MOVIES THAT DONT HOLD UP WITH TIME

@blatham,

Did you carry it through?

As enjoyable as they may be, Tarrantino movies will not hold up over time due to their derivative nature.

It will be too much to expect future viewers who consider his films "old," to appreciate the references to films that his contemporary viewers consider "old."

As time moves on, his films will become increasingly obscure and irrelevant.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

As time moves on, his films will become increasingly obscure and irrelevant.

I hope not, Finn.

For a long time Tarentino was anything but my cup of tea. But at some point I "got" his angry message...and I think the entertainment quality of his films will hold up rather well.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Maybe they will endure on the superfical level of Pulp Fiction entertainment they are meant to invoke, but I doubt it.

Twenty or thirty years from now audiences will have vastly improved methods of entertainment, the films that endure will have to stand alone as classics. None of Tarrantino's films can do this.

This is not to say there will not be a small audience for "campy" decades old films in the years 2023 - 2033, but that's not what this thread is about.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5235197)
Maybe they will endure on the superfical level of Pulp Fiction entertainment they are meant to invoke, but I doubt it.

Twenty or thirty years from now audiences will have vastly improved methods of entertainment, the films that endure will have to stand alone as classics. None of Tarrantino's films can do this.

This is not to say there will not be a small audience for "campy" decades old films in the years 2023 - 2033, but that's not what this thread is about.

If you say so!

We'll see...or more likely, we will not see. But what will happen--will happen.

Vincent Van Gogh NEVER sold a painting in his entire life. Never one. Went into rages every once in a while a destroyed some canvases. Died thinking he was an utter failure. Some of his paintings have sold for almost $150,000,000. Some of the canvases he destroyed would have been worth tens of millions of dollars today.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Van Gogh could not have been less derivative.

Bad comparison Frank.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

@blatham,
Did you carry it through?

Almost. But I was never a Scout so know nothing about knots. It was just one more embarrassment.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5235197)
Maybe they will endure on the superfical level of Pulp Fiction entertainment they are meant to invoke, but I doubt it.

Twenty or thirty years from now audiences will have vastly improved methods of entertainment, the films that endure will have to stand alone as classics. None of Tarrantino's films can do this.

This is not to say there will not be a small audience for "campy" decades old films in the years 2023 - 2033, but that's not what this thread is about.

I find this possibility compelling. Hi Finn. Nice election, no? I'm not a big fan of the guy though I hold Pulp Fiction in high esteem. I think folks up the road may well think of it in the manner we think of Key Largo - events, character types, idioms and patterns of speech, etc - of a time and place but easily imaginable and great story-telling.

The rest of his stuff, not so much for me. Could lose it all.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Quote:
Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5235530)
Van Gogh could not have been less derivative.

Bad comparison Frank.

Sorry you think that. Hope it doesn't ruin the rest of my day.

0 Replies

I wonder about movies that were failures at the box office when first released and became cult classics with very long legs--movies like 'Christmas Story', 'Its a Wonderful Life', 'The Princess Bride.'

As for Tarantino movies, 'Pulp Fiction' will stand with the best for the test of time--it is a movie that I enjoy rewatching---so will 'Jackie Brown.' When you start with a Elmore Leonard plot and throw in Pam Grier as an older hot momma you have a movie with legs--long legs.

Rap

0 Replies

@blatham,

I find his movies very enjoyable, and think he's very talented in the sense that he is very clever, rather than great. Absolutely nothing wrong with being very clever of course, it's something I very much admire in those who are.

Using Frank's example, Van Gogh was something really new, not just a clever repackaging of prior styles.

If future audience regard Tarrantino films as a window on a period of time in American film history, they will actually be looking at a window on American cinema of the 50's and 60's and Hong Kong cinema of a similar time period.

His films are the definition of derivative and and as such can never be truly considered timeless.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

The only Tarantino film that I think will really hold up over time is Kill Bill (both parts). Highly entertaining and very re-watchable.

I met the guy once, in Austin (where I believe he lived for a long time). Shook his hand at a party, and really wanted to talk to him, but I was super stoned and couldn't think of anything to say, so I chickened out.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

PULP FICTION AND INGLORIOUS BASTARDS are my favorite Tarantino romps. Didnt care for K Bill.

0 Replies

I never did get the love of Pulp Fiction. It has some actors I love to watch, but I looked on with a mix of revulsion and disappointment and barely hung in til the conclusion.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Perhaps I am thinking of "time" as a lot longer than others.

Rewatching a movie you saw in your lifetime, in my book, isn't standing up to the test of "time."

Holding up with time, to me, means that someone, long after the movie has hit the screen, finds it as good as the people contemporary to it's initial release.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

I think someone, 30-50 years from now, could get as much enjoyment from Kill Bill as I did. It doesn't rely upon any modern tropes or settings to understand the plot; actually, it's such a homage and throw-back to earlier Japanese and Chinese martial arts films, it's not even really a film OF it's own time.

I don't know if one's own lifetime can be the judge; if that were the case, I couldn't say that Star Wars will stand up to the 'test of time,' but it clearly looks like it's going to.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

If future audience regard Tarrantino films as a window on a period of time in American film history, they will actually be looking at a window on American cinema of the 50's and 60's and Hong Kong cinema of a similar time period.

There's something to that, I think. But most American film-makers are steeped in some cinema traditions, mostly American (with the caveat that they have to match some commercial baselines). For example, Spielberg could not have imagined a work like Run Lola Run because of the film traditions that he arose out of. At one point, I simply stopped attending to him because, though he was top drawer at execution, he didn't surprise me. And if surprise is absent, I'm just not interested. So, without being too trivial about it, all are derivative.

Of the current crop of US film-makers, the Coen brothers knock me out more than any others.

3 Replies

@blatham,

Theyre about half decent Ill agree. All except for OH BROTHER.

1 Reply

@blatham,

And most painters and novelists and poets and sculptors are steeped in some tradition of their art and that is why most works of art are not timeless.

1 Reply

@blatham,

Christopher Nolan's Memento will likely hold up over time.

0 Replies

MOVIES THAT DONT HOLD UP WITH TIME

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know