This is exactly how an interview has to be executed. Ask the question & just let the person answer it to the best of his/her knowledge rather than putting words in there mouths
@@mikecantreed Shut up. You knew what he ment. No need to correct every grammatical error you come across in UA-cam comments. It just makes you look petty.
100% great interview. I’d love to be an interviewer you as a question zone off and ask another when they have answered it. Walk home with a check of thousands. 😂😂 joking obviously there is more to it then just that
This is the difference between a good interviewer and a person who wants to impose an idea. Also, a good interviewer makes the question and don't interrupts you.
Jay Dog Dan Rather is the shit. the big interview is an awesome show. even when the guest is someone I'm not interested in, I end up finding the interview to be interesting. he has a way of bringing out the best in his guests. there is always a sense of respect among the interviewer and the guest.
He just wanted to make sure the point of his question was not “why do you make violent movies?” but rather “how do make you make violence enjoyable and funny?”
It’s funny how commenter after commenter refers to him as “the interviewer”. That’s Dan Rather, one of the most acclaimed and recognizable figures in the last 60 years of media lol
Dan Rather interviewed organized crime figures and terrorist leaders who could have had him killed at the drop of the hat. He’s not afraid of a movie director.
This guy is a world class host and phenomenal interverviewer . The talent he has to speak without words its amazing. Q spoke really openly on the exact way he feels when he makes his 🎥
I’m new to good cinema and just wanted to get my noob thought here. I find violence in Tarantino’s movies fun not at first, but after you actually think about it another time: at first you go like “wtf this guys just got his head blown off” and after you realise how surreal and over the top that scene was and you actually laugh at it. I didn’t get this thought process anywhere else but with Grand Budapest Hotel, even though it wasn’t for violence but for the plot itself
Life is a movie, meaning "moving"...Tragic. Funny. Pity. War. Love etc...and rest then it all begins again...if you don't like it then turn the t.v. off.
Liking violence or appreciating it is not directly correlated to having the capacity to commit violence. Many people seem to misunderstand how fiction or films can affect a human, mainly in how emotions are tied to action. Ancient Greek theatre, which is notorious for its abundance of tragedy, was so popular and revered because of its capacity to bring relief to the audience. It wasn't that they loved to see the characters suffer or that they had inherent sadistic tendencies, but more that they could experience the emotion without action. Humans are not all good and they are not all evil and the role of "fake" violence and emotion is to portray that. Showing violence is a form of catharsis, a way for a person to process that emotion, because humans need a way to de-stress in order to become fully functional and sane members of society.
Only now I realized Quentin loves to manipulate and be at the wheel of his viewers feelings, reactions and thought. And to lead them to the extreme, particularly (not only but also) with extreme violence. He is a really good storyteller and an intelligent guy but, to my view, a twisted mind character. Maybe that is where his “genius” resides. Not a fan at all of his movies ultra violent parts but definitely a fan of his scripts and dialogues.
No one talks about Sam Raimi’s Evil Dead series, or The thing, or the God Father, or stantley kubrik’s violent movies, or Francis Ford Capola’s Apocalypse Now. Tarantino just made the violent genre popular and mainstream.
I know qt gets pissed off when people ask him about his violence which in some of his films is gratuitous & gore porn. So when he is in a different interview 5 yrs later maybe the people watching dont know what he has answered & dont feel like doing research about it. If ur proud of the violence why be mad to be asked about it? I do wonder how some of the things he has put in movies comes from. Same of stephen king. Why does violence gore torture & murder come from his mind ? It's just an interesting question. I can understand violence in a war film . I just dont see being entertained by certain things in his films. Like I go to watch a movie to escape I guess when I was a kid in the 90s my parents & to be fair most parents did not monitor what their kids watched on cable. The cop scene in reservoir dogs really disturbed me. I saw it a couple years after it came out bc I loved pulp fiction. So I wanted to watch his first major film . I was 12 & I really had nightmares about the depravity of that scene with the cop. Years later in his famous interview with that woman in the hat " cause it's so much fun jan !!!" He says his movies are fine for 12 & up if they have really " cool parents " as a 12 year old I was deeply disturbed. Pulp fiction was a more funny film & the their isnt really a lot if gore. Also I'm shocked QT hasnt been cancelled for having his character say the n word a bunch of times to a black man. It wasnt the n word ending with a but er.
Rather's question was really about violence in his films but had to throw in the laughter angle just so Quentin, who is really sensitive about violence in his films, will not get angry. Most of the comedy in his films has to do with violent characters saying mundane things (example would be Travolta and Jackson in Pulp Fiction) and this incongruity makes people laugh. Quentin doesn't really write jokes in his films and uses violence as a mere plot device.
Boom!!! That is how white people need to beeee! Recognize that the past is not cookie cutter, it was brutal especially for slaves and their families! I love love love his films, he depicts the past as it was, no holding back. My ancestors didn’t have to endure what black families did, I need to learn about this, I need to feel the brutality because it is complete white privilege if you don’t at least acknowledge it.
Every movie that comes out looks just like the movie that came out the week before. I can't even stand to watch new movies anymore. But I always watch Tarantino. He takes from past works like every great artist but the difference is he makes it feel new. He makes it better.
@@snapcracklepop711 He is totally overhyped. Watch City on fire. He copied that movie scene from scene in Reservoir dogs. On other movies he totally copied Sergio Leone and Akira Kurosawa.
@@MemoryLaneCinema I know all those movies. He reworks the material effectively, not as a thief. You want to see what a ripoff looks like? Watch any modern summer blockbuster.
@@MemoryLaneCinema O really? Then explain Kill Bill & what movie Tarantino saw that inspired him to make it. Bet you can't even name it without looking it up. Those 2 movies are completely different yet both revenge movies. Tarantino has yet to copy a movie. He ALWAYS makes changes.
Tarantino's apparently thoughtful answer is simply misdirection. He is diverting us from the fact that he tries to persuade his audience to enjoy sadism, which he feels is justified by making the hero the victim in the cycle of violent revenge and thus righteous in taking blood for blood. Are we as a species so misguided that we don't question the psychological health effects of enjoying the misfortune of another, albeit a fictional one? Given that violence in real life is rife, despite having declined historically (read The Better Angels of Our Nature for a comprehensive breakdown) and that establishing causal links for motivators of violent behaviour is notoriously difficult, does no-one see that dismissing the possibility of a link could be dangerously lazy thinking?
Musta Krakish, if that’s his intention though (which he has testified to in different words), do you not think he may be having a bad effect on society?
No. I think the ambiguity of the discussion on this ends at 2:27, with "stop laughing". No one is laughing at a Mandingo fight. You might laugh at how into it Calvin Candie is, but that's only because you're realizing how horrifying it is that human beings actually go to these lengths. If a film isn't designed to be a good time, way less people will see it. I think for QT to be so fearless and unflinching with his inclusion of historically accurate, seriously traumatizing and gut-wrenching acts of humanity's dark side is extremely commendable, because he's bringing the discussion into more households. If we forget the nitty-gritty of our darkest histories, we're more likely to repeat the mistakes of the past in the future. To your credit though Tobo, I agree that it's perhaps foolish to outright state that something isn't having a negative effect on society. I suppose we can never really state for sure where a line gets crossed, but I think a school shooter is far more motivated by loneliness and their damaging mental environments than they are a fictitious portrayal of violence.
You are seriously stupid. You're the kind of people that are hated especially by Quentin. You aren't supposed to 'enjoy' the sad scenes in his movies. They are meant to invoke an emotional reaction. And if a film can pull that off then that's impressive.
Dude what a fucking idiot you are. If violence in films and videogames affected society, we'd be living in the most violent era in history as literally everyone now including kids play and watch ultra violent games and films all the time. As you said, violence has been in decline as history follows, he didn't misguided his answer, what he said is literally part of what makes the art of film making so great, and anyone who loves films, and works in films, would agree with me. If someone loves watching someone else suffer on screen or real life, that particular individual is the one who's got problems. Also totally different watching an actor get "killed" fictionally than enjoying real life violence. You know it's all fake, you can enjoy it, it doesn't mean you'll enjoy it in real life. A mature person is able to differentiate between what's real and what's not. What would help society is not having guns, and investing A LOT more in education, culture, and also implementing ethical and moral values in schools as something really important and obligatory, not just a basic side class. Censorship has not helped anyone at all, ever. Also that's why films got classifications, not the same watching Pulp Fiction as a kid, than being an adult or even a mature minded (to some extent) teenager. These movies are made for adults. Also art is a reflection of society, not the other way around.
POPULAR OPINION: Love Tarantino. My favorite Director of all time. Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill are masterpieces. Deathproof and also Django were excellent movies. UNPOPULAR OPINION: But Inglorious Bastards had nothing to do with this "Orchestra" analogy. It was more like an Opera. Boring and somnolent. Even Jackie Brown was better.
Auto dislike because of you're unpopular opinion. Jackie Brown was not even remotely close to being better than Inglorious. Inglorious is Tarantino's 2nd best movie. Jackie Brown isn't even in his Top 5.
a movie is weak if it needs violence to be entertaining. if he really is talented, he'd tone it down. unfortunately government and hollywood decided violence should become mainstream which gives this guy fame and fortune. he belongs in the b movie genre and should never have been given the chances he's had
@adam kings Tarantino has toned it down. People don't really remember Jackie Brown but there were only about three actual gun fires in it. He is a talented filmmaker. If what you were saying was true then Dawn of the Dead and Jason X would be hailed as the greatest movies of all time. Not saying they're bad. Obviously he had advantages but no successful filmmaker never had no advantages.
This is exactly how an interview has to be executed. Ask the question & just let the person answer it to the best of his/her knowledge rather than putting words in there mouths
*their
@@mikecantreed Shut up. You knew what he ment. No need to correct every grammatical error you come across in UA-cam comments. It just makes you look petty.
💯💯
100% great interview. I’d love to be an interviewer you as a question zone off and ask another when they have answered it. Walk home with a check of thousands. 😂😂 joking obviously there is more to it then just that
@@mikecantreed That's just another option. You don't _have_ to write that.
This is the difference between a good interviewer and a person who wants to impose an idea.
Also, a good interviewer makes the question and don't interrupts you.
Right, just don't ask an inconvenient questions? You really know the meaning of dialogue! ;)
the way the interviewer just sits there smiling is funny to me
Jay Dog Dan Rather is the shit. the big interview is an awesome show. even when the guest is someone I'm not interested in, I end up finding the interview to be interesting. he has a way of bringing out the best in his guests. there is always a sense of respect among the interviewer and the guest.
Why?
Omg! I love the fact how subtle way he asked the question. Brilliant.
this interviewer is so respectful and really listens to him. Thats amazing
This interviewer?! That's Dan frickin Rather!
The interviewer approached this so cautiously. He feared Quentin’s response 😂
He knows his triggers so he wanted to ask the question without offending him.
He didn’t fear him, he respected him.
He just wanted to make sure the point of his question was not “why do you make violent movies?” but rather “how do make you make violence enjoyable and funny?”
It’s funny how commenter after commenter refers to him as “the interviewer”. That’s Dan Rather, one of the most acclaimed and recognizable figures in the last 60 years of media lol
Dan Rather interviewed organized crime figures and terrorist leaders who could have had him killed at the drop of the hat. He’s not afraid of a movie director.
This guy is a world class host and phenomenal interverviewer . The talent he has to speak without words its amazing. Q spoke really openly on the exact way he feels when he makes his 🎥
I love you, Quentin.
Cevahir Ileri I bet you do ;) kissy kissy
This is why Tarantino is such a good director
good? wow. Biggest copycat ever.
The greatness of his work comes from his writing. I would rather he let more talented directors do his movies.
@@MemoryLaneCinema Huh? what movie did django copy? what movie did kill bill copy? what movie did pulp fiction copy?
@@MemoryLaneCinemahe can copy all he wants if he makes it better
What a sweet elderly gentleman and the voice on the man sounds so comforting and as smooth as silk
I LOVE THIS INTERVIEWER. GOD BLESS
He is a great interviewer.
Plus the age factor, he is so humble. ❤️
Mr Rather and your team, would you please share the longer, one hour version of this great interview? Thank you.
Tarantino is one of those directors can make violence movie and you don’t feel depressed after watching it
Amazing interviewer, and you could see Quintin enjoying the conversation.
What a charming interviewer
This guy is beyond chill.
that's a good interviewer
That was a fantastic question
That interviewers smile is burned in my brain 😂
Probably the most professional interview with Quentin, everyone else just pisses him off
Fucking genius man
I really like this and I agree very much with that what Quentin says. The thing is the way he pictures it sounds pretty simple; although it is not :D
Tarantino is amazing, and he does play us as an audience - awesomely!!!
I want a life WRITTEN & DIRECTED BY Quentin Tarantino . It would be so much fun. 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
A movie about Quentin Tarantino. Written and Directed by Quentin Tarantino. If that isn't sanctimonious I don't know what it is. Hahaha
Sweet interviewer. So cute 💙
the difference between keeping it funny, and keeping it real but being able to laugh again after.
I’m new to good cinema and just wanted to get my noob thought here. I find violence in Tarantino’s movies fun not at first, but after you actually think about it another time: at first you go like “wtf this guys just got his head blown off” and after you realise how surreal and over the top that scene was and you actually laugh at it. I didn’t get this thought process anywhere else but with Grand Budapest Hotel, even though it wasn’t for violence but for the plot itself
Life is a movie, meaning "moving"...Tragic. Funny. Pity. War. Love etc...and rest then it all begins again...if you don't like it then turn the t.v. off.
The interviewer reminds me of Brooks out of the Shawshank redemption
The interviewer? Am I at the age where people don’t know who Dan Rather is?!
Liking violence or appreciating it is not directly correlated to having the capacity to commit violence. Many people seem to misunderstand how fiction or films can affect a human, mainly in how emotions are tied to action. Ancient Greek theatre, which is notorious for its abundance of tragedy, was so popular and revered because of its capacity to bring relief to the audience. It wasn't that they loved to see the characters suffer or that they had inherent sadistic tendencies, but more that they could experience the emotion without action. Humans are not all good and they are not all evil and the role of "fake" violence and emotion is to portray that. Showing violence is a form of catharsis, a way for a person to process that emotion, because humans need a way to de-stress in order to become fully functional and sane members of society.
Only now I realized Quentin loves to manipulate and be at the wheel of his viewers feelings, reactions and thought. And to lead them to the extreme, particularly (not only but also) with extreme violence. He is a really good storyteller and an intelligent guy but, to my view, a twisted mind character. Maybe that is where his “genius” resides. Not a fan at all of his movies ultra violent parts but definitely a fan of his scripts and dialogues.
Fantastic interviewer
Why does no one know Dan Rather is, and they refer to him as the interviewer?! He's a broadcast journalist legend
No one talks about Sam Raimi’s Evil Dead series, or The thing, or the God Father, or stantley kubrik’s violent movies, or Francis Ford Capola’s Apocalypse Now. Tarantino just made the violent genre popular and mainstream.
He made Pulp Fiction, not Pulp Reality.
ARTICUUUUUUULE
Better than that punjabi guy from channel4
Fucking master class interviewer skills
looks like Quintin fell into a toaster oven.
Heeeeeeeeeee's TOASTED !
:D
genius
Dan Rather, the last American journalist.
I know qt gets pissed off when people ask him about his violence which in some of his films is gratuitous & gore porn. So when he is in a different interview 5 yrs later maybe the people watching dont know what he has answered & dont feel like doing research about it. If ur proud of the violence why be mad to be asked about it? I do wonder how some of the things he has put in movies comes from. Same of stephen king. Why does violence gore torture & murder come from his mind ? It's just an interesting question. I can understand violence in a war film . I just dont see being entertained by certain things in his films. Like I go to watch a movie to escape I guess when I was a kid in the 90s my parents & to be fair most parents did not monitor what their kids watched on cable. The cop scene in reservoir dogs really disturbed me. I saw it a couple years after it came out bc I loved pulp fiction. So I wanted to watch his first major film . I was 12 & I really had nightmares about the depravity of that scene with the cop. Years later in his famous interview with that woman in the hat " cause it's so much fun jan !!!" He says his movies are fine for 12 & up if they have really " cool parents " as a 12 year old I was deeply disturbed. Pulp fiction was a more funny film & the their isnt really a lot if gore. Also I'm shocked QT hasnt been cancelled for having his character say the n word a bunch of times to a black man. It wasnt the n word ending with a but er.
Rather's question was really about violence in his films but had to throw in the laughter angle just so Quentin, who is really sensitive about violence in his films, will not get angry. Most of the comedy in his films has to do with violent characters saying mundane things (example would be Travolta and Jackson in Pulp Fiction) and this incongruity makes people laugh. Quentin doesn't really write jokes in his films and uses violence as a mere plot device.
Spielberg does violence more appropriate than any filmmaker alive or dead. Tarantino is a nerd playing around, which is fine.
How do you feel about Paul verhoeven?
@@Johnlindsey289 I like him. Comedic violence mostly. Starship troopers and total recall are fun. Basic instinct violence just intended to shock.
@@mrp3263
What about in Robocop? what makes Tarantino different than Verhoeven?
@@Johnlindsey289 nothing really.
@@Johnlindsey289 Verhoeven is absolutely on another level to Tarantino. He creates entire palpable alternate world's, that completely suck you in.
Martin good actor in taxi driver. Quinton not that good actor.
Accurate
Neither are good. But I actually like Director cameos.
Boom!!! That is how white people need to beeee! Recognize that the past is not cookie cutter, it was brutal especially for slaves and their families! I love love love his films, he depicts the past as it was, no holding back. My ancestors didn’t have to endure what black families did, I need to learn about this, I need to feel the brutality because it is complete white privilege if you don’t at least acknowledge it.
Quentin is just a lunatic with pointless movies and he can't be called a human because he loves violence and savagery
biggest copycat ever
Every movie that comes out looks just like the movie that came out the week before. I can't even stand to watch new movies anymore. But I always watch Tarantino. He takes from past works like every great artist but the difference is he makes it feel new. He makes it better.
@@snapcracklepop711 He is totally overhyped. Watch City on fire. He copied that movie scene from scene in Reservoir dogs. On other movies he totally copied Sergio Leone and Akira Kurosawa.
@@MemoryLaneCinema I know all those movies. He reworks the material effectively, not as a thief. You want to see what a ripoff looks like? Watch any modern summer blockbuster.
@@MemoryLaneCinema
O really? Then explain Kill Bill & what movie Tarantino saw that inspired him to make it. Bet you can't even name it without looking it up. Those 2 movies are completely different yet both revenge movies. Tarantino has yet to copy a movie. He ALWAYS makes changes.
Tarantino's apparently thoughtful answer is simply misdirection. He is diverting us from the fact that he tries to persuade his audience to enjoy sadism, which he feels is justified by making the hero the victim in the cycle of violent revenge and thus righteous in taking blood for blood. Are we as a species so misguided that we don't question the psychological health effects of enjoying the misfortune of another, albeit a fictional one? Given that violence in real life is rife, despite having declined historically (read The Better Angels of Our Nature for a comprehensive breakdown) and that establishing causal links for motivators of violent behaviour is notoriously difficult, does no-one see that dismissing the possibility of a link could be dangerously lazy thinking?
If you were 'enjoying' those scenes he mentioned in the interview, you're the one who's misguided.
Musta Krakish, if that’s his intention though (which he has testified to in different words), do you not think he may be having a bad effect on society?
No. I think the ambiguity of the discussion on this ends at 2:27, with "stop laughing". No one is laughing at a Mandingo fight. You might laugh at how into it Calvin Candie is, but that's only because you're realizing how horrifying it is that human beings actually go to these lengths. If a film isn't designed to be a good time, way less people will see it. I think for QT to be so fearless and unflinching with his inclusion of historically accurate, seriously traumatizing and gut-wrenching acts of humanity's dark side is extremely commendable, because he's bringing the discussion into more households. If we forget the nitty-gritty of our darkest histories, we're more likely to repeat the mistakes of the past in the future.
To your credit though Tobo, I agree that it's perhaps foolish to outright state that something isn't having a negative effect on society. I suppose we can never really state for sure where a line gets crossed, but I think a school shooter is far more motivated by loneliness and their damaging mental environments than they are a fictitious portrayal of violence.
You are seriously stupid. You're the kind of people that are hated especially by Quentin. You aren't supposed to 'enjoy' the sad scenes in his movies. They are meant to invoke an emotional reaction. And if a film can pull that off then that's impressive.
Dude what a fucking idiot you are.
If violence in films and videogames affected society, we'd be living in the most violent era in history as literally everyone now including kids play and watch ultra violent games and films all the time. As you said, violence has been in decline as history follows, he didn't misguided his answer, what he said is literally part of what makes the art of film making so great, and anyone who loves films, and works in films, would agree with me. If someone loves watching someone else suffer on screen or real life, that particular individual is the one who's got problems. Also totally different watching an actor get "killed" fictionally than enjoying real life violence. You know it's all fake, you can enjoy it, it doesn't mean you'll enjoy it in real life. A mature person is able to differentiate between what's real and what's not. What would help society is not having guns, and investing A LOT more in education, culture, and also implementing ethical and moral values in schools as something really important and obligatory, not just a basic side class. Censorship has not helped anyone at all, ever. Also that's why films got classifications, not the same watching Pulp Fiction as a kid, than being an adult or even a mature minded (to some extent) teenager. These movies are made for adults. Also art is a reflection of society, not the other way around.
POPULAR OPINION: Love Tarantino. My favorite Director of all time. Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill are masterpieces. Deathproof and also Django were excellent movies.
UNPOPULAR OPINION: But Inglorious Bastards had nothing to do with this "Orchestra" analogy. It was more like an Opera. Boring and somnolent. Even Jackie Brown was better.
The farm scene in inglorious Bastard was a beauty of film making, altough I agree the rest didn't hold.
I didn’t like the hateful eight it was kinda slow
Auto dislike because of you're unpopular opinion. Jackie Brown was not even remotely close to being better than Inglorious. Inglorious is Tarantino's 2nd best movie. Jackie Brown isn't even in his Top 5.
@@boxingman4077
His worst movie.
a movie is weak if it needs violence to be entertaining. if he really is talented, he'd tone it down. unfortunately government and hollywood decided violence should become mainstream which gives this guy fame and fortune. he belongs in the b movie genre and should never have been given the chances he's had
adam kings stfu liberal
@adam kings Tarantino has toned it down. People don't really remember Jackie Brown but there were only about three actual gun fires in it. He is a talented filmmaker. If what you were saying was true then Dawn of the Dead and Jason X would be hailed as the greatest movies of all time. Not saying they're bad.
Obviously he had advantages but no successful filmmaker never had no advantages.
I think he tries to make B movie grindhouse movies but he's so knowledgable about filmmaking that he turns out A movies disguised as B movies.
ur fat
Django Unchained is not a good movie because of violence.