I swear, I can (and do) spend hours listening to Tarantino talk about his thought process behind movies. He does such a good job explaining what it is that he finds interesting about the films he makes, and listening to his perspective is invaluable to me as someone trying to learn more about what makes movies tick.
i ripped through cinema speculation and i could easily read it again. i cant decide if he is a better writer or a film director. his novelization of OUATIH is so well written.
His movies are good because he makes what he wants to which means he cares, most movies you will watch were made (at best partially) for money. Imo thats most of it.
He's like the Neil Degrasse Tyson of film, just more likeable, like before NDG got all douchey. He speaks with a genuine charismatic enthusiasm, and gets into creative and technical detail but in a way that's very direct and descriptive and easy to understand.
Jackie Brown is Tarantino restrained, believe it or not, and the characters really stand out because of that. It’s no Pulp Fiction or Basterds or Dogs, but it’s his most underrated film by far.
@@uraigroves7898 Truth. Bastards had three amazing scenes. As a film, it's trying WAAAAAAy too hard to look cool and it's just cringe, aside from those 3 scenes. I think it's Tarantino's worst movie by far.
@@justinhunt4767this video is about Jackie Brown the film, the comment is obviously about the film considering “jackie Brown” the character isn’t real and you would not know how she looks like now
People have to understand that when "Jackie Brown" FIRST came out, YOUNG people, especially, HATED it, for the most part and it got mixed reviews everywhere. The reason being that everyone was just so floored with the THRILLING aspects of "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction" that when "Jackie Brown" came along - a VERY slowly paced film about people in their middle age, confronting the end of their relevance to the world and navigating a world they'd grown cynical about and finding love in the end - only to understand that they couldn't be together and that it would never work - this was VERY different than his first two films and was much more FORMAL, in terms of its presentation and style. So it was a total surprise to a lot of people. I remember seeing it with an audience of young people like me and while I loved it, half of the audience was literally laughing at the "old people" in it and going "ew!" when they kissed - and you could literally hear GROANS from the entire audience near the end when it hadn't ended yet. So while "Jackie Brown", in RETROSPECT, has been reevaluated by a lot of critics and audiences as probably his greatest movie - ironically, for those VERY REASONS people didn't like it at the time - that it's the most HUMAN and grounded film he'd made (which had a lot to do with Elmore Leonard being the source of the story and not Tarantino, I mean, let's be honest) - at the TIME, it was a box office failure and had a very mixed critical reaction. So there's nothing these critics were saying that nobody else was. Tarantino has NEVER made another movie like "Jackie Brown" and I still maintain that it's his greatest piece of work. But in 1997, this was *not* the movie people wanted or expected from him and it took MANY years for people to recognize how strong it is.
Hmm, well Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction didn't exactly feature YOUNG PEOPLE, did they? Jackie Brown (Rum Punch) could have been made by anyone, with a totally different cast and it would have been just about as good. Just look at Life of Crime (2013), an adaptation of Elmore Leonard's other novel featuring some of the same characters as Jackie Brown. It's possibly superior to Tarantino's movie, although it was surely influenced by his work. The disappointment of Jackie Brown is that it was a waste of his talents other than proving he could make a fairly generic crime thriller, making him more commercially viable.
I've enjoyed all of Tarantino's films, but I haven't loved one since Jackie Brown. Almost nobody writes dialogue better than Quentin, however, the characters all sound the same. You can hear Quentin's "voice" behind all his characters which makes them less distinct. Jackie Brown was different. Distinct characters that didn't all talk the same and speak like individuals
Excuse my ignorance. You aren’t going to agree with me but perhaps we can reach middle ground: I recently had a discussion with someone that believes Full Metal Jacket is a great film from beginning to end. I feel it’s one great film attached to a disjointed and unmemorable one. A slow paced film can be pulled off well (There Will Be Blood). Part of how I gauge how good a film actually is, is how much do you remember after watching it once? Except for “AK-47, when you absolutely need to kill every motherfucker in the room” most people can’t remember most of the film. It can be argued that artistic vision supersedes watchability (Orwell’s 1984 is hard to watch) but really what was Quintin’s goal here? To bore us? I don’t know a single person on a Friday night that would say, “you know what we should do? Watch Jacky Brown!” To me (just my opinion and I’m open to changing my mind) people want to like Jacky Brown because they love Quentin the same way they like the second half of Full Metal Jacket. They believe in Kubrick’s vision even when he misses the point that a film is meant to be watchable.
The book is massive too and a lot was not included in the movie. Like you get a moment with Max getting another guy who skipped bail and see how clever is Max is with not just his words but his movements are thought out. I almost wished it could of been 4.5 hours long or a two parter.
Getting a filmmaker on a TV panel with film critics seems like an awkward concept. I don't like it. That lady acted like she wasn't expecting the situation she ended up in. She might have been tricked.
@@TexasMan77 She might just not be ready to share her thoughts yet. Maybe she knew she would filter her thoughts talking face to face, as opposed to sitting down and writing a brutally honest review with no social inhibitors. If she writes a review that misunderstands Tarantino, the review can still teach him something about his audience. If NOBODY talks about his film, that's a problem.
The way he answers to the critic... I felt I went back to my naïf days at film school, remembering how Directors should be: real artists. That's the only key for a great motion picture. with all the pros and the cons that an artist brings on the table. Tarantino it like a Picasso, a Mozart. He has truly an unique brain. I would say that our times, made by white collars controlling the arts and promoting "algorithms" as the main stream solution to make products that make money, don't deserve such a gifted artist.
My dad and I went to see Jackie Brown together in the theater. I was 16 and he was in his mid-50s, so basically Max Cherry's age. We both loved the movie and loved every performance. I think a lot of people thought they were going to see "Pulp Fiction 2," but if you took it on its own terms, it was wonderful. The only thing that bothered me on the first screening was that I wasn't prepared for Sam Jackson to play the bad guy, and you don't realize that's the case early. He doesn't really become the bad guy until the final few scenes. So that threw me off. But sheesh, we came out of there knowing we had seen a great movie, and I thought a lot of the criticism of the film came from critiques and fans who were critiquing this based on the movie they thought he was going to make, not the movie he did make. What I didn't think about until years later was that after Pulp Fiction, so many movies had an element of Pulp Fiction's surface: the humor mixed with the violence. Some held up on their own terms (Usual Suspects), some found an audience even if that audience even if they weren't fully unique (Go, which I loved, Boondock Saints and Things to Do In Denver When You're Dead, which I didn't) and some were just ripoffs (Suicide Kings comes to mind). But I think what's fascinating is that none of these directors would have made Jackie Brown if they set out to make a "Tarantino-esque movie" in the late 90s. That's why he's him and they're not.
I’m a big Tarantino fan, but I watched Jackie Brown fully for the first time the other day, for the first time since seeing it in theaters when it came out. I didn’t much like it back then because I was expecting more Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs out of it. People were still figuring out what Tarantino style was. Now, 30 years later, I appreciate Jackie Brown much more.
I was 20 years old when it came out in theaters and I felt I was hoodwinked and hated the movie. It's the only time I've seen it until I watched it again last night. I fell in love with this movie. It's probably an age thing. Now that I'm the same age as many of the characters are in the movie I understand what QT was doing and it's cinematic perfection! I'm sorry QT I admit I was hat 20 year old hater because it was so far removed from what I was expecting.
She was philosophically woke before woke was cool, QT was just pointing actually reality that he/his actors/the culture was experiencing in real life while not in effort of making a word count for an east coast liberal think-piece. It's why he's a genius.
Huh? She said she liked pulp fiction so… did I miss something. She refused to engage him because of her principles and that she hadn’t written the review yet. Principles is a good thing. I wonder if this is the critic Tarantino admired… anyone know?
What talent exists among those "critics"? For what are they known, remembered, and renowned? The arrogance of the lady to answer "get serious" when asked if she liked the movie. And her refusal to discuss the movie on a panel discussion show discussing the movie begs the question, what was she even doing there other than to suggest her critiques were not open to discussion and therefore beyond reproach. Utter cowardly, delusional arrogance.
Jackie Brown is my favourite Movie of his, the films pace is perfect, each character is strong and it feels like you have stepped into their lives rather than you are watching a performance. Adore the twist.
Wow these critics all come of kinda weak. If you can't go deeper than "what are the hats about?" And "it's too long.". You probably shouldn't be a critic. If you feel like criticizing you should at least be able to bring up what you would've changed.
Yeah, really funny viewing it all these years later. The critics' takes have not aged well while Quentin has had this amazing career and genuinely contributed to the cultural zeitgeist. It looks like a bunch of people sitting around picasso and asking why he doesnt draw realistically and its too simple of an art style or something.
I love all of Tarantino's movies, but this one is my absolute favorite. This movie feels like a nice warm, comforting hug when i watch it no matter my mental mood or physical feeling. Jackie Brown, The Life Aquatic, The Thing and Event Horizon are the only movies i can watch no matter what.
As a kid watching Jackie Brown, I didn't get it. I didn't really "get" Pulp Fiction but it had enough spectacle that I could think that I got it. As an adult I can actually appreciate the greatness of Jackie Brown.
Exactly! That film is a masterpiece. Just rewatched yesterday for the 4th time after a decade. I only recently maybe because im older and an adult now that the first times I’ve seen it, the emotions in the eyes of the characters are so moving in those key moments. Samuel L Jackson and Robert Forster In that scene towards the end, in the car when they arrive to the office to meet Jackie. That exchange is all in the eyes and in Sam you see the humanity in Ordell when, in a strange way, he’s been the terrorizer, but becomes vulnerable because he knows maybe this might be the end for him but max looks him straight in the eye, empathetic eyes reassuring him that nothing shady is going on. Its like the role’s switch. Even when after Micheal Keaton shoots him in there and the close up on ordell dead, he still had that look of vulnerability and surprise, you almost feel sorry for him, even though he wpuld have had no pb killing them all in there for his money. Ofc the final kiss between Max and Jackie and last scene Pam grier in the car singing along to across 110th street with tears in her eyes as she leaves max. Iconic ❤
Well these critics are but others are truly knowledgable and their writing can be as illuminating and rewarding as any film school. Try Dave Kehr and Jonathan Rosenbaum.
That film is a masterpiece. Just rewatched yesterday for the 4th time after a decade. I only recently maybe because im older and an adult now that the first times I’ve seen it, the emotions in the eyes of the characters are so moving in those key moments. Samuel L Jackson and Robert Forster In that scene towards the end, in the car when they arrive to the office to meet Jackie. That exchange is all in the eyes and in Sam you see the humanity in Ordell when, in a strange way, he’s been the terrorizer, but becomes vulnerable because he knows maybe this might be the end for him but max looks him straight in the eye, empathetic eyes reassuring him that nothing shady is going on. Its like the role’s switch. Even when after Micheal Keaton shoots him in there and the close up on ordell dead, he still had that look of vulnerability and surprise, you almost feel sorry for him, even though he wpuld have had no pb killing them all in there for his money. Ofc the final kiss between Max and Jackie and last scene Pam grier in the car singing along to across 110th street with tears in her eyes as she leaves max. Iconic ❤
@@uraigroves7898No, they were just more different to the rest of what was out there. After thirty years, he’s not the new guy in town anymore. He’s an veteran filmmaker with an established POV. When Pulp Fiction came out there were only two Tarantino movies. Three if you count True Romance. Now there are nine he’s directed alone, two that he just wrote, and one other that he disavows because he was rewritten and it was directed by someone else too.
@@Nostalgias.LivingRoom I think i'm biased having extensively studied 50's & 60's LA history + spending time visiting relatives in California as a child. Tbh, Tarantino never made a film i didn't enjoy at the cinema, even Grindhouse was a blast with a packed audience. He's developed a storytelling style that wouldn't work for any other top directors. Sally Menke deserved A LOT of that praise too.
It's not a bad film. And from someone who's from LA and understands the milieu I can appreciate the sense of truth in the storyline. It's probably a film that requires a few viewings to fully appreciate and its a film that stews rather than jumps out at the viewer. So I can appreciate it. Were it the first film in the catalog....I doubt it would have jump started things like RD or PF and QT would've just been another quirky indie filmmaker infinitum...
Kind of cowardly to hide behind her keyboard and not be able to say what she actually thinks. If you stand by your opinion, you should be able to say it to the filmmaker.
I love Tarantino's movies, i rewatched them all during Christmas break. So many movies today spend the first 15 minutes, if that, developing the story and characters.Jackie Brown is one of my favorite movies of all time.
Fucking critics that never direct and maybe played an extra in a school play. This movie was a masterpiece and they just dont like it because it was different. I couldnt comprehend that 2 1/2 hrs went by that fast when i first saw it. It took me to another world watching this film
Too long has nothing to do with the length itself but if there's enough to the story to justify the length. This is why films like Jackie Brown are too long and The Godfather Part II isn't.
Pulp Fiction is so clearly his masterpiece that virtually everyone found this movie an anti climax who saw them both when they came out at the time. All of a sudden he could get De Niro ffs.. everything changed for him. If you're a songwriter you can't follow your best album and one of the all time great albums with a better one. It's just the way it is. Jackie Brown is a very solid piece of work and a very well executed film. It probably is a little underrated. My only criticism would be the overuse of that Delfonics tune to an almost comedic degree.
I agree. What's with this too long stuff? The film was packed with interesting characters. Let's take some time to get to know them instead of just rushing along with some plot. Taking its time lets us care a lot more what happens to the characters.
@@greense65 yeah there’s lots of stuff happening that just goes past people - even though there’s not much happening. There’s a reason why you can enjoy that film hundreds of times.
@@AbirTarafdar Not to take up more of your time on this old thread, but I have to add that I'm with you on your point in your reply to me. JB is one of those movies that I've seen lots of times, and each time I come away with something new.
Elmore Leonard has recently became my favorite author. His books are truly QT films on paper. So much fun to read and the dialogue is what hilds it all together. Ill read 100 pages of an EL book without even knowing what the plot is but it is so enjoyable because im getting to know the characters on a personal level and at that point i dont care what the plot is about!
I’ve settled on it as my favourite Tarantino film. Movies like Django & Inglorious have the advantage of being centered around huge historical events. If someone thinks Jackie Brown is a little think on plot/story - but that’s their only or main issue - they may find what they want in 1 of those 2 films. Pulp Fiction is almost universally agreed to be his best movie - and the movie basically follows around a bunch of criminals. It’s amazing. Jackie Brown? As far as a “criminal” movie goes - it’s got everything. It’s just too good. Criminals cops and in between. All the performances and casting is perfect. I can’t think of a better cast movie. Everyone who speaks is perfect for it. I don’t know I just find it to be amazing in every way and re-watchable. Yeah it’s my favourite Tarantino movie and I just edited this quickly - I didn’t even realise it’s 2.5 hours long. Doesn’t feel like it.
@@uraigroves7898 no matter what you say good , bad , indifferent. He made you think he made you feel & he moved you enough for you to watch tarantino critiques video. Happy friyay brotha
I watched this movie again last night. what drew my attention was the amount of times I found jackie brown attractive, despite at the same time not finding her attractive. it was this ambiguous feeling. Maybe because it's implied by the movie that she is attractive and I do not find her. Or maybe I dunno, something else. But one minute she fine, one minute not and there is this constant switch between these states. loved the movie though. very good, was also sad about the amount of screen time Chris Tucker had lol., love that actor. That scene where Ordell picks him up from his home, I laughed so much at the way Tucker walked, it was hilarious. Top actors there man.
Quentin is an amazing storyteller and a brilliant director. In the 1970s in a tsunami of self delusion, rock critics thought they were as important as the artists they were covering. In the end almost all of them were just snarky college level essayists. Film criticism appeared to be a little more cerebral but it always comes down to those who can do, those who can’t review. That sounds trite, but it is 110% accurate.
*Jackie Brown* is an absolute favorite of mine! When I hear harsh criticism of the film, it let’s me know that I’m talking to someone with NO TASTE whatsoever 🤷🏾♂️😂
Jackie Brown is my least favourite Tarantino movie. I've seen it many times and I've tried to understand why it doesn't work for me like the other Tarantino movies do. I think it's because it's not an original script. Some of the themes in JB are missing in all the others QT movies, like fear of getting old or falling in love. I think JB could have been directed by somebody else, ie De Palma, while the other QT movies could have only been directed by QT. It also seems to me a bit slow in some parts, although I understand Quentin's intention with the slow pacing.
Could do with African Americans in this discussion, younger people and other film makers not critics who have never made a film. It was deeper than his other films up to that point.
The hypocrisy of that woman. A critic who runs away from criticism. Of course, QT knows more about cinema than all these 'experts' put together, so they didn't dare.
I find it darkly ironic that, for centuries, the purpose of a critic was to justify the existence of a particular piece of media before Ma and Pa rode an hour into town and spent their precious nickel on it. And now, when the opinion of the common man is readily available and media is plentiful, the critic now finds themselves in the position of having to justify their own existence.
This is a truly weird setup, but Tarantino's passion for film in general and his films specifically is what carries this whole segment. The best part of films is how we all differ in our opinions and interpretations of it, and Tarantino gets that
What the internet has truly revealed, is that the job of being a professional movie critic, was always a BS job. This lady just can’t fathom having a discussion, as if her review is some prized information. Neither of them had ANYTHING interesting to say. It was another time, I get that…..I was there too, but nearly ALL of the people I look to for movie critique, are on youtube now…..total amateurs. This film has stood the test of time. These critics have not.
I have always been fond of "Jackie Brown" -- which hinted at a maturity Tarantino chose not to pursue. But watching it again recently made me realize what's always bugged me about his self-consciously overwritten dialog: It's all exposition (laying out legal and illegal procedures, explicitly explaining everybody's motivations), studded with cutesy cliches and pop-culture slang -- and almost everybody speaks exactly the same way: like Quentin Tarantino. That monotonously solipsistic style hasn't dated well...
nothing he went for an old sch primitive classic and that's what he gave his public good writing , good directing and great all around acting and it's not for naught that it is considered by all to be a classic
I swear, I can (and do) spend hours listening to Tarantino talk about his thought process behind movies. He does such a good job explaining what it is that he finds interesting about the films he makes, and listening to his perspective is invaluable to me as someone trying to learn more about what makes movies tick.
Totally.
i ripped through cinema speculation and i could easily read it again. i cant decide if he is a better writer or a film director. his novelization of OUATIH is so well written.
His movies are good because he makes what he wants to which means he cares, most movies you will watch were made (at best partially) for money. Imo thats most of it.
He's like the Neil Degrasse Tyson of film, just more likeable, like before NDG got all douchey. He speaks with a genuine charismatic enthusiasm, and gets into creative and technical detail but in a way that's very direct and descriptive and easy to understand.
@@D-Fens_1632 tyson is a joke
Jackie Brown is Tarantino restrained, believe it or not, and the characters really stand out because of that. It’s no Pulp Fiction or Basterds or Dogs, but it’s his most underrated film by far.
Bastards was awful.
@@uraigroves7898 Whaaat, Bastards was awesome, what are you saying lol
@@j-doomster1624 stupid movie. Made up death of Hitler. Any child could make up that crap....
@@uraigroves7898 Truth. Bastards had three amazing scenes. As a film, it's trying WAAAAAAy too hard to look cool and it's just cringe, aside from those 3 scenes. I think it's Tarantino's worst movie by far.
@@robertbloom4424 yes...the guy is way too pleased with himself...he crawled up his own azz years ago...
Jackie Brown is like fine wine. Just gets better with age.
Umm ok in her prime she was definitely a finee woman
@@justinhunt4767😂 He was talking about the movie, not Pam Grier.
@@wolf17238 I guess you can read his thoughts
@@justinhunt4767this video is about Jackie Brown the film, the comment is obviously about the film considering “jackie Brown” the character isn’t real and you would not know how she looks like now
@@jeffcunningham0389 it's not obvious you are not the person that I was talkin to the person can explain it for themselves
People have to understand that when "Jackie Brown" FIRST came out, YOUNG people, especially, HATED it, for the most part and it got mixed reviews everywhere. The reason being that everyone was just so floored with the THRILLING aspects of "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction" that when "Jackie Brown" came along - a VERY slowly paced film about people in their middle age, confronting the end of their relevance to the world and navigating a world they'd grown cynical about and finding love in the end - only to understand that they couldn't be together and that it would never work - this was VERY different than his first two films and was much more FORMAL, in terms of its presentation and style. So it was a total surprise to a lot of people. I remember seeing it with an audience of young people like me and while I loved it, half of the audience was literally laughing at the "old people" in it and going "ew!" when they kissed - and you could literally hear GROANS from the entire audience near the end when it hadn't ended yet. So while "Jackie Brown", in RETROSPECT, has been reevaluated by a lot of critics and audiences as probably his greatest movie - ironically, for those VERY REASONS people didn't like it at the time - that it's the most HUMAN and grounded film he'd made (which had a lot to do with Elmore Leonard being the source of the story and not Tarantino, I mean, let's be honest) - at the TIME, it was a box office failure and had a very mixed critical reaction. So there's nothing these critics were saying that nobody else was. Tarantino has NEVER made another movie like "Jackie Brown" and I still maintain that it's his greatest piece of work. But in 1997, this was *not* the movie people wanted or expected from him and it took MANY years for people to recognize how strong it is.
Hmm, well Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction didn't exactly feature YOUNG PEOPLE, did they? Jackie Brown (Rum Punch) could have been made by anyone, with a totally different cast and it would have been just about as good. Just look at Life of Crime (2013), an adaptation of Elmore Leonard's other novel featuring some of the same characters as Jackie Brown. It's possibly superior to Tarantino's movie, although it was surely influenced by his work. The disappointment of Jackie Brown is that it was a waste of his talents other than proving he could make a fairly generic crime thriller, making him more commercially viable.
I've enjoyed all of Tarantino's films, but I haven't loved one since Jackie Brown. Almost nobody writes dialogue better than Quentin, however, the characters all sound the same. You can hear Quentin's "voice" behind all his characters which makes them less distinct. Jackie Brown was different. Distinct characters that didn't all talk the same and speak like individuals
Excuse my ignorance. You aren’t going to agree with me but perhaps we can reach middle ground:
I recently had a discussion with someone that believes Full Metal Jacket is a great film from beginning to end. I feel it’s one great film attached to a disjointed and unmemorable one. A slow paced film can be pulled off well (There Will Be Blood).
Part of how I gauge how good a film actually is, is how much do you remember after watching it once? Except for “AK-47, when you absolutely need to kill every motherfucker in the room” most people can’t remember most of the film. It can be argued that artistic vision supersedes watchability (Orwell’s 1984 is hard to watch) but really what was Quintin’s goal here? To bore us? I don’t know a single person on a Friday night that would say, “you know what we should do? Watch Jacky Brown!”
To me (just my opinion and I’m open to changing my mind) people want to like Jacky Brown because they love Quentin the same way they like the second half of Full Metal Jacket. They believe in Kubrick’s vision even when he misses the point that a film is meant to be watchable.
@@clash5jagreed
Why do you feel the need to put random words in caps?
In a world where the average Transformers film is nearly three hours long. Jackie Brown definitely isn’t too long
transformers also has action and impressive cgi to grab your attention every 5 minutes
@@Antwannnn i can go to my local dumpy and set off an explosion and get the same amount of entertainment a transformer movie does
Jackie Brown is a BIT too long. Transformers and every modern Marvel/DC/Star Wars/Disney movie is WAY too bloated - ridiculously long.
The book is massive too and a lot was not included in the movie. Like you get a moment with Max getting another guy who skipped bail and see how clever is Max is with not just his words but his movements are thought out. I almost wished it could of been 4.5 hours long or a two parter.
Movie is still too long and has a lot of dead air. Still a solid movie.
If a critic does not want to talk directly with the film maker then why did she go on the panel?
Getting a filmmaker on a TV panel with film critics seems like an awkward concept. I don't like it. That lady acted like she wasn't expecting the situation she ended up in. She might have been tricked.
Could be.@@StarfieldRailway
@@StarfieldRailwayShe was afraid to debate QT because she knew he’d wipe the floor with her.
@@TexasMan77 she said she is a fan dumb dumb.
@@TexasMan77 She might just not be ready to share her thoughts yet. Maybe she knew she would filter her thoughts talking face to face, as opposed to sitting down and writing a brutally honest review with no social inhibitors. If she writes a review that misunderstands Tarantino, the review can still teach him something about his audience. If NOBODY talks about his film, that's a problem.
critics don't normally do this because they cant sit next to an artist and say it to their face.
You need to go to sundance, at least in the 90's you could see critics fight each other and the directors in the press meating
@@akiraperu1 - What kind of meat was served in the meating?
The way he answers to the critic... I felt I went back to my naïf days at film school, remembering how Directors should be: real artists. That's the only key for a great motion picture. with all the pros and the cons that an artist brings on the table.
Tarantino it like a Picasso, a Mozart. He has truly an unique brain.
I would say that our times, made by white collars controlling the arts and promoting "algorithms" as the main stream solution to make products that make money, don't deserve such a gifted artist.
My dad and I went to see Jackie Brown together in the theater. I was 16 and he was in his mid-50s, so basically Max Cherry's age. We both loved the movie and loved every performance. I think a lot of people thought they were going to see "Pulp Fiction 2," but if you took it on its own terms, it was wonderful. The only thing that bothered me on the first screening was that I wasn't prepared for Sam Jackson to play the bad guy, and you don't realize that's the case early. He doesn't really become the bad guy until the final few scenes. So that threw me off.
But sheesh, we came out of there knowing we had seen a great movie, and I thought a lot of the criticism of the film came from critiques and fans who were critiquing this based on the movie they thought he was going to make, not the movie he did make.
What I didn't think about until years later was that after Pulp Fiction, so many movies had an element of Pulp Fiction's surface: the humor mixed with the violence. Some held up on their own terms (Usual Suspects), some found an audience even if that audience even if they weren't fully unique (Go, which I loved, Boondock Saints and Things to Do In Denver When You're Dead, which I didn't) and some were just ripoffs (Suicide Kings comes to mind). But I think what's fascinating is that none of these directors would have made Jackie Brown if they set out to make a "Tarantino-esque movie" in the late 90s. That's why he's him and they're not.
I’m a big Tarantino fan, but I watched Jackie Brown fully for the first time the other day, for the first time since seeing it in theaters when it came out. I didn’t much like it back then because I was expecting more Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs out of it. People were still figuring out what Tarantino style was.
Now, 30 years later, I appreciate Jackie Brown much more.
Care to explain why that is?
I was 20 years old when it came out in theaters and I felt I was hoodwinked and hated the movie. It's the only time I've seen it until I watched it again last night. I fell in love with this movie. It's probably an age thing. Now that I'm the same age as many of the characters are in the movie I understand what QT was doing and it's cinematic perfection! I'm sorry QT I admit I was hat 20 year old hater because it was so far removed from what I was expecting.
To me Jackie Brown is one of his finest films, I loved it.
3:18 has me weak bro. Just look at his expression when QT expounded on his reasoning 😂.
That lady was not ready for change. Jackie Brown is very subversive - ahead of its time!
She was philosophically woke before woke was cool, QT was just pointing actually reality that he/his actors/the culture was experiencing in real life while not in effort of making a word count for an east coast liberal think-piece. It's why he's a genius.
Overrated
Huh? She said she liked pulp fiction so… did I miss something. She refused to engage him because of her principles and that she hadn’t written the review yet. Principles is a good thing. I wonder if this is the critic Tarantino admired… anyone know?
Admired? I’d say by the body language he was downright hot for her.
@@jkerfeld Jesus fucking CHRIST this is cringe-inducing.
What talent exists among those "critics"? For what are they known, remembered, and renowned?
The arrogance of the lady to answer "get serious" when asked if she liked the movie. And her refusal to discuss the movie on a panel discussion show discussing the movie begs the question, what was she even doing there other than to suggest her critiques were not open to discussion and therefore beyond reproach. Utter cowardly, delusional arrogance.
Jackie Brown is my favourite Movie of his, the films pace is perfect, each character is strong and it feels like you have stepped into their lives rather than you are watching a performance. Adore the twist.
This aged well for Quentin
Wow these critics all come of kinda weak. If you can't go deeper than "what are the hats about?" And "it's too long.". You probably shouldn't be a critic. If you feel like criticizing you should at least be able to bring up what you would've changed.
Yeah, really funny viewing it all these years later. The critics' takes have not aged well while Quentin has had this amazing career and genuinely contributed to the cultural zeitgeist. It looks like a bunch of people sitting around picasso and asking why he doesnt draw realistically and its too simple of an art style or something.
I love all of Tarantino's movies, but this one is my absolute favorite. This movie feels like a nice warm, comforting hug when i watch it no matter my mental mood or physical feeling. Jackie Brown, The Life Aquatic, The Thing and Event Horizon are the only movies i can watch no matter what.
As a kid watching Jackie Brown, I didn't get it. I didn't really "get" Pulp Fiction but it had enough spectacle that I could think that I got it. As an adult I can actually appreciate the greatness of Jackie Brown.
It's definitely an older person's movie.
Exactly! That film is a masterpiece. Just rewatched yesterday for the 4th time after a decade. I only recently maybe because im older and an adult now that the first times I’ve seen it, the emotions in the eyes of the characters are so moving in those key moments. Samuel L Jackson and Robert Forster In that scene towards the end, in the car when they arrive to the office to meet Jackie. That exchange is all in the eyes and in Sam you see the humanity in Ordell when, in a strange way, he’s been the terrorizer, but becomes vulnerable because he knows maybe this might be the end for him but max looks him straight in the eye, empathetic eyes reassuring him that nothing shady is going on. Its like the role’s switch. Even when after Micheal Keaton shoots him in there and the close up on ordell dead, he still had that look of vulnerability and surprise, you almost feel sorry for him, even though he wpuld have had no pb killing them all in there for his money. Ofc the final kiss between Max and Jackie and last scene Pam grier in the car singing along to across 110th street with tears in her eyes as she leaves max.
Iconic ❤
I appreciate both Jackie Brown and the music of Steely Dan as an adult in his 30s. Both hit quite hard when you've dealt with life's hardships.
She was afraid to talk face to face with Tarantino.
As a critic, I believe critics are useless.
Well these critics are but others are truly knowledgable and their writing can be as illuminating and rewarding as any film school. Try Dave Kehr and Jonathan Rosenbaum.
You are useless
I don't.
Tarantino got into film, in part, because of film critic Pauline Kael
A cynic knows the price of everything but the value of nothing. Oscar Wilde
The only woman in the group:
"Houston, we have a problem."
"What is it?"
"Never mind."
"What's the problem?"
"Nothing."
"Please tell us."
"I'm fine!"
Your comment made my day.
That film is a masterpiece. Just rewatched yesterday for the 4th time after a decade. I only recently maybe because im older and an adult now that the first times I’ve seen it, the emotions in the eyes of the characters are so moving in those key moments. Samuel L Jackson and Robert Forster In that scene towards the end, in the car when they arrive to the office to meet Jackie. That exchange is all in the eyes and in Sam you see the humanity in Ordell when, in a strange way, he’s been the terrorizer, but becomes vulnerable because he knows maybe this might be the end for him but max looks him straight in the eye, empathetic eyes reassuring him that nothing shady is going on. Its like the role’s switch. Even when after Micheal Keaton shoots him in there and the close up on ordell dead, he still had that look of vulnerability and surprise, you almost feel sorry for him, even though he wpuld have had no pb killing them all in there for his money. Ofc the final kiss between Max and Jackie and last scene Pam grier in the car singing along to across 110th street with tears in her eyes as she leaves max.
Iconic ❤
In my opinion, this was his best work tied with Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
His earlier movies are better than his later movies...
@@uraigroves7898No, they were just more different to the rest of what was out there. After thirty years, he’s not the new guy in town anymore. He’s an veteran filmmaker with an established POV.
When Pulp Fiction came out there were only two Tarantino movies. Three if you count True Romance.
Now there are nine he’s directed alone, two that he just wrote, and one other that he disavows because he was rewritten and it was directed by someone else too.
I agree on this.
I’d have to rewatch Once Upon a Time in Hollywood again, it was good, it just didn’t WOW me
@@Nostalgias.LivingRoom I think i'm biased having extensively studied 50's & 60's LA history + spending time visiting relatives in California as a child.
Tbh, Tarantino never made a film i didn't enjoy at the cinema, even Grindhouse was a blast with a packed audience. He's developed a storytelling style that wouldn't work for any other top directors. Sally Menke deserved A LOT of that praise too.
It's not a bad film. And from someone who's from LA and understands the milieu I can appreciate the sense of truth in the storyline. It's probably a film that requires a few viewings to fully appreciate and its a film that stews rather than jumps out at the viewer. So I can appreciate it. Were it the first film in the catalog....I doubt it would have jump started things like RD or PF and QT would've just been another quirky indie filmmaker infinitum...
Kind of cowardly to hide behind her keyboard and not be able to say what she actually thinks. If you stand by your opinion, you should be able to say it to the filmmaker.
Tarantino and the Cohen brothers have brought back the joy of cinema for me.
Where’s the full interview? It used to be on TH-cam.
Jackie Brown is not too long. It is as long as it needs to be.
she doesn’t want to be influenced by having that that dialogue and i respect that
I read the book well before, and can attest that Tarantino succeeded in making the movie feel just like reading the book.
Elmore Leonard was such an incredible novelist. I wish more people would read him.
I love Tarantino's movies, i rewatched them all during Christmas break. So many movies today spend the first 15 minutes, if that, developing the story and characters.Jackie Brown is one of my favorite movies of all time.
OMY He just drips talent like a melting popsicle Pete / these poor critic's don't know what they are up against he is a master
Omg, critics are exactly how you think they are in person. They gotta be some of the most unlikeable group of people ever.
Why is the background black?
Fucking critics that never direct and maybe played an extra in a school play. This movie was a masterpiece and they just dont like it because it was different. I couldnt comprehend that 2 1/2 hrs went by that fast when i first saw it. It took me to another world watching this film
It's one of his best whenever him and Sam get together it's a classic best director-actor duo in the game maybe de Niro and Scorsese
Who was the critic that wouldn’t tell her point of view in the show ?
How on earth is 2 and a half hours “too long”?!
Just think this was the attention span over 20 years ago.
Too long has nothing to do with the length itself but if there's enough to the story to justify the length. This is why films like Jackie Brown are too long and The Godfather Part II isn't.
People nowadays bang out five seasons of a tv show like it's nothing but still complain about movies being too long. Go figure.
Who is this silly woman? she's taking up space. // Jackie Brown is his best film .. every scene is perfect, I loved it❤🎉
The thing about Jackie Brown is that it is a serious character piece. It feels so much like a late 70’s, early 80’s movie kinda film.
Pulp Fiction is so clearly his masterpiece that virtually everyone found this movie an anti climax who saw them both when they came out at the time. All of a sudden he could get De Niro ffs.. everything changed for him. If you're a songwriter you can't follow your best album and one of the all time great albums with a better one. It's just the way it is. Jackie Brown is a very solid piece of work and a very well executed film. It probably is a little underrated. My only criticism would be the overuse of that Delfonics tune to an almost comedic degree.
She has the courage to criticize the movie *only* if Quentin Tarantino is not in front of her and desperately invent nonsensical reasons not to do so.
It’s a great, great film on so many counts. In my opinion, his best. These critics are mouth breathing fools.
I agree. What's with this too long stuff?
The film was packed with interesting characters. Let's take some time to get to know them instead of just rushing along with some plot. Taking its time lets us care a lot more what happens to the characters.
@@greense65 yeah there’s lots of stuff happening that just goes past people - even though there’s not much happening. There’s a reason why you can enjoy that film hundreds of times.
@@AbirTarafdar Not to take up more of your time on this old thread, but I have to add that I'm with you on your point in your reply to me. JB is one of those movies that I've seen lots of times, and each time I come away with something new.
Elmore Leonard has recently became my favorite author. His books are truly QT films on paper. So much fun to read and the dialogue is what hilds it all together. Ill read 100 pages of an EL book without even knowing what the plot is but it is so enjoyable because im getting to know the characters on a personal level and at that point i dont care what the plot is about!
jackie brown is one of his best
Critics talk because that's all they can do: talk.
His best film, still.
I love it, but on my personal list, it's tied for 2nd with Reservoir Dogs. Pulp is obviously #1.
This was my #1 until OUATIH came out.
What is the female critic’s full name? Who did she write for?
Janet Maslin. She wrote for the New York Times at the time:
archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/library/film/122497jackie-film-review.html
@@Vanilla_Skynet thank you, just read the review!
That first hour is the part I enjoy the most
I’ve settled on it as my favourite Tarantino film. Movies like Django & Inglorious have the advantage of being centered around huge historical events. If someone thinks Jackie Brown is a little think on plot/story - but that’s their only or main issue - they may find what they want in 1 of those 2 films. Pulp Fiction is almost universally agreed to be his best movie - and the movie basically follows around a bunch of criminals. It’s amazing. Jackie Brown? As far as a “criminal” movie goes - it’s got everything. It’s just too good. Criminals cops and in between. All the performances and casting is perfect. I can’t think of a better cast movie. Everyone who speaks is perfect for it. I don’t know I just find it to be amazing in every way and re-watchable. Yeah it’s my favourite Tarantino movie and I just edited this quickly - I didn’t even realise it’s 2.5 hours long. Doesn’t feel like it.
The Jackie Brown soundtrack has been my most played album & I think the film is Tarantino's most refined.
that’s awesome how he was talking about the black community. He is so awesome.
He's a poser...he likes to try to act black. But it's fake.
@@uraigroves7898 no matter what you say good , bad , indifferent. He made you think he made you feel & he moved you enough for you to watch tarantino critiques video. Happy friyay brotha
Very fascinating dynamic QT and the female critic have going
I had a fuzzy Kangol in the early 90s..lol
Jackie Brown was excellent, excellent work. A very mature and smoth piece of writing and film-making.
Jackie brown is a really good movie. Underrated in the Tarantino collection
I watched this movie again last night. what drew my attention was the amount of times I found jackie brown attractive, despite at the same time not finding her attractive. it was this ambiguous feeling. Maybe because it's implied by the movie that she is attractive and I do not find her. Or maybe I dunno, something else. But one minute she fine, one minute not and there is this constant switch between these states. loved the movie though. very good, was also sad about the amount of screen time Chris Tucker had lol., love that actor. That scene where Ordell picks him up from his home, I laughed so much at the way Tucker walked, it was hilarious. Top actors there man.
Good for QT for doing this. JB is better than most movies.
Quentin is an amazing storyteller and a brilliant director. In the 1970s in a tsunami of self delusion, rock critics thought they were as important as the artists they were covering. In the end almost all of them were just snarky college level essayists. Film criticism appeared to be a little more cerebral but it always comes down to those who can do, those who can’t review. That sounds trite, but it is 110% accurate.
Critics, critic because they couldn't write or direct. Jackie Brown is an amazing movie
I watch it once a month!
Michael Keaton, who was in Jackie Brown, summed up being a critic perfectly in Birdman.
*Jackie Brown* is an absolute favorite of mine! When I hear harsh criticism of the film, it let’s me know that I’m talking to someone with NO TASTE whatsoever 🤷🏾♂️😂
Jackie Brown is my least favourite Tarantino movie. I've seen it many times and I've tried to understand why it doesn't work for me like the other Tarantino movies do. I think it's because it's not an original script. Some of the themes in JB are missing in all the others QT movies, like fear of getting old or falling in love. I think JB could have been directed by somebody else, ie De Palma, while the other QT movies could have only been directed by QT. It also seems to me a bit slow in some parts, although I understand Quentin's intention with the slow pacing.
Damn I personally find Jackie brown one of his best. Probably his most believable portrayal of emotions and characters.
I think it's one of best too
its one of my favorite Quentin movies maybe the best and that means its one of my favorite movies.
Jackie brown , I could watch over ,over,and over again and I have !
one of my favourite tarantino films...the cast was just perfect fit
Could do with African Americans in this discussion, younger people and other film makers not critics who have never made a film. It was deeper than his other films up to that point.
I saw that movie when I was young and don’t remember thinking it was long.
The hypocrisy of that woman. A critic who runs away from criticism.
Of course, QT knows more about cinema than all these 'experts' put together, so they didn't dare.
To be fair, while I do love QT movies I have always thought Jackie Brown could be about 20 min shorter
Quentin's final film will involve a film critic apparently
Whats the ladys name?
What is the name of the female critic from the video?
Janet Maslin
Thank you@@Vanilla_Skynet
I find it darkly ironic that, for centuries, the purpose of a critic was to justify the existence of a particular piece of media before Ma and Pa rode an hour into town and spent their precious nickel on it. And now, when the opinion of the common man is readily available and media is plentiful, the critic now finds themselves in the position of having to justify their own existence.
5:33 theres a book called Antkind by Charlie Kaufman anout how dumb that mindset is
Amazing movie. He is so many steps ahead of these critics, i almost feel embarrassed for them.
This is a truly weird setup, but Tarantino's passion for film in general and his films specifically is what carries this whole segment. The best part of films is how we all differ in our opinions and interpretations of it, and Tarantino gets that
What the internet has truly revealed, is that the job of being a professional movie critic, was always a BS job. This lady just can’t fathom having a discussion, as if her review is some prized information. Neither of them had ANYTHING interesting to say. It was another time, I get that…..I was there too, but nearly ALL of the people I look to for movie critique, are on youtube now…..total amateurs.
This film has stood the test of time. These critics have not.
I have always been fond of "Jackie Brown" -- which hinted at a maturity Tarantino chose not to pursue. But watching it again recently made me realize what's always bugged me about his self-consciously overwritten dialog: It's all exposition (laying out legal and illegal procedures, explicitly explaining everybody's motivations), studded with cutesy cliches and pop-culture slang -- and almost everybody speaks exactly the same way: like Quentin Tarantino. That monotonously solipsistic style hasn't dated well...
I never met a single brotha in the 90s who rocked a Kangol. I only saw them on TV.
nothing he went for an old sch primitive classic and that's what he gave his public good writing , good directing and great all around acting and it's not for naught that it is considered by all to be a classic
Damn she is professional!!!!!
People who dislike Jackie Brown right to jail
1990s "this movie is too long"
2018 "hold my beer"
The film “critic” didn’t know what a Kangol is yet the opinions she may express, we’re supposed to take serious? That math ain’t mathing.
Is that Pauline Kale??
Janet Maslin.
"That there's a Tech9. The most popula gun in American Crime. Can you believe dat shit?"
Jackie Brown is my favorite QT film
Some of these critics just can't relate to or have no interest in a story about black people. Change the color of everybody and they'd love it.
He’s right on the money!!! I cant stand the fast food delivery of movies.
I understand what he is saying, but after two hours, it doesn't matter how great a movie is, you just want it to be over with.
The criticism that "a film is too long," without any explication, is pointless.
Definitely didn't run long enough for Beaumont.
I think Jackie Brown is one of Tarantino's best movies! (Not just because of the hats)
JB is my favorite Tarantino movie
Boy oh boy did these critics get it wrong
You really do feel like you've read a big novel with rich characters when Jackie Brown's credits roll. It's still his best film.
Film so underrated