THE BORE
General => The Superdeep Borehole => Topic started by: Phoenix Dark on February 07, 2008, 11:23:49 AM
-
Talks about the faults of Jackie Brown, the origin of Death Proof, tidbit on Inglorious Bastards, what he's reading, his opinion on digital, and more at the link
How is 'Inglorious Bastards' going?
I've got tons of material and a lot of stuff written but now I've figured out what to do, I gotta start from page one, square one. I started just before I came on this trip and brought the stuff with me but I haven't had a chance to continue yet. But maybe on the flight back home I'll come back into it. I love writing in other countries. It's a lot of fun
Discussing the origin of Death Proof:
So then I started thinking about what I could do. And the first idea was a bunch of young college history students that were going through a tour of the plantations of the old South. And there's a ghost of an old slave that is part of negro folklore. Jody the Grinder actually went down and bested the devil, by fucking him. And so the devil put him on earth for all eternity to fuck white women. And that was the devil's punishment.
The opening scene would take place in the classroom, with the professor telling the story of Jody the Grinder in a big four-page monologue. I would probably have had Sam Jackson playing that part. And it was really good. But then I didn't have anywhere to go with it, because if you have a story about a killer slave with supermacho powers done in the style of a slasher films, then even if he's doing it today, and even if the white girls are innocent, how can you not be on the slave's side?
And then it hit me - and actually this was one of the things that was really funny in the Sight & Sound review - "Death Proof in no way resembles the kind of genre movie that used to be projected until it fell to pieces in the fleapits of America" (S&S, October 2007). In answer to that - and this is something I said to myself when I was coming up with the story - I never do proper genre movies. It's like using the fact that Reservoir Dogs isn't a proper heist film even though it fits in the genre, as a slag against it. And what is so good about slasher films is they are all the same. This is why they are so much fun to write subtextual film criticism about, because all your arguments really work for a vast majority of films. And if you try to monkey about just a little too much with it then now you're not even really making a slasher film.
Where does your girl dialogue come from?
This is gonna sound like a smartass answer, but I have to say, it's obvious, but it so needs to be said. I'm a good writer. It's what I'm supposed to be able to do. It needs to be said. It's not like I overheard some friends. It's my job to be interested in other people's humanity and not just write about myself. Having said that, there was something that added to the authenticity of these ladies. For the last five years I've had a lot of different posses of female friends. You know, these three black girls over here, these four Korean girls over here, these waitresses over here, these more posh club owners over there... I have male friends but up until recently they were more one on one. I didn't roll with a crew. But with women I did. And in most cases, it wasn't like they were my crew, I was part of their posse. It wasn't like Quentin and his bitches, even though it looks like that when we walk into a club. I just realised as I finished the script that, wow, they're here! This is almost my love letter to them. I got the chance so say all their funniest lines, and a couple of the girls are based on girls in particular, and a couple of them aren't but were informed by my knowledge of femininity. What I'm particularly proud about is that the fact that the women sound like girls today, not me remembering what it was like with the girls in the tavern in college. I'm always having them say antiquated phrases because that's my dialogue, they are all going to be wordsmiths. But they sound like women generally today, and one of my biggest pleasures about the movie is girls watch the movie and they say: you know, that is exactly like me and my friends talking last fucking night.
:lol QT rolling into a club :lol
Slasher analysis
In a weird way this goes back to Death Proof, because one of the biggest inspirations for the film, especially the first half of the movie - the more slasher-oriented section - was Carol Clover's book Men, Women and Chainsaws. I really truly think that her chapter on the 'final girl', the role that gender plays in the slasher film, pins down the best piece of film criticism I've ever read. It gave me a new love for slasher films and one of the things that I was doing when I was watching that movie was applying her lessons.
Everything about the film suggests that the character Butterfly played by Vanessa Ferlito is the final girl. And she has all the qualities. She's the odd girl out with her friends. She's not a virgin, but she is the only one that doesn't get any kind of action in the movie. She does seem a little bit more reserved or at least she pretends to be more reserved. When she does make out with the guys, she won't let anybody else know about it. Her other friends are more open, they talk more body and about sex. She is the female character with the investigator gaze, the one that smells something rotten, she notices the car, and that something is not quite right. It's never so bad that she has to bring it up. She doesn't want to be embarrassed.
You do want her to survive?
Yes, and I gotta say, as shocking to audiences as the crash itself is, there's even more when she gets it, because they weren't prepared for her to get it. I've been giving subconscious hints that she's gonna be ok, which to me makes it all the more exciting. When later you see Zoë on that hood, I know you know that now I'm not to be trusted.
Question: People talk about the death of cinema but all you really see is the death of their particular generation's cinema. Everything you see between the age of 18 and 25 is hugely important.
QT: I remember 25 years ago reading critics slugging on Lucas, on De Palma, on Spielberg saying these guys are so talented but they've dedicated their lives to recreating the junk of their childhood. I guess the same people could say that about me and Robert Rodriguez.
I'd like to make a spy movie. I can't ever imagine that I'm doing it though because, as much as I'm attracted to it, it ultimately would be just pictures of people talking to each other. One of the books that I'm reading right now is Len Deighton's Berlin Game, part of the 'Game, Set and Match' trilogy. So I'm reading Berlin Game. I actually read it before years ago and I didn't properly get into Mexico Set, and now I have to read them all over again.
Digital
Question: Can you imagine yourself making a film like 'Sin City'?
QT: I would have thought not. I'm not a fan of digital. And I sound like I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth when it comes to Robert. When Robert does it, it's great. That's where Robert is coming from. He just wants to do everything himself and digital allows him to do that. Why would you hire a cinematographer? If you're doing a digital movie it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. All you need to do is look to the screen to see if you like it. Gaffer do this, do that... you could be your own cinematographer. No cinematographer should be promoting digital. It makes them as obsolete as a dodo bird. But in the case of Sin City, and probably 300, you know you could never have made those movies on film.
To me 97 per cent of the use of digital is laziness. They are trying to make it easier on themselves, and it shows. If you don't care enough about your movie to shoot it yourself, I don't care enough about it enough to see it. But in those cases where they are creating a whole new cinematic landscape, I can't be churlish about that. I've got to give it up. It adds another possibility in which to tell stories, and create pictures. But normally, even with, say, what David Fincher used in Zodiac, I think what the fuck is that about? I found it more interesting in my brain than I did watching it. I thought Apocalypto was a masterpiece. Then I found out he did it in digital and it lessened the effort for me. Using this Mount Everest analogy again, the mountain got smaller and the achievement was a little less.
http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/feature/49432
-
Discussing the origin of Death Proof:
So then I started thinking about what I could do. And the first idea was a bunch of young college history students that were going through a tour of the plantations of the old South. And there's a ghost of an old slave that is part of negro folklore. Jody the Grinder actually went down and bested the devil, by fucking him. And so the devil put him on earth for all eternity to fuck white women. And that was the devil's punishment.
This is so an EB script. :rofl
-
i've never heard about this particular bit of american folklore
sounds fascinating
-
Why would digital make it easier? serious question
-
Why would digital make it easier? serious question
because you don't have to wait for dailys to see how something looks in regards to lighting and the like
you look on the monitor and that's exactly what digital looks like
there's a GREAT documentary on it for Once Upon a Time in Mexico
-
Why would digital make it easier? serious question
because you don't have to wait for dailys to see how something looks in regards to lighting and the like
you look on the monitor and that's exactly what digital looks like
there's a GREAT documentary on it for Once Upon a Time in Mexico
Also have you noticed how films that rely on digital often put less emphasis on good acting and writing? Clone Wars is a great example in the sense that so many scenes are digitally spiced up, and it's so obvious the actors are secondary prop pieces. Same with Sin City, although I'm more forgiving there because of the content it's based on.
I love Zodiac but some of the digital backgrounds are rather jarring, particularly the scenes on Washington St. (where the cab driver crime scene is)
-
i honestly didn't notice any of the digital in zodiac and didn't know it was digital until it was mentioned in this thread
-
For sho'?
-
yeah. not that i can recall. but i only watched it in theaters once. so it's not like i've seen it on a home system recently
-
Ah ok; I have it on DVD and have seen it about 3 times. Plus I don't wear glasses! :bow
-
it seems like he actually might not have been drunk for this interview.
i honestly didn't notice any of the digital in zodiac and didn't know it was digital until it was mentioned in this thread
same for me. I know there were a few because I looked for them on the DVD but I wasn't bothered by it.
digital making actors worse is bullshit. they spend more time setting up each scene when using film but using shit like clone wars as an example is idiotic. the acting wasn't any better in the original trilogy.
-
Great interview excerpts.