Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous
I think tarantino lost his magic when he became an insider about 5-7 years ago. I liked the more underground and gritty without being gratuitous or contrived, its almost like Tarantino flicks have become cliches of themselves :X
|
An insider? 5-7 years ago being roughly the era of "Grindhouse?"
I think he was one his way to industry insiderdom when he swept Cannes. And I think he has been a massive influence on screenplay writers since Reservoir Dogs. But I guess the Kill Bill era is probably what you're referring to; when everybody in the country was shooting was over the film, from Tweens to critics with an appreciation for the absurd.
Personally, I think Inglorious Basterds was his real Hollywood breakthrough. I'm not sure why, as it's his least accessible film by far, but that was his first film to attain blockbuster status AND unanimous critical acclaim. And I think somethong of the "old" Tarantino did shine trough in that film. It had the complexity of Pulp Fiction, and a screenplay that, in my kinda humble opinion, outshines even Reservoir Dogs.
Now I believe he's managed to carve out a niche in the mainstream, and I think Django Unchained is proof of that. I've only seen it once, but to me it was an epic that maintained a good deal of the grit and grime of pulp fiction. The flashback scenes (which should have been given more length and screen time) were great examples of this.
Now that he's had his fun with war-epics (or pre-war in Django's case), I'd like to see him re-explore heist films and Scorscesian crime dramas. And yes, a revisitation to the world of Kill Bill would have a lot if potential. As long as it bore no similarities to the style of the first two films at all. He should go for a character piece, and give insight into the more human (read: less superhuman) dimensions of the individual characters.
Shit I've gotta go to work.