Your daily reminder that he never made a good movie after Kill Bill

>is like literally
Brainlet genocide when

Hollywood is one of his best. Up there with dogs and pulp fiction

>reddit
>reddit
>reddit
>kino
>reddit
>reddit
>reddit
>reddit
>reddit

Hateful 8 is one of his best

The Hateful Eight was kino.

Apart from that stupid ending I mean.

I've only ever seen one Tarantino movie. Inglorious Basterds or whatever they called it. Didn't like it. Only saw it because a literal autistic Dutch fag made me. I will never watch another Tarantula movie again.

You’re mom never had a good fuck after me

He never made a good movie, period.

dubs confirm

Remove "after Kill Bill" and this is correct.

1.Kill Bill
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Reservoir Dogs
the rest

Confirmed for shit

Dubs confirm Basterds as a masterpiece

Trips confirm Once upon a time

Inglorious Bastards is my favorite.

Inglourious Basterds is his best movie

1. Inglorious Bastards
2. Pulp
3. Reservoir Dogs
4. Django
5. Jacki Brown
6. Kill Bills

Haven't seen once upon a time yet.

kill bill was watchable but it wasn't good
i can't think of any tara movies that aren't cringey for attention, like oliver stone movies

he's not a good director but he makes some entertaining movies

tried to watch that last night -- had to stop 15 minutes in because it was so fucking corny and overbaked

Better than his last 5 movies.

ok

>Your daily reminder that he never made a good movie.

Fixed it for ya.

Same. Fucking retarded goon he is

good tier:
>pulp fiction
>reservoir dogs
dude I'm cool look how slick I am did you get that reference tier
>everything else

That forehead has always and will always be amazing.
So much brain.

>em dash with omitted subject like he think's he's a movie
big cringe. your post is corny and overbaked

Inglourious Basterds is his best movie tho

>Your daily reminder that he never made a good movie
ftfy

>Inglourious Basterds
Sucked colossal ass

>Sucked colossal ass
If you generally hate Tarantino, fair enough. But I legit can't understand someone liking Pulp Fiction and hating Inglourious Basterds. They're tonally and aesthetically very similar

90's Tarantino was kino, then he went batshit.

Attached: 5bcded41b53f5-f14mm211u5.jpg (1440x942, 438K)

I didn't like Pulp Fiction either. I don't like Tarantino and I'm not entirely sure if it's because he's been built up as this amazing director that failed to live up to expectation. It's all style, no substance for me.

Such a meme opinion, his movies clearly have plots and characters that discover things, why do people act like tarantino films need to be thematically deep

You guys are such faggots

He doesn't make thematically complex films, but they're more than just surface-level exercises in form. Inglourious Basterds has a postmodern ending with the audience cheering Nazis being killed in a propaganda-style film as the Nazis are cheering the death of allied soldiers in a propaganda film. Stuff like that goes beyond simply referencing other movies, they create something that's aesthetically original

Pulp Fiction=Jackie Brown>RD>IB>KB1-2>H8>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Django

i didn´t see Once upon a time....

Django below Kill Bill. The editing on that film is atrocious.

Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction were his 2 greatest movies, True Romance was good too but it was directed by somebody else. After those movies everything else is watchable entertaining shit.

1. Inglourious Basterds
2. Jackie Brown
3. Pulp Fiction
4. Kill Bill Vol. 2
5. Django Unchained
6. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
7. Reservoir Dogs
8. The Hateful Eight
9. Kill Bill Vol. 1
10. Death Proof

is he really going to stop at 10? i don’t think so

He'll do Star Trek, which he won't count as part of his 10 since he didn't write it, then he'll direct his final film.

>implying any director at all made a movie better than Kill Bill

Based contrarian

he's such a weird guy it's not even funny.
the way he acts in interviews, his dancing in public, his foot fetish he's not even trying to hide anymore.
how did he do it?

He's 100% on the spectrum

Reminder that OP is a Reddit infiltrator, TRUE Yea Forums fans like everything on this list.

Attached: 1523605534158.jpg (1995x5184, 3.4M)

ONIONS READY TO DRINK MEAL
THE VERY GAYEST THERE IS
WHEN YOU ABSOLUTELY
POSITIVELY
HAVE TO KILL EVERY LAST SPERM IN THE SACK
ACCEPT NO SUBSTITUTE

I don't get it.

Inglorious Basterds
Jackie Brown
Pulp Fiction
Reservoir Dogs
Once Upon A Time in Hollywood
Django
True Romance
Hateful 8
Kill Bill
Deathproof

His top 3 are Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown and Inglorious Basterds

The editing is atrocious on all his post-Basterds movies because his old editor died.

I like Tarintino (except Django) but Once Upon A Time In Hollywood was literally the worst movie I’ve ever seen. I couldn't sleep last night it was so bad.

Leo and Pitt had no chemistry, the movie (3 fucking hours long) could have been told in 40 minutes or less, and the entire movie lacked the trademark Tarantino "cool" (which is amazing because it's staring Brad Pitt and Leo).

The editing was poor and the direction was meh. There was no set up and pay off for anything, the movie spends time introducing uninteresting characters and they never come back or have an impact on anything, and Brad Pitts character didn't have a character arc. Leo's had a very small arc but his arc literally didn't have an impact on the ending. We spent like 20 minutes in that western that Leo was filming, but it was shot in a way that wasn’t reminiscent of direction from the era, or in a way that showcased production back in the day.

The ending, which is questionably getting the most praise, could have happened in the first five minutes of the movie. The rest of the movie didn’t matter. Sharon Tate’s role was to sit in a movie theater smiling at herself acting. The Manson family murdered weren’t set up at all so I felt NOTHING when they were killed.

Also Tarantino chose to shit on Bruce Lee in the movie, while giving Roman Polanski a pass and hired "comedian" and admitted child molester Lina Dunham for a role.

>It's the anti-pulp fiction. Just awful.

I enjoyed Django Unchained und Hateful 8 more than I did Kill Bill Death Proof Inglorious Bastards

Kill yourself. Once upon a time was objectively awful.

No character development
Bad editing
Nothing paid off
No story arc

The ending could have literally happened in the first five minutes of the movie and it would have changed nothing about the rest of the movie.

It was awful and lacked any of Tarantino’s trademark cool. I’m thinking his now deceased editor was the one that made his movies cool.

1. Pulp Fiction
2. Reservoir Dogs
3. Jackie Brown
4. Django Unchained
5. Hateful 8
6. Kill Bill
7. Inglorious Bastards
8. Death Proof

Don’t care about Yea Forums cancer opinions

Don't even try, this boaard hates Tarantino by default cause he made a movie where nazis are killed and black people win. You can't even get a half-decent discussion goin here about him, even if you're pointing out his flas the answer is alwasy the dogmatic: "Everything he ever did was garbage REEEEEEEEE"

For me, Hateful Eight is Tarantino's best movie.

Don’t forget, Yea Forums calls him Tarantula for some odd reason.

thats more of a common thing, probably has to do with autocorrect I would assume

Once Upon A Time was objectively shit. It has nothing to do with Yea Forums‘s opinion of him as a filmmaker.

Kill Bill is literally his weakest after death proof and django

The ending of hateful is literally the best part of the movie

I think you mean Once Upon A Time is his weakest user.

Kill Bill actually had story and characters with payoff and oozed Tarantino’s trademark cool.

I agree Django was bad too.

Jackie Brown is so fucking great, looks amazing and the writing isnt retarded because it's an Elmore Leonard novel. Yea Forums should eat it the fuck up but they cant because a black woman is ostensibly the main character, even though shes barely in the movie

Kill Bill was literally his only truly bad movie.

Trek is his script

I dont know why 8 gets shit on so much. I guess because it's not nearly as flashy, but it was like watching a really great play. I'm surprised theres no hateful 8 on Broadway

>literally his weakest

Yet it was the one film he was able to make 4 hours long. It's his most thorough movie. His most fleshed out, single character, journey. You may not like it but calling it his weakest is far from true. Oh you didn't like Death Proof? Your opinion isn't worth shit.

Lol nobody even talking about Kill Bill 2

t. plebs

Actually havent seen Hollywood yet so you might be right

Last I heard it was written by the guy who wrote The Revenant.

This.

Easily his worst

It has nothing to do with the black female character, the movie is just under the radar and most people haven't seen it. I didn't even know it was a proper Tarantino movie until recently, I thought it was one of his side-projects like Death Proof.

Crazy how much better it is than Vol 1

Kill yourself faggot. Once Upon A Time was worse in every possible way

>acting
>story
>characters
>music
>editing

The ending of OUAT could have happened in the first five minutes of the movie and it wouldn’t have changed a thing. Pitts character has ZERO growth and Leo’s character has zero growth (besides getting out of a very minor self-deprecating funk). Sharon Tate literally drove around and then smiled at herself in the movies. She had nothing to do.

The movie had a bunch of good actors play a bunch of uninteresting characters we spent too much time getting to know despite them having very little to do with anything. The killers weren’t set up in any way so I felt nothing when they were killed.

It was objectively terrible. Like not only my least favorite Tarantino movies, but very likely my least favorite movie ever. I HATED it. It was horse shit at a technical and story level.

>Yea Forums should eat it the fuck up but they cant because a black woman is ostensibly the main character, even though shes barely in the movie

I think JB is his best, though -- or, at least, his most mature.

Latest articles say he pitched the idea and theres already a script but he hasn't weighted in on it. So yeah hes not writing it looks more like a writer's room collaborative effort.

Django and Bill have the exact same premise and character arc. Both are cliches that have been done better a million times. Death Proof was just Quentin sniffing feet and doing coke with robert rodriguez

based and brownpilled

Basically Kill Bill 1&2 are just a ripoff from lady snowblood

Yeah or more because it’s a meme calling Tarantino Tarantula

>It has nothing to do with the black female character, the movie is just under the radar
t. wasnt alive in 1997

I am. Save your money and torrent it just to see what I’m talking about.

The best way to describe it is “the anti-pulp fiction”. It lacks all the cool atmosphere, characters and payoff.

When I say the ending could have happened in the first five minutes, that’s not even an exaggeration.

How the fuck do you make a movie starring Brad Pitt and Leo DiCaprio with Tarantino behind the lens UNCOOL?!

I literally lost sleep last night thinking about how pointless the movie was. The direction and editing was also shit.

It's called a hero's journey. How fucking old are you?

It's crazy how Kill Bill is one movie and should be judged as such.

No, it's really not. A ripoff would be the entire premise being lifted.

dis nigga finna dab on Yea Forums

Pulp fiction is the most 90s and the best movie that came out in the 90s prove me wrong

>It's called a hero's journey
How fucking old are you because that's objectively wrong. God theres nothing worse than stupid people who are aggressively smug

1 Death Proof
2 Jackie
3 H8
everything else is trash

Damn, I love not being a pleb. Imagine not thinking that OUATIH is one of his best films

OP seething after KB is exposed as trash lmao

>and hired "comedian" and admitted child molester Lina Dunham for a role.
He's dabbing on her and every other woke Hollywood tard. The film is a commentary on #metoo, with Pitt's character being cancelled for the unsubstantiated rumor that he killed his wife, and every young woke actress today being cast as members of a "hippie" (i.e. leftist anti-establishment) cult. The movie literally ends with a character burning a woman alive in a triumphant manner.

So why did Uma cuck T. and why is he marreid now to Prick?

Reservoir Dogs is my favorite Tarantino, I like PF and KB is moderately entertaining, not really a big fan of everything else. Would I enjoy Once Upon A Time?

His wife is way hotter than current-day Uma

Attached: 276419f479060ba3eea87d8e91a33854.jpg (744x434, 44K)

Do you like movies without plots where buddies just hang out and do cool things together? If so, you'll enjoy Ounce Upon a Time

Okay nigger I’ll bite. What was:
>What was Brad Pitt’s character arc
>What was the point of Sharon Tate’s character if she just smiled at herself in the movies the whole time?
>What was the point of Leo’s meltdown and subsequent rediscovery of his mojo if he was going to go to Italy anyway?
>What was the point of introducing and spending time a bunch of characters that didn’t move the story forward at all (everyone at the ranch, Pachino, Bruce Lee, Polanski)
>Treated Bruce Lee with disrespect but didn’t shit on child molesting Polanski and hired child molesting Lena Dunham to be in his movie.
>All of that attention to detail in sets and the direction did nothing to accentuate it.
>Driving in cars to poorly mixed music
>Basil Exposition coming in in the last 20 minutes to move the story anywhere close to a conclusion.
>Oh look they weren’t wearing hats and now they are - just like the old movies! Too bad the rest of the movie isn’t stylized so it was random and stupid.
>Brad Pitt and Leo have zero chemistry.
>the ending. The fucking ending. The killers weren’t introduced or set up in any way. Then the tone shifts for the last five minutes so ridiculous exploitative violence (which I personally have no problem with if it matches the tone of the last 2.5 hours) can occur and the killers - who we don’t care about - are killed by our leads - who aren’t in a different place as characters as the beginning of the film. So it could have all happened in the first five minutes.

There was no story, no character development, directing and editing was awful, the tone was inconsistent,

>It's crazy how Kill Bill is one movie and should be judged as such.
Tarantino counts it as 2 movies since Once Upon A Time is being billed as his 9th. Unless you think he counts Death Proof as one of his main films.

He’s buddies with Weinstein and probably diddles kids too. This was not some anti-woke film. Don’t be dishonest. Even if it was, it was terribly done and an embarrassment.

>He really showed child molesting Lena Dunham who’s boss by paying her tens of thousands of dollars for a couple days work!!

Imagine being this fucking stupid.

The flamethrower bit at the end was stupid anyway. Was I supposed to clap at the Asian girl we know nothing about flailing around like she was the white Japanese chick from kill bill after her arm was cut off? The film totally went of the rails at the end (not that it ever even got momentum before that).

Death proof shouldn't always be so low. I really enjoyed it

Attached: hmm.jpg (720x718, 25K)

Death Proof has a great vehicular manslaughter scene, otherwise its like Coolsville

This is facts

Dont listen to this faggot. Pitt and DiCaprio have no chemistry and Pitt’s character has no development. He exists to beat up Bruce Lee and to beat up the “bad guys” at the end who we know nothing about except that in reality they kill Sharon Tate (whose entire role is going to the movies and watching herself and reaction shots of her smiling and people clapping at her performance).

It ends in a blaze of violence that I’m sure will be on YouTube as a clip. That scene is good alone, but in context of the movie and as a climax it falls flat. Nothing happened during the movie that was set up to give them the upper hand at the end (except a clip of Leo with a flamethrower in an old movie - but that’s done more for comedy than anything).

It was terrible. Torrent it just to see for yourself how bad it is - but god don’t spend $12 to go and see it.

1. Reservoir Dogs
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Jackie Brown (considering that's Elmore Leonard's child)
4. Kill Bill saga

I have yet to see the new. Ungrateful 8 was trash barring KING BITCH JENNIFER JASON LEIGH, Glorious Bastards was a train wreck. Django seriously miss underused my guy Jamie Foxx.

all of his movies are good but RD, PF, JB and maybe Hollywood are the only ones I ever rewatch

If Reservoir Dogs isn't in your top 3 then do you even deserve to talk about film?

this

>after Kill Bill
Kill Bill stinks.

Listen to this dude:

Calling Jackie Brown kino has sort of become Reddit now. It's a good movie, and I think you placed it appropriately.

Attached: 1555306116328.png (640x478, 431K)

this, shame he wasted his talents on revenge porn fantasy and god awful westerns for more than a decade

What the hell did you even enjoy about Hollywood. It was THREE FUCKING HOURS of mediocre performances and a mess of a script. The characters didn’t grow or change even though the story is set over 6+ years, and the ending - which exciting for brainlets, was almost completely irrelevant to the rest of the story. Tens of minutes were spent of watching Sharon Tate Drive in a car and then smile at her own performances As I’ve said, it could have happened in the first five minutes. Actually, I think that would have made for the more interesting movie.

There is literally nothing redeeming about this nepotistic payday.

>>What was Brad Pitt’s character arc
Kills his wife, redeems himself by saving both Rick's wife and Sharon Tate
>>What was the point of Sharon Tate’s character if she just smiled at herself in the movies the whole time?
The film is thematically centered around how people perceived Hollywood prior to her murder. Her scenes were a respectful homage to her.
>>What was the point of Leo’s meltdown and subsequent rediscovery of his mojo if he was going to go to Italy anyway?
Not every character arc has to serve the plot. He can have a satisfactory personal arc that has no effect on the plot itself.
>>What was the point of introducing and spending time a bunch of characters that didn’t move the story forward at all (everyone at the ranch, Pachino, Bruce Lee, Polanski)
Not every character in a particular story has to move the plot along.

Don't feel like answering the rest, sorry

kill bill 2*
kill bill 1 sucked

great performances (even by shit ass Leo) and great scenery that felt like a living breathing 70's LA. movie didn't feel long at all

ITT monkeys discussing movies but don't know their opinions aren't facts. And giving very false information.

AMAZING """"DISCUSSION""" EVERYONE

You sound like the type of person who needs plot in his films. As an exercise in tone, style, and characterization, the movie worked for me

>kill bill is a good movie

Attached: 1561348444151.jpg (472x198, 18K)

Fucking faggot redditor

>Redeems himself
He saved himself. He was held at gunpoint. Leo’s wife (who only shows up 5 minutes prior and has a total of 42 seconds screen time), and only the viewer knows that he inadvertently shaved Sharon. That’s not redemption at all and there’s nothing that hinted he was at all feeing guilty about killing his wife. It was a punchline, that’s it.

>respectful homage to her
So it literally adds nothing to the narrative. For a movie that’s supposedly thematically centered around how people see Hollywood, it had very little to do with an outsiders perspective of Hollywood.

>satisfactory character arc
That’s the issue. He didn’t. In the last ten minutes we learn he gets married and has to sell his house and rent instead (a callback to the first 5 minutes), but the end of the movie he’s the same character we saw at the beginning essentially despite significant time passing.

>not every character in
WRONG. If you introduce and spend time on characters, they should have a purpose. This isn’t a fucking David Lynch movie. Side characters can inform you about your main characters, can shape your main characters, can be meaningful to the plot, etc.

This isn’t a taste thing. It’s objective fact about storytelling. If you’re telling a story and extend it with a bunch of meaningless bullshit that doesn’t matter to the story, then you are just blathering on.

i don't see how us knowing less about the Manson family hippies would have made the movie better. they felt like actual people instead of backdrop

What the fuck are you talking about?

The tone was all over the place. He had funny cuts like people not wearing hats then suddenly wearing hats at one point but the rest of the movie is shot like a modern movie. The sets, while beautifully detailed weren’t really taken advantage of by the directing or the editing. The big long Saloon Western shoot scene wasn’t really done with any style that was reminiscent of old Hollywood. And the end of the movie was like Inglorious Basterds out of nowhere.

There are countless other movies that do “old Hollywood” better.

Also, there was much to be left desired when it came to the performances and characters. Pachino was Pachino. Leo was Leo with a southern accent. Pitt was fine, but his character was kinda pointless. Sharon Tate being in the movie was pointless.

What actor besides Pitt and Leo gave a “great performance”? Pachino was essentially Pachino from that Adam Sandler movie, Sharon Tate smiled, the little actress girl wasn’t good and sounded like she was reading lines (not when she was in the movie), no one from the Ranch was good. The hippie girl that Pitt picked up was good, but how hard is it to act like a slutty hippie? The blind guy sucked. Oh you must be talking about Bruce Lee - such a great performance (eye roll).

>felt li a living breathing 70’s world
Funny, I could name several movies that do it much better. It was also shot like a modern movie and the color palate was super muted. The sets were detailed but the direction and editing took away from it.

No we should have known more about them as the movie is. I felt nothing at the end. At least if it happened at the beginning it wouldn’t matter and it would start our characters off with something interesting to get the story going.

Every character introduced in the film either served as foils to main characters, or moved the plot along. The interaction with Bruce Lee both articulates how badass Booth is, and also explains why he's so loyal to Rick: Rick gets him jobs despite his abysmal reputation among the Hollywood elite.

As for Booth's redemption arc, it's an arc involving his relationship to the audience of the film, not involving traditional storytelling structures where there's a barrier between the audience and the work itself, which is very Tarantino. The fourth wall is permeable in his work.

>So it literally adds nothing to the narrative.

The final scene plays off the audience's understanding of the Sharon Tate murders. The movie couldn't work without her presence.

>This isn’t a taste thing. It’s objective fact about storytelling.

No, it's a taste thing. Don't assume that your preferences are somehow more objective than anyone else's. People have been playing with these Aristotelean forms for centuries, they're not set in stone.

I'm not that interested in your opinions dude, sorry. Chekov's flamethrower was funny; the decision to shoot the Western in a contemporary style was the right decision because we're watching Dalton act in Lancer, not Lancer itself; and every character served a function in both the plot and the theme of the movie.

The highest form of artistry is the masterful Quintin Tarantino’s Ninth Film - Once Upon A Time In Hollywood. It can only be enjoyed by patricians with an IQ greater than 150 and those with foot fetishes. Plebeian simpletons aren't ready for it, as they would have trouble picking up on the subtle nihilistic themes & masterfully-executed, yet intentionally-mistransmitted messages that always seem to fly right over lesser minds undetected. The abstruse humour and existential themes which are woven ever so intricately into the rich plot, are eternally poignant, forever relevant, steeped in an understanding of 1970’s Hollywood and exuding it unto others like a blessing from heaven, made from important thinkers and visionaries such as the director of Django Unchained. Once Upon A Time In Hollywood will not appeal to the mediocre masses; it is solely for the geniuses and pedophiles among us who hold a true passion and understanding of philosophy and film.

Attached: feet.jpg (1917x817, 246K)

kill bill wasn't good

Every Tarantino movie I've seen has been at most 'okay'. They're middling movies. Action, blood and shit like that but I have no clue why people love him so much and why he's become this pop culture icon over the years.
>ooh it's a tarantino movie!
So fucking what? It's going to have violence, crime and some bitch is going to show her feet or something. The only fun movie he made was From Dusk Till Dawn because it was supernatural rather than a bunch of low lives killing people for money. Still a ridiculous movie.

Attached: 1453850189249.gif (371x209, 1.09M)

fuck off quentin
go back to mongering vhs tapes

he was considered "cool" during the two years after pulp fiction and then he began to think he was actually talented

deathproof pretty much sealed that debate

for me it's
>Inglourious Basterds
>Reservoir Dogs
>Pulp Fiction
>Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
>Jackie Brown

and the rest are shit and not worth rating

bro how many times are you going to post the same post in this thread. you’ve mentioned how it lacks his signature “cool” like 4 times now

Im the only one responding to your garbage thread rn.

>Implying the Kill movies were any good
He hasn't done a good movie since Pulp Fiction. Basters, Djamgo, and Hollywood were only okay. Plus, we don't need to discuss Jackie Brown, Hateful 8, and Death Proof. Those were terrible.

>Kill Bill
>good

Django was hot dogshit

scaruffi.com/director/tarantin.html

Yea Forums hates tarantino because he's a beginner level pleb pick for fave director. Most of his films are good.

he never made a good film

he just copypasta from KINOs he's seen.

1. Resevoir Dogs
2. Pulp Fiction

Everything else - load of boring shit

it tries too hard to appear auteur and it comes across as pretentious wankery

He's only written one good movie, and it was he didn't even direct. True Romance.

Django is pretty kino