the story is their own. Terence Malick, M. Night Shyamalan, Pedro Almodovar and Roman Polanski are a few which come to mind. Quentin Tarantino is another. In fact, as soon as a character speaks, you can tell Tarantinos influence; there truly is no director working in Hollywood who can create a film in the same way. Even the flawed truly "Grindhouse-for-the-noughties" Deathproof has a script and film language that no other filmmaker can recreate.

In the first instance, it is worth clarifying that Inglourious Basterds is not a direct remake of Quel maledetto treno blindato of 1978. Tarantino's shares the title but this original assigns itself as a 'macaroni combat', following in the influence of 'spaghetti westerns'. (I never realised there was this whole "pasta-name genre" way of referring to every type of Italian film in the 70's... Where is Rigatoni-Horror? Farfalle-Sci-Fi? and Fusilli-Gangster?). Inglourious Basterds itself is clearly influenced by spaghetti westerns - Sergio-Leone full-screen shots of the eyes; Ennio Morricone score; the beautiful beginning that reeks of Once Upon a time in the West (Which, in turn, was influenced by John Ford and that legendary shot in The Searchers.)

In the introduction, we are introduced to one of the two lead male roles; Christoph Waltzs' Col. Landa - the 'Jew Hunter' (The second is Brad Pitt's Lt Aldo 'the Apache' Raine). Landa is an exceptional 'hunter' as he finds the family of our lead character Shosanna (Melanie Laurent), who manages to escape his grasp. Akin to 'The Bride' in Kill Bill, the film is about revenge. A revenge that Shosanna holds towards the Nazi's - and as she is hosting a premiere of Nations Pride at the cinema she has bequeathed from her auntie and uncle, it is the ideal opportunity to take them out. This premiere has in attendance (amongst many other high-ranking Nazi's) Goebbels and Hitler himself. Running alongside her revenge plot is also the Basterds plot to end the war. Raines is the leader of the Basterds and, through the assistance of the British Army, they also intend to use the premiere as an opportunity to knock-out the enemy. If they wipe all four leaders out, they end the war.

The more you watch the film, the more you realise how intricately paced Tarantino has made the film. Take the basement bar-sequence as Lt Hicox, Stiglitz and another basterd are meeting up with von Hammersmark. As soon as the basterds arrive, there is a subtle show of power building from one character to another - beginning at the moment the German-female headlocks a low-ranking German soldier. It estalishes her power over him, only to then be interrupted by a different soldier 'drinking-to' Wilhelm (this supercedes her power), this then leads to Wilhelm (who had just been championed, as drunk as he was, he was in a position of power), approaching Hicoxs' table to be very swiftly knocked down to size as Hicox and Stiglitz tell him to leave the group - as a viewer we are now clear in the knowledge that Hicox and Stiglitz are the most powerful characters in the room - the fact that Stiglitz defends Hicox implies Hicox stronger is than he ... until Hellstrom is revealed. We are wholly aware that it is he who assumes power over everyone - even pushing Stiglitz to the side, placing himself 'up there' on a par with Hicox and Stiglitz. This very gradually builds the tension - even though the German girl we first see, we know, has no real purpose except for beginning this play of power gradually. Prior to the German girl-on-guy head-lock, we see the quiet, shy exceptionally-weak French girl who is embarressed by playing the game with the German soliders, backing up this structure I believe Tarantino adhered to.

The sequence is finished as von Hammersmark kills Wilhelm - while everyone else lays dead. von Hammersmark, though she has parallels with Shosanna, she is nowhere near as cunning or strong as Shosanna - linking to another focus for analysis in the sequence whereby Landa kills Hammersmark. Upon using the shoe, in a Cinderella-like fashion, Landa leaps onto her, straddling her body and strangling her to death. We can assume there may be a pleasure in this - but it is also grotesque. Her legs flailing around the place as she gasps for her last breath. He is ashamed of her and what she has done. Hammersmark is a character with no pride for her country - she had no qualms about killing Wilhelm (even though Raines - we can assume through the conversation - hoped to keep him alive and even Hellstrom mentions when his life is at stake how Wilhelms life, to some extent is valuable. Hammersmark doesn't see it as valuable and kills him with no problem whatsoever - and she is clumsy enough to leave her shoe and go to 'the ball' (the cinema) anyway with such a lame excuse as to the mountain-climbing accident and bring along her 'Italian' friends. Aldo Raine even thought the meeting place in a basement was excpetionally bad planning. This lack of skill and clumsiness is everything Landa is not (note how he is exceptionally scathing towards Hammersmark when Raine asks about her) - and so he takes her life with a lot more gusto and makes the entire sequence that much more violent. Aldo Raine on the other hand is met with respect - Landa respects and admires him, thus saving his life.

To finish this analysis of these outstanding sequences, it is worth noting some other interesting aspects. When we see Churchill, he sits awkwardly in the room like a statue, with the bold red curtains draped behind him. This sequence looks almost dreamlike and, in my opinion, reminds me of David Lynch and even the dreams in Twin Peaks whether or not this was on purpose, I don't know, but it is an interesting correlation. Samuel L. Jackson also cameos as the voice over to a few sequences - which is nice to see. Sam Jackson is a must in any good Tarantino film. Top Three Tarantinos all now have Samuel L. Jackson in them (Reservoir Dogs would by 4th. place)

The end of the film has been spoken about a lot. I don't think, as Chris Hewitt says in Empire that Tarantino is 'playing God' by reimagining history the way he does, but Hewitt is right in stating that it is 'bold and outrageous'. Part of the reason that I think it is ground-breaking. Nick James, obviously, is a little harsher telling us how the film is a 'too-complex plot' replete with 'low-level black humour' as some sort of 'wish-fulfilment Jewish revenge fantasy'. Though, maybe someone with a Jewish background and potential links to the atrocities of Hitler may see it that way, I doubt the vast majority chanted 'yes!' as Hitler was killed. The reality is, whether he was killed or not - it doesn't matter. The sequence was black-humour as it should be. What matters is what happened afterwards - and thats the message of the film. What scars are left on the accomplices of Hitlers Nazi campaign? I feel that, at many points, the basterds are out of place - like a bunch of contemporary figures dropped into Nazi-occupied France. They are not making dreams real - they are raising questions about what is right and what we have missed. In any war, the soldiers are what they are - following orders - but they are still the killers who killed the enemy, they are still the man comitting the legal-crime. It reminds me of a Band of Brothers episode whereby a character has an argument with a baker when the baker argues he was unaware of the stench of dead bodies from a nearby concentration camp. The character is shouting at the baker - how on earth could he not have known? He was ignorant and he pretended he was not a part of it. We are all responsible and, one man being butchered on screen (Hitler...) and even the entire cinema burning down with all the Nazi officials inside, does not get rid of the 'stench' of horror that lingers. What happens to the people who 'got away' - like Landa - do they just mingle back into society post-war? An interesting, though completely different approach to the same moral question, is raised in The Reader ... who commits the crime and how can we, without killing the perpetrators, enact justice on those at fault? The scars are permanant for the victims, yet in the passing of time they fade into the back of the mind of the perpetrators.