![]() |
Quentin Tarantino shouts at Krishnan Guru-Murthy
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I would pay good money to see Tarantino shut someone's butt down.
I don't even know what it means, but it's Tarantino, so would probably look awesome. |
Promotion tactic maybe? Not that any of his films need much promoting!
|
Haha QT on excellent form! :D And also, how many times does he need to be asked the same question re violence in films? Can't wait to see django unchained.
KGM needs to have a watch of the recent THR's directors' roundtable, might give him a few pointers on how to get a great conversation going with QT. |
He's making movies for 20 years. Violent shootings have been ten a penny since the gun was invented. QT has to explain nothing.
|
I don't really blame Quentin in a way - when he has to answer the same loaded question for 20 years about how he and his camera is more to blame for gun crimes than guns are, it must be pretty tiring.
|
Tarantino's cinematic 'Marmite', you either love him or *puts tin hat on*....... Imho QT seems overrated, a movie-nerd who takes clips from his favourite obscure films , remakes them with American actors - then claims the credit. So he's kind of lucky to be of interest to C4 news, as opposed to an interviewer from a late night film buff show. Saying that, KGM was being cheeky in trying to raise the sensitive topic of the Sandy Hook killings, especially to an American film maker. On the other hand, given all the practice QT says he has had dealing with similar questions ... no problem, I would have thought ;)
|
I think Tarantino was right there, Guru-Murthy a minute before had to be corrected 'and the rape..' pause by QT...'there is no rape in the movie.'
Guru-Murthy pushed the same question a number of times about violence...why do you like making violent films...QT explained very lucidly about violence and the different types and then Guru-Murthy asked a really poor, tedious question about links between film and real violence hoping to get some sound bite and QT refused...it's old stuff it's poor and QT was there for to advertise the film...and Channel 4 were doing it to get people to watch...it's a mutual win-win. Django Unchained addresses slavery etc that's really more important than some hackneyed Daily Mail question by Guru-Murthy who should have known better. QT was answering with energy and giving very good clear answers and was full filling his part of the bargain on the interview...I really don;t like it when interviewers try and score points. i.e. http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/...go-ben-affleck http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xs8...s#.UPBX5UPyj_Y The 'interviewer/questioner' asked 'what's it like being a Skype father?' |
Quote:
The subject of slavery is far more sensitive and is going on today around the world still he could have asked about it's relevance today but just went for the sensationalist question and it back-fired.He should have known QT will have been asked that question before and that it's really nothing new or special. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I thought QT was basically tired and emotional, and a bit on edge. |
Imagine what could happen if Kay Burley had interviewed him.
|
Quote:
Sandy Hook caused teh Mass Effect (a computer game) facebook page SPAMMED with hate mail about the game causing the shootings. Its a space shooting game with aliens and spaceships and weird looking things. Same with in the 80s and heavy metal was on trail for many stupid reasons. Although I do agree America and its gun issue is MUCH deeper than the movies it makes and enjoys. Its sexual the love they have for guns over there. its VERY strange for a non-American to witness (I honestly felt quite unnerved when I was shown a high powered assault rifle in someones living room) |
Quote:
QT was probably a bit tired but he was giving the interview his full concentration and when you get a dumb question then you'll sometimes go back at it. I'm not exactly how you could come to the conclusion that I mentioned Sandy Hook in any of my posts.:confused: Tal'shiar's reply is perfect. |
Watching the interview I never felt that Krishnan was sincere, he was just out to drum up viewers for CH4 News.
There's a time and a place and it's not in the middle of those dreary film PR things when the interviewee has probably done twenty interviews that day alone. CH4 News obviously saw it as a PR opportunity... for CH4 News. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'm not exactly sure how I came to that conclusion either, save it's Friday and the Chardonnay is a-flowing. :o Maybe I'm tired and emotional and a bit on edge. |
Here be the interview clip in question. From about four mins onwards, KGM makes several attempts to peck away at Tarantino, trying to draw him out re: the perceived link between movie violence and real life violence. Even saying at one point [6.00 mins-ish] that 'today' the [US] 'Vice President is talking to people in the movie industry' about the alleged link between the two. OK, KGM didn't utter the precise words Sandy Hook, but he sure as hell wasn't alluding to the US Fiscal Cliff crisis. QT appeared to be fully aware of where KGM was 'going', so 'shut him down'. QED. x ;) *goes off to find phone box for this week's meeting of the Quentin Tarantino non-appreciation society*
|
Quote:
Much respect to Krishnan for giving him some tough questions. |
Quote:
|
We're gonna need a bigger phone box :D
|
Quote:
|
He's a bit unhinged at the best of times.
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 17:14. |