His films kind of remind me of the Hans Christian Andersen story "the Emperor's new clothes".
I don't think that's particularly fair at all. Even those who aren't a fan of his movies should be able to see he's a skilled writer and director even if what he writes and directs isn't to their taste. The man's undoubtably got talent.
His films kind of remind me of the Hans Christian Andersen story "the Emperor's new clothes".
I think that is what some people are left feeling because what he does do is make a point of focusing on the very humdrum elements of film tropes that would normally only be alluded to.
For example, in Pulp Fiction, Jules and Vincent would appear in any other action film briefly as the main bad guy's henchmen in the background, and wouldn't get to say anything. In Pulp Fiction, they are shown driving to a hit, having a mundane conversation, carrying out their boss' orders and then cocking it all up, and needing to be bailed out. I like how he zooms in on the lives of characters typically at the lower end of the pecking order.
His films kind of remind me of the Hans Christian Andersen story "the Emperor's new clothes".
But are his films really pertaining to something that isn't quite there then?
It seems to me that QT has always set his stall out pretty clearly, no matter what he does. How people choose to view it is a seperate issue. You may find he doesn't warrant the praise, and in some respects I'd agree, but that's not quite the same as tagging the actual films as the emperor's new clothes.
Comments
I don't think that's particularly fair at all. Even those who aren't a fan of his movies should be able to see he's a skilled writer and director even if what he writes and directs isn't to their taste. The man's undoubtably got talent.
I think that is what some people are left feeling because what he does do is make a point of focusing on the very humdrum elements of film tropes that would normally only be alluded to.
For example, in Pulp Fiction, Jules and Vincent would appear in any other action film briefly as the main bad guy's henchmen in the background, and wouldn't get to say anything. In Pulp Fiction, they are shown driving to a hit, having a mundane conversation, carrying out their boss' orders and then cocking it all up, and needing to be bailed out. I like how he zooms in on the lives of characters typically at the lower end of the pecking order.
It seems to me that QT has always set his stall out pretty clearly, no matter what he does. How people choose to view it is a seperate issue. You may find he doesn't warrant the praise, and in some respects I'd agree, but that's not quite the same as tagging the actual films as the emperor's new clothes.