WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.540 Welcome to the Deep Dive. We're the show that 00:00:02.540 --> 00:00:05.540 unpacks the careers of modern giants, looking 00:00:05.540 --> 00:00:07.740 at, you know, the hidden gears behind their biggest 00:00:07.740 --> 00:00:10.599 hits and, well, the controversies that often 00:00:10.599 --> 00:00:13.179 follow them around. And today we're putting a 00:00:13.179 --> 00:00:15.500 really monumental filmography under the microscope. 00:00:15.720 --> 00:00:17.719 We're talking about the work of Quentin Tarantino. 00:00:18.089 --> 00:00:20.170 Yeah, the ultimate movie kid, right? The one 00:00:20.170 --> 00:00:22.629 who actually turned into this major auteur. He 00:00:22.629 --> 00:00:24.929 really is. I mean, you could argue he's the single 00:00:24.929 --> 00:00:26.809 most influential director of his generation. 00:00:26.809 --> 00:00:31.250 He's got this unique style. It's a mix of graphic 00:00:31.250 --> 00:00:34.729 violence, sure, but also these long, witty, pop 00:00:34.729 --> 00:00:37.009 culture -heavy dialogues. And all held together 00:00:37.009 --> 00:00:39.909 by that signature nonlinear storytelling. He 00:00:39.909 --> 00:00:42.289 completely broke the mold with that. Exactly. 00:00:42.429 --> 00:00:46.090 So our mission today is to basically... Map out 00:00:46.090 --> 00:00:48.950 his whole career, starting from the beginning, 00:00:49.109 --> 00:00:51.530 the video store days. The non -traditional path, 00:00:51.829 --> 00:00:53.950 yeah. Right. Then look at his style. What makes 00:00:53.950 --> 00:00:57.310 a Tarantino film a Tarantino film? His influence, 00:00:57.509 --> 00:00:59.929 not just directing, but producing, curating. 00:01:00.090 --> 00:01:01.969 And exhibiting film, too, which is fascinating. 00:01:02.429 --> 00:01:04.430 And we have to tackle the controversies because 00:01:04.430 --> 00:01:06.590 they're a big part of his public image. Absolutely. 00:01:06.670 --> 00:01:09.650 The public persona, the clashes, and hanging 00:01:09.650 --> 00:01:12.379 over all of it is this countdown. His plan to 00:01:12.379 --> 00:01:15.239 stop after 10 films. It's a huge part of the 00:01:15.239 --> 00:01:17.500 narrative now. But before we dive into how he 00:01:17.500 --> 00:01:19.180 built all this, let's just quickly look at the 00:01:19.180 --> 00:01:21.219 sheer scale of it. I mean, the numbers are kind 00:01:21.219 --> 00:01:24.379 of staggering. They really are. His films collectively 00:01:24.379 --> 00:01:29.439 have grossed over $1 .9 billion worldwide. That's 00:01:29.439 --> 00:01:31.760 just huge. That's blockbuster money, not what 00:01:31.760 --> 00:01:33.540 you typically expect from an indie auteur, right? 00:01:33.640 --> 00:01:35.640 But then you balance that against the critical 00:01:35.640 --> 00:01:38.599 acclaim. Exactly. It's not just money. It's serious 00:01:38.599 --> 00:01:42.060 recognition. Two Academy Awards for Best Original 00:01:42.060 --> 00:01:44.780 Screenplay, Pulp Fiction, Django Unchained. It'd 00:01:44.780 --> 00:01:47.239 be BAFTAs as well. And the big one early on, 00:01:47.299 --> 00:01:49.739 The Palm Door at Cannes for Pulp Fiction. That 00:01:49.739 --> 00:01:51.719 really announced his arrival. He went from indie 00:01:51.719 --> 00:01:55.239 darling to like critical heavyweight almost overnight 00:01:55.239 --> 00:01:58.540 and completely on his own terms. OK, so to really 00:01:58.540 --> 00:02:00.420 get Tarantino, you have to understand where he 00:02:00.420 --> 00:02:02.739 came from. It wasn't the usual system. He basically 00:02:02.739 --> 00:02:05.299 emerged from, well, a library of movies. Born 00:02:05.299 --> 00:02:08.180 in Knoxville, Tennessee. Right. March 27th, 1963. 00:02:09.150 --> 00:02:11.909 Yeah, Quentin Jerome Tarantino. And his connection 00:02:11.909 --> 00:02:14.849 to pop culture was there from the start. He was 00:02:14.849 --> 00:02:17.210 partly named after Quinn Asper, Burt Reynolds' 00:02:17.370 --> 00:02:20.270 character in Gunsmoke. Huh, no way. And that 00:02:20.270 --> 00:02:24.310 famous self -taught film education. It's legendary 00:02:24.310 --> 00:02:27.210 now. He skipped film school. He did. Yeah, it's 00:02:27.210 --> 00:02:28.870 hard to believe looking at his films, isn't it? 00:02:28.889 --> 00:02:30.770 Right. But he essentially made his own film school. 00:02:30.909 --> 00:02:33.229 That famous quote. When people ask me if I went 00:02:33.229 --> 00:02:34.789 to film school, I tell them, no, I went to film. 00:02:34.849 --> 00:02:37.879 Exactly. And that education happened in a couple 00:02:37.879 --> 00:02:40.020 of key places. First, he was an usher at the 00:02:40.020 --> 00:02:43.099 Pussycat Theater, an adult movie house, soaking 00:02:43.099 --> 00:02:45.879 up genre films, the raw stuff. Right. And then 00:02:45.879 --> 00:02:48.680 the big one, video archives. The crucial five 00:02:48.680 --> 00:02:50.800 years working at video archives in Manhattan 00:02:50.800 --> 00:02:53.560 Beach. That's where it all clicked. Five years 00:02:53.560 --> 00:02:56.659 surrounded by tapes, recommending movies, arguing 00:02:56.659 --> 00:02:59.240 about them. That must have been like a firehose 00:02:59.240 --> 00:03:01.639 of film knowledge. Oh, totally. It wasn't just 00:03:01.639 --> 00:03:03.680 shelving videos. He and his friend Roger Avery, 00:03:03.840 --> 00:03:06.710 they were like curators. They'd championed obscure 00:03:06.710 --> 00:03:10.030 B -movies, foreign films, stuff nobody else was 00:03:10.030 --> 00:03:12.590 watching. So he was developing that taste, seeing 00:03:12.590 --> 00:03:15.650 the art and genres others dismissed. Yeah, soaking 00:03:15.650 --> 00:03:17.789 up visual styles, narrative tricks, dialogue 00:03:17.789 --> 00:03:20.930 rhythms. That video store, it basically became 00:03:20.930 --> 00:03:23.069 the source code for his whole aesthetic. It was 00:03:23.069 --> 00:03:25.289 his university. But before Reservoir Dogs blew 00:03:25.289 --> 00:03:27.250 up, there were some early attempts, weren't there? 00:03:27.330 --> 00:03:29.580 Almost like myths now. Oh, yeah. Definitely. 00:03:29.639 --> 00:03:32.879 Raw efforts. His very first known script was 00:03:32.879 --> 00:03:35.460 apparently written when he was just 14. Something 00:03:35.460 --> 00:03:38.060 called Captain Peach Fuzz and the Anchovy Bandit. 00:03:38.219 --> 00:03:41.240 Fantastic title. Isn't it? But more importantly, 00:03:41.319 --> 00:03:43.520 there was the uncompleted film My Best Friend's 00:03:43.520 --> 00:03:47.219 Birthday from 87 shot on 16 millimeter. A lot 00:03:47.219 --> 00:03:50.020 of that got lost right in a fire. Yeah. Partially 00:03:50.020 --> 00:03:52.400 destroyed in a lab fire, sadly. Right. But some 00:03:52.400 --> 00:03:54.919 dialogue, some scenes, they survived. And he 00:03:54.919 --> 00:03:57.099 ended up folding bits of that into the script 00:03:57.099 --> 00:03:59.479 for True Romance. So even then, he was learning 00:03:59.479 --> 00:04:02.000 to recycle, repurpose his own ideas. And the 00:04:02.000 --> 00:04:04.060 money to actually get going, the seed money, 00:04:04.180 --> 00:04:07.099 didn't come from some studio exec. It came from 00:04:07.099 --> 00:04:10.460 residuals. From Elvis. Well, playing Elvis. Yeah. 00:04:10.560 --> 00:04:13.699 In 1988, he had this bit partisan Elvis impersonator 00:04:13.699 --> 00:04:16.779 on The Golden Girls. The Golden Girls. Serious. 00:04:16.779 --> 00:04:19.420 Yep. The episode, Sophia's Wedding, part one. 00:04:20.000 --> 00:04:24.439 Got paid maybe $650 up front. But the episode 00:04:24.439 --> 00:04:27.600 was popular. Got rerun a lot. Ah, so the residuals 00:04:27.600 --> 00:04:29.459 kept coming in. Over the next three years, they 00:04:29.459 --> 00:04:32.600 added up to about $3 ,000. And that, plus the 00:04:32.600 --> 00:04:34.680 stuff salvaged from my best friend's birthday, 00:04:34.839 --> 00:04:37.100 that was basically the pre -production fund for 00:04:37.100 --> 00:04:39.959 his first real feature script. Which brings us 00:04:39.959 --> 00:04:43.279 to Reservoir Dogs, the breakthrough. And that 00:04:43.279 --> 00:04:46.000 script, apparently, he just churned it out. Three 00:04:46.000 --> 00:04:48.709 and a half weeks. Legend has it. The script was 00:04:48.709 --> 00:04:50.730 just electric. He met producer Lawrence Bender. 00:04:50.810 --> 00:04:52.850 It got passed around. Monty Hellman got involved. 00:04:53.170 --> 00:04:55.129 The director. Yeah, Bender got it to Hellman, 00:04:55.230 --> 00:04:57.990 who helped secure some initial funding. But the 00:04:57.990 --> 00:05:00.790 absolute game changer was Harvey Keitel reading 00:05:00.790 --> 00:05:02.990 it. Right. Keitel didn't just like it. He loved 00:05:02.990 --> 00:05:05.550 it. Signed on immediately. Agreed to act in it 00:05:05.550 --> 00:05:07.689 and put money into the budget. That was huge. 00:05:07.850 --> 00:05:10.410 Having an established Oscar -nominated actor 00:05:10.410 --> 00:05:13.269 backing this unknown kid, that gave it instant 00:05:13.269 --> 00:05:15.149 credibility. Made it more than just another low 00:05:15.149 --> 00:05:18.050 -budget indie. It had weight. So Reservoir Dogs 00:05:18.050 --> 00:05:21.610 hit Sundance in 92. And suddenly Tarantino, who 00:05:21.610 --> 00:05:24.790 wrote it, directed it, even acted in it as Mr. 00:05:24.910 --> 00:05:27.670 Brown. He's like a virgin interpretation. That 00:05:27.670 --> 00:05:30.529 guy. Suddenly he's the hottest new voice in Hollywood. 00:05:30.990 --> 00:05:33.329 But what's interesting is while he's doing this 00:05:33.329 --> 00:05:36.449 edgy indie stuff, he's also moonlighting. As 00:05:36.449 --> 00:05:39.209 a script doctor, yeah. Yeah. On big studio movies. 00:05:39.290 --> 00:05:41.870 That's the fascinating part. He did uncredited 00:05:41.870 --> 00:05:45.430 work polishing dialogue on huge films like Crimson 00:05:45.430 --> 00:05:48.490 Tide, The Rock. So he's seeing how the big machine 00:05:48.490 --> 00:05:50.750 works from the inside. Exactly. Learning about 00:05:50.750 --> 00:05:53.230 high -budget action filmmaking, but consciously 00:05:53.230 --> 00:05:55.730 choosing not to direct those kinds of films himself. 00:05:55.810 --> 00:05:58.230 He got offered massive projects, right? Speed, 00:05:58.490 --> 00:06:02.519 Men in Black. Turn them down. Why? Control. Pretty 00:06:02.519 --> 00:06:05.680 much. He prioritized his vision, his control 00:06:05.680 --> 00:06:08.019 over the material, instead of cashing in and 00:06:08.019 --> 00:06:10.339 directing, say, speed. He took his reservoir 00:06:10.339 --> 00:06:12.800 dog's money and went to Amsterdam. Yep. Pulled 00:06:12.800 --> 00:06:14.800 up and wrote Pulp Fiction. And when that came 00:06:14.800 --> 00:06:18.699 out in 1994, well, it wasn't just a movie. It 00:06:18.699 --> 00:06:21.100 was a phenomenon. It completely changed indie 00:06:21.100 --> 00:06:23.759 film, didn't it? Cemented his style, the violence, 00:06:23.899 --> 00:06:26.139 the dialogue, and especially that fragmented, 00:06:26.160 --> 00:06:29.000 non -linear structure. Absolutely. And the success 00:06:29.000 --> 00:06:33.139 was insane. Over $200 million worldwide. Wins 00:06:33.139 --> 00:06:35.540 the Palme d 'Or, gets him and Roger Avery the 00:06:35.540 --> 00:06:38.680 Oscar for Best Original Screenplay. It proved 00:06:38.680 --> 00:06:40.740 you didn't need a straight line to tell a story 00:06:40.740 --> 00:06:43.120 that connected with a massive audience. Okay, 00:06:43.160 --> 00:06:45.500 so let's dig into that style. From the video 00:06:45.500 --> 00:06:48.620 store origins to the actual cinematic signature, 00:06:48.839 --> 00:06:52.060 people call his work postmodern. What does that 00:06:52.060 --> 00:06:55.459 really mean for a film like Pulp Fiction? Well, 00:06:55.480 --> 00:06:57.519 yeah, he's obviously drawing heavily on film 00:06:57.519 --> 00:06:59.319 history. He's not creating in a vacuum. Right, 00:06:59.360 --> 00:07:02.019 he's a massive film nerd. Exactly. The postmodern 00:07:02.019 --> 00:07:04.779 part is really about the synthesis. He takes 00:07:04.779 --> 00:07:07.420 genres that were maybe looked down on, spaghetti 00:07:07.420 --> 00:07:10.660 westerns, blaxploitation, Hong Kong martial arts 00:07:10.660 --> 00:07:14.060 films, and he mashes them up. Like Sergio Leone's 00:07:14.060 --> 00:07:16.579 westerns. He talks about those a lot. Huge influence. 00:07:16.740 --> 00:07:18.600 Once upon a time in the West, the good, the bad, 00:07:18.620 --> 00:07:20.620 and the ugly. But it's not just the gunfights 00:07:20.620 --> 00:07:23.240 he takes. It's that stretched out tension, the 00:07:23.240 --> 00:07:26.600 cool factor, the moral ambiguity. And mixing 00:07:26.600 --> 00:07:29.019 that with, say, blaxploitation, what does that 00:07:29.019 --> 00:07:31.879 mashup achieve? Okay, so blaxploitation films 00:07:31.879 --> 00:07:35.120 from the 70s, like the Mac or Foxy Brown, they 00:07:35.120 --> 00:07:38.769 had this specific energy. gritty street level, 00:07:38.850 --> 00:07:42.750 often focused on black antiheroes, super stylized. 00:07:42.870 --> 00:07:46.129 So when Tarantino fuses the kind of Leone -esque 00:07:46.129 --> 00:07:49.850 cool and moral gray areas with the visual flair 00:07:49.850 --> 00:07:52.170 and attitude of blaxploitation, think Jackie 00:07:52.170 --> 00:07:55.110 Brown, he creates something new. It feels vintage, 00:07:55.129 --> 00:07:58.089 but also totally contemporary. He's picking the 00:07:58.089 --> 00:08:00.149 cool parts of film history and stitching them 00:08:00.149 --> 00:08:01.930 together. And he pulls from everywhere, does 00:08:01.930 --> 00:08:04.230 any Hong Kong action, Sonny Chiba. Oh, yeah. 00:08:04.680 --> 00:08:07.000 Cult figures. He even championed obscure Filipino 00:08:07.000 --> 00:08:09.680 directors like Sirio H. Santiago, called him 00:08:09.680 --> 00:08:11.939 a personal icon. And his admiration for other 00:08:11.939 --> 00:08:14.399 filmmakers like Brian De Palma. That led to casting 00:08:14.399 --> 00:08:17.100 Travolta, right? Directly. He loved De Palma's 00:08:17.100 --> 00:08:19.259 blowout and saw something in Travolta that Hollywood 00:08:19.259 --> 00:08:21.379 had kind of forgotten, which obviously paid off 00:08:21.379 --> 00:08:23.680 massively in Pulp Fiction. And he has some surprising 00:08:23.680 --> 00:08:25.920 takes, too, like Calling Jaws, the greatest movie 00:08:25.920 --> 00:08:28.199 ever, not necessarily the best film. Yeah, that 00:08:28.199 --> 00:08:30.819 distinction is interesting. It shows he values. 00:08:31.470 --> 00:08:34.950 Cure cinematic experience, the ride, maybe even 00:08:34.950 --> 00:08:37.330 over high art refinement sometimes. It's about 00:08:37.330 --> 00:08:41.090 impact. So the influences are this rich tapestry, 00:08:41.169 --> 00:08:45.289 but the structure, that non -linearity, that's 00:08:45.289 --> 00:08:47.570 maybe the most recognizable Tarantino effect. 00:08:47.850 --> 00:08:49.570 It's more than just shuffling scenes around, 00:08:49.710 --> 00:08:52.370 though. It's deliberate. By shifting the timeline, 00:08:52.669 --> 00:08:55.250 he plays with how you understand the characters, 00:08:55.350 --> 00:08:58.289 their motivations. Information gets withheld, 00:08:58.309 --> 00:09:01.190 then revealed. It ramps up the tension. You see 00:09:01.190 --> 00:09:03.470 someone die, then later you see what led up to 00:09:03.470 --> 00:09:05.269 it, which totally changes how you feel about 00:09:05.269 --> 00:09:07.710 them. Exactly. You see it in Pulp Fiction, Reservoir 00:09:07.710 --> 00:09:10.990 Dogs, Kill Bill, Hateful Eight. It's a core tool 00:09:10.990 --> 00:09:13.190 for him. And we know it's intentional because 00:09:13.190 --> 00:09:15.730 Tony Scott directed True Romance from Tarantino's 00:09:15.730 --> 00:09:18.470 script, but Scott made it linear. Right, and 00:09:18.470 --> 00:09:20.970 it became this high -energy thriller, totally 00:09:20.970 --> 00:09:23.230 different vibe from what Tarantino probably intended, 00:09:23.470 --> 00:09:26.470 which was more character -focused. That linear 00:09:26.470 --> 00:09:28.950 True Romance is like the perfect contrast to 00:09:28.970 --> 00:09:31.950 his own directing style. For Tarantino, the structure 00:09:31.950 --> 00:09:34.070 is part of the theme. Okay, structure aside, 00:09:34.370 --> 00:09:36.750 the dialogue is probably the other half of the 00:09:36.750 --> 00:09:38.470 equation. Oh, absolutely. It's what makes it 00:09:38.470 --> 00:09:41.549 all work, arguably. It's that mix of really mundane 00:09:41.549 --> 00:09:44.809 pop culture stuff right before or after something 00:09:44.809 --> 00:09:47.309 incredibly violent happens. It grounds everything. 00:09:47.649 --> 00:09:50.889 You've got hitmen talking about burgers in France 00:09:50.889 --> 00:09:54.029 or gangsters debating Madonna lyrics. A royale 00:09:54.029 --> 00:09:58.210 with cheese. Like a virgin breakdown. These hyper 00:09:58.210 --> 00:10:02.029 real trivial conversations make these often extreme 00:10:02.029 --> 00:10:05.129 characters feel weirdly human, relatable even. 00:10:05.370 --> 00:10:08.570 They argue about tipping, about foot massages. 00:10:08.570 --> 00:10:11.289 It makes the sudden shifts to violence even more 00:10:11.289 --> 00:10:13.870 jarring. And that contrast is where his dark 00:10:13.870 --> 00:10:15.909 humor comes in, right? Definitely. Which leads 00:10:15.909 --> 00:10:18.220 us to the violence itself. We have to talk about 00:10:18.220 --> 00:10:20.179 it. It's constant. It's graphic. It's always 00:10:20.179 --> 00:10:21.899 been controversial. And he's always defended 00:10:21.899 --> 00:10:24.120 it, hasn't he? Famously saying. Because it's 00:10:24.120 --> 00:10:26.919 so much fun. Yeah. He argues his films are dramas, 00:10:27.039 --> 00:10:29.139 but they have this sense of humor that makes 00:10:29.139 --> 00:10:31.279 you laugh at unexpected, often uncomfortable 00:10:31.279 --> 00:10:33.759 moments. Even though the body counts can be really 00:10:33.759 --> 00:10:36.659 high. Oh, yeah. The data is pretty stark. Like, 00:10:36.720 --> 00:10:40.139 Reservoir Dogs had, what, 10 deaths? But over 00:10:40.139 --> 00:10:43.750 400 profanities. Yeah. Django Unchained. Fewer 00:10:43.750 --> 00:10:47.269 swear words, but like 47 deaths. The intensity 00:10:47.269 --> 00:10:49.529 is always there. Another structural thing he 00:10:49.529 --> 00:10:51.789 does is build his own universe. The Tarantino 00:10:51.789 --> 00:10:53.470 cinematic universe. Yeah, he's actually laid 00:10:53.470 --> 00:10:55.529 it out. A two -tiered system, right? Exactly. 00:10:55.710 --> 00:10:59.549 Tier one is the realer than real world. Films 00:10:59.549 --> 00:11:01.929 like Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Once Upon 00:11:01.929 --> 00:11:04.269 a Time in Hollywood, they exist in a reality 00:11:04.269 --> 00:11:06.470 pretty close to ours, just maybe a bit heightened. 00:11:06.629 --> 00:11:09.980 Okay. And tier two. Tier two is the movie movie 00:11:09.980 --> 00:11:12.379 universe. These are the films that the characters 00:11:12.379 --> 00:11:14.860 in tier one would actually go and watch. So like 00:11:14.860 --> 00:11:17.879 Kill Bill or From Dusk Till Dawn are the kind 00:11:17.879 --> 00:11:20.659 of B movies Vincent Vega might watch. Precisely. 00:11:20.659 --> 00:11:23.259 That explains why those films are even more stylized, 00:11:23.259 --> 00:11:25.340 more extreme. They're literally meant to be movies 00:11:25.340 --> 00:11:27.990 within his other movies. Yeah. It justifies the 00:11:27.990 --> 00:11:30.090 comic book visuals, the anime sequences in Kill 00:11:30.090 --> 00:11:31.730 Bill. That's actually quite clever, and this 00:11:31.730 --> 00:11:34.190 extends to the product placement, or lack thereof. 00:11:34.269 --> 00:11:36.190 The fictional brands, yeah. Big Kahuna Burger, 00:11:36.610 --> 00:11:39.769 Red Apple Cigarettes, Jackrabbit Slims. Why do 00:11:39.769 --> 00:11:42.090 that? Just to avoid dating the films. That's 00:11:42.090 --> 00:11:44.470 part of it, yeah. Keeps them timeless. But it 00:11:44.470 --> 00:11:46.590 also reinforces that self -contained universe. 00:11:47.029 --> 00:11:49.870 These brains pop up across different films, connecting 00:11:49.870 --> 00:11:52.549 them subtly. It makes his world feel more cohesive. 00:11:52.889 --> 00:11:56.279 Okay, before we move on from style... We kind 00:11:56.279 --> 00:11:59.279 of mentioned the feet. Ah, yes. Feet. It's become 00:11:59.279 --> 00:12:01.240 this huge internet thing, hasn't it? The constant 00:12:01.240 --> 00:12:03.240 close -ups on bare feet. He gets asked about 00:12:03.240 --> 00:12:05.460 it all the time. What's his take? He tends to 00:12:05.460 --> 00:12:08.019 get defensive. Dismisses it as just good direction. 00:12:08.299 --> 00:12:11.240 Says other great directors did it too. Buñuel, 00:12:11.320 --> 00:12:14.179 Hitchcock, Sofia Coppola. It does seem really 00:12:14.179 --> 00:12:16.220 prominent in his films compared to others, doesn't 00:12:16.220 --> 00:12:18.940 it? I mean, yeah. The frequency and the specific 00:12:18.940 --> 00:12:22.750 framing. It feels like more than just coincidence, 00:12:22.889 --> 00:12:25.690 whether it's a conscious fetish or just a recurring 00:12:25.690 --> 00:12:27.830 visual attack. It's definitely become one of 00:12:27.830 --> 00:12:30.169 his unmistakable signatures, maybe even a distraction 00:12:30.169 --> 00:12:33.269 for some viewers. So a director with such a specific, 00:12:33.330 --> 00:12:36.230 intense style, they often need a loyal crew, 00:12:36.370 --> 00:12:38.850 right? People who just get it. Tarantino seems 00:12:38.850 --> 00:12:40.850 to have built his own kind of repertory company. 00:12:41.070 --> 00:12:44.590 Oh, absolutely. That loyalty is key to the consistency. 00:12:45.230 --> 00:12:47.490 The most obvious example is Samuel L. Jackson. 00:12:47.649 --> 00:12:49.629 Yeah, nobody delivers Tarantino dialogue quite 00:12:49.629 --> 00:12:52.269 like him. He's been in, what, five films Tarantino 00:12:52.269 --> 00:12:54.190 directed, plus True Romance, which he wrote. 00:12:54.590 --> 00:12:58.149 Six total. Knowing Jackson will deliver the lines 00:12:58.149 --> 00:13:01.110 lets Tarantino write specifically for that voice, 00:13:01.190 --> 00:13:03.710 that rhythm. It deepens the whole thing. And 00:13:03.710 --> 00:13:06.610 then there's Uma Thurman, his muse. Integral 00:13:06.610 --> 00:13:09.240 is the word. Three films. Obviously, Kill Bill 00:13:09.240 --> 00:13:11.679 is the peak of that collaboration. They develop 00:13:11.679 --> 00:13:13.919 the bride character together. That partnership 00:13:13.919 --> 00:13:16.620 really shaped those two films entirely. Shows 00:13:16.620 --> 00:13:18.480 the trust involved. But maybe the most amazing 00:13:18.480 --> 00:13:20.779 collaboration story recently, the one that really 00:13:20.779 --> 00:13:23.620 shows his impact, is Christoph Waltz. Waltz is 00:13:23.620 --> 00:13:25.519 incredible. He was basically unknown in the U 00:13:25.519 --> 00:13:27.940 .S., working mostly in European TV for decades. 00:13:28.320 --> 00:13:31.500 Then Tarantino casts him as Hans Landa in Inglourious 00:13:31.500 --> 00:13:34.379 Bastards. And boom! Oscar for Best Supporting 00:13:34.379 --> 00:13:36.600 Actor. Instantly. And then he does it again a 00:13:36.600 --> 00:13:39.220 few years later for Django Unchained. Tarantino 00:13:39.220 --> 00:13:40.960 didn't just cast him. He saw this incredible 00:13:40.960 --> 00:13:43.340 talent nobody else stateside had tapped into 00:13:43.340 --> 00:13:46.360 and gave him this massive platform. Twice. That 00:13:46.360 --> 00:13:48.679 loyalty extends behind the camera too, doesn't 00:13:48.679 --> 00:13:51.500 it? Especially in the editing room. Sally Menke. 00:13:51.559 --> 00:13:54.879 Ah, Sally Menke. Her importance can't be overstated. 00:13:55.039 --> 00:13:58.000 She edited every single one of his films until 00:13:58.000 --> 00:14:00.639 she sadly passed away in 2010. He called her 00:14:00.639 --> 00:14:03.860 his number one collaborator. You did. And think 00:14:03.860 --> 00:14:06.879 about her job. Taking these non -linear scripts, 00:14:07.179 --> 00:14:09.700 often shot out of order, and making them flow, 00:14:09.940 --> 00:14:12.139 making them tense instead of just confusing. 00:14:12.320 --> 00:14:15.220 She was the architect, making those complex structures 00:14:15.220 --> 00:14:18.419 work so beautifully. Her loss was huge for his 00:14:18.419 --> 00:14:20.940 filmmaking process. Now, thinking back to his 00:14:20.940 --> 00:14:23.379 video store roots, that love of film history 00:14:23.379 --> 00:14:25.659 wasn't just for his own movies. He actively tried 00:14:25.659 --> 00:14:27.740 to promote other films, right? As a curator. 00:14:28.100 --> 00:14:30.460 Absolutely. That drive led him to set up Rolling 00:14:30.460 --> 00:14:33.740 Thunder Pictures back in 95 with Miramax. The 00:14:33.740 --> 00:14:36.700 whole idea was to distribute or re -release indie 00:14:36.700 --> 00:14:39.039 and foreign films he loved, but that weren't 00:14:39.039 --> 00:14:41.419 getting seen. Like Wong Kar -wai's Chungking 00:14:41.419 --> 00:14:44.080 Express. Beautiful film. Exactly. And exploitation 00:14:44.080 --> 00:14:46.480 stuff like Switchblade Sisters. He wanted to 00:14:46.480 --> 00:14:48.590 give these films a platform. But it didn't quite 00:14:48.590 --> 00:14:52.169 take off commercially. Sadly, no. The films got 00:14:52.169 --> 00:14:54.929 critical praise, but sales weren't great. And 00:14:54.929 --> 00:14:56.690 Meermak shut it down after a couple of years. 00:14:56.950 --> 00:15:00.269 But the impulse didn't die. He just shifted tactics. 00:15:00.629 --> 00:15:03.710 Using his own name. The Presented by Quentin 00:15:03.710 --> 00:15:06.320 Tarantino tag. That became his new tool. And 00:15:06.320 --> 00:15:08.480 it was brilliant marketing. His name was a stamp 00:15:08.480 --> 00:15:10.679 of approval for audiences who trusted his taste. 00:15:10.860 --> 00:15:13.120 It gave films mainstream attention they wouldn't 00:15:13.120 --> 00:15:15.120 have gotten otherwise. Totally. He used it for 00:15:15.120 --> 00:15:17.179 stuff like Iron Monkey, a Hong Kong martial arts 00:15:17.179 --> 00:15:20.360 film, and most successfully, Zhang Yimou's Hero. 00:15:20.679 --> 00:15:22.960 Hero opened at number one in the U .S., didn't 00:15:22.960 --> 00:15:26.940 it? It did. Grossed over $50 million. All thanks 00:15:26.940 --> 00:15:30.580 to that. Presented by TAG. He was leveraging 00:15:30.580 --> 00:15:32.960 his own fame to champion other people's work 00:15:32.960 --> 00:15:35.200 he believed in. He even got involved in producing 00:15:35.200 --> 00:15:38.059 a documentary. Yeah, Freedom's Fury in 2006. 00:15:38.360 --> 00:15:40.960 It's about that insane blood in the water water 00:15:40.960 --> 00:15:43.399 polo match between Hungary and the Soviet Union 00:15:43.399 --> 00:15:46.080 at the 56 Olympics right after the Hungarian 00:15:46.080 --> 00:15:49.179 uprising. Politically charged story. Incredibly. 00:15:49.500 --> 00:15:51.639 Tarantino heard about it, was captivated, said 00:15:51.639 --> 00:15:53.440 it was the best story he'd ever heard and wanted 00:15:53.440 --> 00:15:55.620 to help get it made. His name helped secure funding 00:15:55.620 --> 00:15:58.600 and distribution. And finally, his most literal 00:15:58.600 --> 00:16:02.500 commitment to film, buying theaters. This is 00:16:02.500 --> 00:16:04.840 like the ultimate film preservationist move, 00:16:04.960 --> 00:16:07.360 isn't it? In 2010, he bought the New Beverly 00:16:07.360 --> 00:16:09.960 Cinema in L .A. And made that pledge. As long 00:16:09.960 --> 00:16:12.620 as I'm alive, and as long as I'm rich, the New 00:16:12.620 --> 00:16:15.259 Beverly will be there, showing films shot on 00:16:15.259 --> 00:16:19.720 35mm. It's a direct stand against digital, a 00:16:19.720 --> 00:16:21.799 commitment to the physical experience of film. 00:16:22.029 --> 00:16:23.750 And he didn't stop there. He bought the Vista 00:16:23.750 --> 00:16:26.830 Theater recently, too. Yep, in 2021. Same intention. 00:16:27.049 --> 00:16:29.509 Keep it running as a first -run theater, but 00:16:29.509 --> 00:16:31.889 only showing movies projected on actual film. 00:16:32.629 --> 00:16:34.470 He's putting his money where his mouth is when 00:16:34.470 --> 00:16:36.129 it comes to preserving the format. Okay, this 00:16:36.129 --> 00:16:38.830 leads us neatly into the big thing hanging over 00:16:38.830 --> 00:16:41.629 his career right now. The countdown, this self 00:16:41.629 --> 00:16:43.970 -imposed limit of exactly 10 films. It's such 00:16:43.970 --> 00:16:46.110 a Tarantino move, isn't it? Curating his own 00:16:46.110 --> 00:16:48.710 legacy down to the exact number of entries. His 00:16:48.710 --> 00:16:50.470 reasoning is pretty interesting, too. He doesn't 00:16:50.470 --> 00:16:53.330 want to end on a dud, basically. Right. He talks 00:16:53.330 --> 00:16:56.470 about avoiding the horrible last movie that contained 00:16:56.470 --> 00:16:59.470 a great director's filmography. He said ending 00:16:59.470 --> 00:17:02.350 on a decent movie is rare and ending on a good 00:17:02.350 --> 00:17:04.950 movie is kind of phenomenal. He's shooting for 00:17:04.950 --> 00:17:07.630 phenomenal, trying to craft this perfect finished 00:17:07.630 --> 00:17:10.220 set. And just to clarify the count, Kill Bill 00:17:10.220 --> 00:17:12.299 counts as one film, volumes one and two together? 00:17:12.539 --> 00:17:14.980 Correct. Which makes Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 00:17:14.980 --> 00:17:18.400 from 2019 his ninth. He's got one left in the 00:17:18.400 --> 00:17:20.279 chamber. The pressure on that tenth film must 00:17:20.279 --> 00:17:22.940 be immense. And he had one planned, right? The 00:17:22.940 --> 00:17:26.960 movie critic. He did. Set in 1977 about a guy 00:17:26.960 --> 00:17:29.460 reviewing movies for a porn mag. Sounded very 00:17:29.460 --> 00:17:32.539 Tarantino -esque, very cinephile -centric. But 00:17:32.539 --> 00:17:35.319 then he pulled the plug. Shelved his final film. 00:17:35.359 --> 00:17:37.059 Why? He said he was really excited about the 00:17:37.059 --> 00:17:39.259 writing phase. But when it came to actually making 00:17:39.259 --> 00:17:41.339 it, dramatizing it, he just wasn't feeling it. 00:17:41.359 --> 00:17:43.559 He admitted he wasn't really that excited about 00:17:43.559 --> 00:17:45.839 dramatizing what I wrote. Wow. So the commitment 00:17:45.839 --> 00:17:47.779 to quality, or maybe just his personal connection 00:17:47.779 --> 00:17:50.420 to it, overruled the deadline. Seems like it. 00:17:50.660 --> 00:17:52.720 He wasn't going to force it just to hit the number 00:17:52.720 --> 00:17:55.380 10. He'd rather wait and get it right, even if 00:17:55.380 --> 00:17:57.539 it means delaying the final chapter. So what's 00:17:57.539 --> 00:18:00.519 he doing instead, if not the 10th film right 00:18:00.519 --> 00:18:02.779 now? Well, he's talked about wanting to write 00:18:02.779 --> 00:18:06.559 a stage play. and generally just taking his time, 00:18:06.680 --> 00:18:09.420 letting the right idea for the final film come 00:18:09.420 --> 00:18:12.299 to him, maybe waiting at least a year, which 00:18:12.299 --> 00:18:14.180 fits with how he approaches writing anyway. Right, 00:18:14.259 --> 00:18:16.500 he talks about screenwriting starting as novel 00:18:16.500 --> 00:18:18.819 writing for him. Yeah, he drafts extensive prose 00:18:18.819 --> 00:18:21.519 first, gets deep into the characters and world, 00:18:21.640 --> 00:18:24.519 almost like writing a novel, then formats it 00:18:24.519 --> 00:18:26.759 as a screenplay. Believes it helps the characters 00:18:26.759 --> 00:18:29.680 emerge fully formed. Exactly. Gives them that 00:18:29.680 --> 00:18:32.420 depth, that backstory, which fuels the dialogue. 00:18:32.779 --> 00:18:35.839 And this literary side has become a really significant 00:18:35.839 --> 00:18:38.460 part of his output lately. The book deal with 00:18:38.460 --> 00:18:41.480 HarperCollins. Yeah, a two -book deal. First 00:18:41.480 --> 00:18:43.579 was the novelization of Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 00:18:43.579 --> 00:18:47.079 in 2021, which wasn't just the script. It added 00:18:47.079 --> 00:18:50.180 backstory, changed perspectives, a companion 00:18:50.180 --> 00:18:52.640 piece, really. And then cinema speculation. His 00:18:52.640 --> 00:18:56.259 film history book came out in 2022. Essays on 00:18:56.259 --> 00:18:59.660 70s new Hollywood cinema, mostly. Deep dives 00:18:59.660 --> 00:19:02.539 into films and filmmakers he loves. Really successful, 00:19:02.619 --> 00:19:04.740 too. And he's gone back to his roots with the 00:19:04.740 --> 00:19:07.619 podcast. Video Archives Podcast, yeah. With Roger 00:19:07.619 --> 00:19:10.240 Avery, his old video store buddy. They just watch 00:19:10.240 --> 00:19:12.180 old tapes, talk about movies they rented out 00:19:12.180 --> 00:19:14.700 back in the day. It's like full circle. The curator 00:19:14.700 --> 00:19:17.019 and the creator coming together again. His strong 00:19:17.019 --> 00:19:19.099 opinions have even gotten him official critic 00:19:19.099 --> 00:19:21.059 status, right? On Rotten Tomatoes, yeah, since 00:19:21.059 --> 00:19:24.920 2020. And his takes are pure Tarantino. championing 00:19:24.920 --> 00:19:27.579 stuff like Ishtar, saying Psycho II is better 00:19:27.579 --> 00:19:29.759 than Hitchcock's original. He's never going to 00:19:29.759 --> 00:19:31.779 just follow the consensus, even as a critic. 00:19:31.980 --> 00:19:34.299 And his skepticism about digital projection, 00:19:34.500 --> 00:19:36.680 that ties into the retirement plan too, doesn't 00:19:36.680 --> 00:19:39.420 it? Absolutely. He's been very blunt about not 00:19:39.420 --> 00:19:42.279 wanting to make films if 35mm disappears entirely. 00:19:43.220 --> 00:19:46.079 He sees digital as sterile, lacking the magic, 00:19:46.279 --> 00:19:48.759 says he won't even make it to 60 as a filmmaker 00:19:48.759 --> 00:19:52.359 in a purely digital world. So the retirement 00:19:52.359 --> 00:19:55.099 is partly an artistic statement, a stand against 00:19:55.099 --> 00:19:58.200 how he sees the industry changing. OK, so we've 00:19:58.200 --> 00:20:00.039 talked about the genius, the style, the legacy 00:20:00.039 --> 00:20:02.619 curation. But you can't discuss Tarantino without 00:20:02.619 --> 00:20:04.680 discussing the controversies. They're just as 00:20:04.680 --> 00:20:07.200 much a part of his story. Definitely. And maybe 00:20:07.200 --> 00:20:09.759 the longest running one is about his use of racial 00:20:09.759 --> 00:20:12.140 language, specifically the N -word. Yeah, that 00:20:12.140 --> 00:20:14.240 goes way back, particularly the public feud with 00:20:14.240 --> 00:20:16.960 Spike Lee. Started around Jackie Brown in 97, 00:20:17.319 --> 00:20:19.859 Lee called out Tarantino's infatuation with the 00:20:19.859 --> 00:20:21.799 word. And Tarantino's defense has always been 00:20:21.799 --> 00:20:24.420 pretty fiery. Very. It boils down to a writer's 00:20:24.420 --> 00:20:26.880 right as he sees it. He insists he should be 00:20:26.880 --> 00:20:29.380 able to write any character, use any language 00:20:29.380 --> 00:20:31.619 necessary to make them feel authentic to their 00:20:31.619 --> 00:20:34.039 world. I demand the right to tell the truth as 00:20:34.039 --> 00:20:36.400 I see they are. That kind of thing. Exactly. 00:20:36.880 --> 00:20:39.119 He argued it was true to the setting of Jackie 00:20:39.119 --> 00:20:42.680 Brown. He even called Lee's criticism racist 00:20:42.680 --> 00:20:45.480 for trying to limit him based on his own race. 00:20:46.160 --> 00:20:48.220 It's a really fundamental disagreement about 00:20:48.220 --> 00:20:50.819 art, language, and ownership. And it blew up 00:20:50.819 --> 00:20:53.809 again with Django Unchained, obviously. Given 00:20:53.809 --> 00:20:55.950 the subject matter. Oh, yeah. Using that language 00:20:55.950 --> 00:20:58.589 so frequently in a film about American slavery, 00:20:58.890 --> 00:21:01.950 hugely polarizing. Spike Lee famously refused 00:21:01.950 --> 00:21:04.950 to see it, called slavery a holocaust, not material 00:21:04.950 --> 00:21:08.029 for a Sergio Leone spaghetti Western. Bo Samuel 00:21:08.029 --> 00:21:10.869 L. Jackson, who starred in it, defended Tarantino. 00:21:11.470 --> 00:21:13.849 Jackson argued it felt authentic to the period 00:21:13.849 --> 00:21:16.730 and characters. Tarantino maintained he made 00:21:16.730 --> 00:21:19.109 Jackie Brown, for instance, primarily for black 00:21:19.109 --> 00:21:21.369 audiences and was just reflecting the world. 00:21:21.490 --> 00:21:23.049 It's a debate that's never really gone away. 00:21:23.210 --> 00:21:24.809 And there's the whole Hardy -Weinstein connection. 00:21:25.190 --> 00:21:27.269 Weinstein was crucial to his early success with 00:21:27.269 --> 00:21:30.170 Miramax. Absolutely pivotal, which made the reckoning 00:21:30.170 --> 00:21:32.589 during the hashtag MeToo movement incredibly 00:21:32.589 --> 00:21:35.670 difficult and public for Tarantino. He eventually 00:21:35.670 --> 00:21:38.069 admitted he knew more than he let on. Yeah, he 00:21:38.069 --> 00:21:40.609 gave that quote, I knew enough to do more than 00:21:40.609 --> 00:21:44.059 I did. admitted that both Mira Sorvino, who he 00:21:44.059 --> 00:21:47.259 dated, and Uma Thurman had told him about Weinstein's 00:21:47.259 --> 00:21:50.380 advances. It was a painful admission of complicity, 00:21:50.380 --> 00:21:53.559 or at least inaction. And how he described Weinstein, 00:21:53.599 --> 00:21:55.960 a fucked up father figure, that says a lot. It 00:21:55.960 --> 00:21:58.519 really does. Captures that complex mix of gratitude, 00:21:58.779 --> 00:22:02.329 dependency, and ultimate moral horror. Explains 00:22:02.329 --> 00:22:04.829 the hesitation maybe, but he did eventually condemn 00:22:04.829 --> 00:22:07.029 him. He also had to apologize for some really 00:22:07.029 --> 00:22:09.410 bad comments about Roman Polanski that resurfaced. 00:22:09.549 --> 00:22:12.130 Right, from a 2003 interview where he seemed 00:22:12.130 --> 00:22:14.609 to downplay Polanski's crime, suggesting the 00:22:14.609 --> 00:22:17.450 victim wanted to have it. Just awful stuff. And 00:22:17.450 --> 00:22:19.980 when confronted later. He apologized fully in 00:22:19.980 --> 00:22:23.000 2018, said he was incorrectly playing devil's 00:22:23.000 --> 00:22:24.980 advocate just to be provocative, which kind of 00:22:24.980 --> 00:22:27.039 highlights a recurring theme, right? Prioritizing 00:22:27.039 --> 00:22:29.200 the edgy statement over maybe thinking through 00:22:29.200 --> 00:22:31.779 the implications. That confrontational side comes 00:22:31.779 --> 00:22:33.859 out a lot, not just with critics, but industry 00:22:33.859 --> 00:22:37.119 people, talk show hosts. Oh, yeah. The Denzel 00:22:37.119 --> 00:22:40.180 Washington clash during Crimson Tide script doctoring 00:22:40.180 --> 00:22:43.720 over perceived racist dialogue, though Denzel 00:22:43.720 --> 00:22:46.549 later said they buried the hatchet. than the 00:22:46.549 --> 00:22:49.069 actual physical fight with Don Murphy. The producer 00:22:49.069 --> 00:22:51.089 of Natural Born Killers. Yeah, Murphy wrote some 00:22:51.089 --> 00:22:53.190 critical stuff about him. Tarantino apparently 00:22:53.190 --> 00:22:56.569 found him in a restaurant and insulted him. Ended 00:22:56.569 --> 00:22:58.630 up in court. Had to pay a fine. And the David 00:22:58.630 --> 00:23:01.569 Letterman story is wild. Letterman tells it like 00:23:01.569 --> 00:23:05.150 Tarantino called him up absolutely furious over 00:23:05.150 --> 00:23:07.529 some joke Letterman made about an ex -girlfriend 00:23:07.529 --> 00:23:10.109 screaming threats like, I'm going to beat you 00:23:10.109 --> 00:23:12.670 to death. Seriously? Over a joke? Apparently. 00:23:13.670 --> 00:23:15.650 Letterman said he only got this really awkward 00:23:15.650 --> 00:23:18.809 grudging apology years later when Tarantino needed 00:23:18.809 --> 00:23:21.170 to promote a film on his show. It just paints 00:23:21.170 --> 00:23:23.210 a picture of this incredibly volatile personality. 00:23:23.549 --> 00:23:26.109 And that volatility definitely extends to journalists 00:23:26.109 --> 00:23:29.369 who push him. Famously so. That Channel 4 interview 00:23:29.369 --> 00:23:31.650 in 2013 where the journalist kept pressing him 00:23:31.650 --> 00:23:34.369 on the link between movie violence and real violence. 00:23:34.450 --> 00:23:37.269 He completely lost it. I'm not your slave. I'm 00:23:37.269 --> 00:23:39.480 not a monkey. Yeah, just shut down the whole 00:23:39.480 --> 00:23:42.059 line of questioning with extreme anger. And more 00:23:42.059 --> 00:23:45.140 recently, at Cannes, when asked if Margot Robbie 00:23:45.140 --> 00:23:48.240 had too few lines in Once Upon a Time, he just 00:23:48.240 --> 00:23:51.700 flatly said, I reject your hypothesis. He does 00:23:51.700 --> 00:23:53.539 not like his artistic choices being questioned. 00:23:53.900 --> 00:23:56.700 Finally, his very public stance on police brutality, 00:23:57.019 --> 00:24:00.039 that caused a huge storm. It really did. October 00:24:00.039 --> 00:24:02.660 2015, he attended a rally in New York, spoke 00:24:02.660 --> 00:24:05.960 very passionately. Calling murder, murder and 00:24:05.960 --> 00:24:08.900 murderers, murderers. Exactly. I'm a human being 00:24:08.900 --> 00:24:11.599 with a conscience. When I see murder, I cannot 00:24:11.599 --> 00:24:14.640 stand by. Very strong words. Which led to police 00:24:14.640 --> 00:24:16.940 unions calling for a boycott of the hateful eight. 00:24:17.019 --> 00:24:19.759 Immediately. NYPD union, others across the country. 00:24:19.880 --> 00:24:22.119 It was a serious backlash, potentially hurting 00:24:22.119 --> 00:24:24.019 the film's release. So he had to walk it back 00:24:24.019 --> 00:24:26.180 a bit. He clarified, yeah. Said all cops are 00:24:26.180 --> 00:24:28.700 not murderers. And that being it, an anti -brutality 00:24:28.700 --> 00:24:31.759 protest didn't make him anti -police. He insisted 00:24:31.759 --> 00:24:34.279 he was talking about specific cases, citing names 00:24:34.279 --> 00:24:37.180 like Eric Garner, Tamir Rice. But it was a clear 00:24:37.180 --> 00:24:39.680 instance where his activism directly clashed 00:24:39.680 --> 00:24:43.140 with his business. Hashtag tag outro. So looking 00:24:43.140 --> 00:24:45.119 back at everything, Quentin Tarantino's career 00:24:45.119 --> 00:24:47.839 is just this incredible story, isn't it? The 00:24:47.839 --> 00:24:50.960 ultimate film geek who studied the masters and 00:24:50.960 --> 00:24:53.180 then became one himself. Absolutely. Built this 00:24:53.180 --> 00:24:58.400 legacy through homage. Yes. But also real innovation. 00:24:58.660 --> 00:25:03.250 And all alongside this, shall we say. very colorful 00:25:03.250 --> 00:25:05.509 and controversial public persona. He's definitely 00:25:05.509 --> 00:25:08.210 a unique force, highly studied, critically lauded. 00:25:08.250 --> 00:25:10.130 I remember reading he was the most studied director 00:25:10.130 --> 00:25:12.690 in the UK at one point. Yeah, back in 2013. And 00:25:12.690 --> 00:25:15.750 yet constantly generating debate. But you can't 00:25:15.750 --> 00:25:18.470 deny the critical peak winning all four major 00:25:18.470 --> 00:25:21.349 U .S. Critics Awards for Pulp Fiction. L .A., 00:25:21.349 --> 00:25:23.490 National Board of Review, New York National Society. 00:25:23.750 --> 00:25:26.069 First director ever to do that just cemented 00:25:26.069 --> 00:25:28.289 his status. And now here he stands right on the 00:25:28.289 --> 00:25:31.130 edge of this self -declared retirement. One film 00:25:31.130 --> 00:25:33.650 left. One shot to stick the landing to avoid 00:25:33.650 --> 00:25:36.329 that horrible last movie he fears. And we know 00:25:36.329 --> 00:25:38.509 he's willing to scrap ideas like the movie critic 00:25:38.509 --> 00:25:40.490 if they don't feel absolutely right for that 00:25:40.490 --> 00:25:42.670 final statement. The pressure must be unbelievable. 00:25:43.009 --> 00:25:44.650 It's not just got to be a good film. It has to 00:25:44.650 --> 00:25:47.710 somehow cap off this entire meticulously curated 00:25:47.710 --> 00:25:50.650 10 film arc. It's the ultimate narrative challenge 00:25:50.650 --> 00:25:53.569 for him. Can he control this final chapter as 00:25:53.569 --> 00:25:56.180 perfectly as he controls the scripts? So. The 00:25:56.180 --> 00:25:58.579 big question for all of us watching is, will 00:25:58.579 --> 00:26:01.460 this immense pressure to deliver the perfect 00:26:01.460 --> 00:26:04.279 ending be the one story he can't quite script? 00:26:04.680 --> 00:26:07.960 Or will Tarantino, the master curator, pull off 00:26:07.960 --> 00:26:11.220 one last masterpiece, sealing his 10 -film legacy 00:26:11.220 --> 00:26:13.819 exactly as planned? That's the cliffhanger, isn't 00:26:13.819 --> 00:26:15.660 it? We'll just have to wait and see what he delivers. 00:26:15.839 --> 00:26:17.859 That's our deep dive for today. Thanks for joining 00:26:17.859 --> 00:26:18.920 us. We'll see you next time.