MovieChat Forums > Quentin Tarantino Discussion > Why the 10 film limit sucks

Why the 10 film limit sucks

posted 3 years ago by Drooch (5333)
6 replies | jump to latest

The world basically needs more Tarantino.

Actors need him - as well as T regularly resurrecting forgotten stars, and finding hidden gems like Cristoph W, the guy gets career best performances from all his actors.

Culture needs him - with political correctness suffocating Western Civilisation and especially Hollywood, T actually has the industry clout to give the middle finger to the woke monstrosity, gleefully dropping racial slurs and portraying ‘fucking hippies’ accurately.

Film needs him - the whole industry is just bland, repetitive, digital dreck dumbed down for the Chinese market. T’s films are exciting, intelligent and unpredictable. Plus he shoots on film, which looks so much better than digital. He’s keeping the medium, the art-form, and cinema’s alive.

We need him - Spielberg and Scorsese are still going strong but they’re pushing 80. There aren’t many proper filmmakers left, Fincher’s good but he rarely makes movies these days. We need the likes of T to make stuff that’s actually worth watching.

I wish he’d just take a break and leave the door open to making a new film if inspiration strikes, but he seems adamant about the 10 film limit. He’s an egomaniac and very conscious of his ‘brand’. Perhaps he can sense that he’s spent his creative load when it comes to film 🤷🏻‍♂️

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8449) 3 years ago

I agree. For someone who is absolutely obsessed with movies and Hollywood, it certainly seems strange that he would impose a limit on himself like this. He doesn't seem the type. It seems instead that he'd be like Eastwood and just keep making movies until one day he has a heart attack on set and that's it.

[–] ebhaynz (3614) 3 years ago

I think that's it, he's obsessed with Hollywood and hates what has become of it.

[–] Drooch (5333) 3 years ago

But he is one of the few that can transcend the toilet that is modern Hollywood. Hell, he even states that he hated 80’s cinema and wanted to reinvigorate it - that’s what compelled him to surface in the first place.

He says that fatherhood & family is the main reason to retire, as well as wanting to go out on a high. He wants to write novels and plays instead. I suspect he’ll continue to run The New Beverly and remain a commentator on podcasts.

If he’s not directing, I’d like him to produce and fund projects that reject wokism. I used to think he’d get bored snd would feel an overwhelming desire to write and direct again, but listening to him recently… it’s for real. 10 then out.

[–] Mrmojo4700 (20766) 3 years ago

I think he’s seen all his favorite directors stay in the game too long so he wants to call it quits while he’s on top. I hate the idea of him leaving too.

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8449) 3 years ago

Eh, I'd say a lot of directors are still quite strong and putting out good work in their later years. Scorsese, Eastwood and Spielberg come to mind. Ridley Scott is a little more hit-and-miss but he still makes at least one good movie for every bad one.

[–] Mrmojo4700 (20766) 3 years ago

Yes, but do we know who Tarantino’s favorite directors are?