You're way off about Tarantino having a "racist" intent. You are basing it on the fact that you are young and have been brainwashed. Everything that you see, infers "Racism" because you are programmed to. The things that you connected were not intentional . People with attitudes based on insanity like yours , really ruin the things that we all used to enjoy. You see Tarantino treating his characters as characters and NOT their racial identity, as somehow an intentional, what? a jab at black people ? Race is not a factor in his films in the way that you wish it was and are programmed to see it. You see him having Sam Jackson portray "The House Negro" and having him act what your limited brain perceives as "Bad" as an intentional casting of another Black man who is a bad guy. In reality he is showing a phenomena that is known but not many know about. How House slaves felt about their Masters and how they would die for them. This went over your head and you instead cooked up something, again based on your narrative. The Head of the Mob , who HAPPENED to be Black, WAS raped, because unlike what your brain sees, Tarantino wasn't looking at it like that . I'm really troubled by the way that you think and what you have inferred in your video. It's very untrue, but I deal with twentysomethings every day and know where it comes from.
As a black fan of Tarantino, I praise his depiction of characters how he sees fit, that's what an artist does, he's not supposed to be "politically correct".
Welles commented that Ford was where the cliches began. Note in Drums Along the Mohawk (1939) where a character peering out of the fort says it quiet, too quiet, out there.
8:09 'You see, Quentin, you may have spent twelve straight years of your life writing and directing movies about women kicking men's asses six ways till Sunday, but one of those women was a mother who cared a lot about her child and slew her mortal enemy merely by causing his heart to explode inside his body. So I gotta dock you some MAJOR points there.'
And she doesn't just "crumble" when she finally confronts Bill, he freaking shoots her with a freaking neurotoxin and stops her right there... Then she kills him. You see, this is what we call forced moral judgement, kids!
A funny comparison is the Danny as a greaser reveal in Grease and how QT emulated it for Calvin Candy in DU, same snap zoom turn over the shoulder cigarette smile and everything lol
Tarantino is a shameless plagiarist. There is nt single original idea or scene in his movies. All are stolen from other movies. The man is so shameless he plagiarize a whole HK movie, scen by scene, and called it his own creation.
@@parapoliticos52 And yet, filtered through QT's mind by some sort of alchemy, Reservoir Dogs is regarded by many as a superior film to 'City on Fire' -- a quality flick in its own right -- or at least is easily distinguishable from it (for Dogs he also borrows liberally from 'The Killing' and 'Kansas City Confidential'). The ability of QT to transcend the sources he draws from is the defining characteristic of his craft, one that neutralises the dusty argument that he is nothing but a pale imitator. Funnily enough, I consider Tarantino's plundering to be one of the most unique pleasures his films offer to the cinephile. He knows where he got this idea, that costume, this shot etc. from, and he hopes you do too. He is not hiding his references like so many lesser filmmakers. Knowledge of the margins of film history enhances the meta aspect of his stories, which is why he cross references his own films as well. But I know that for some this will never be enough to justify his remix/pastiche style, and that's ok. I don't care for every movie he's made either. But he is a living legend in the biz, like him or not.
The Searchers: an older veteran of campaigns takes a young man under his wing to rescue a girl kidnapped into slavery. Django: a seasoned campaigner takes young man under his wing to rescue a woman enslaved by a villain. In both movies, the two protagonists are welcomed into the villains home and shown trophies. In both movies the older protagonist kills the villain.
@Randy White, I'm not disputing its standing with scholars, but with regular people. Walk down the street and ask everyone you pass if they even heard of it. You will be out quite a long time, so bring snacks.
Those parts were obviously forced and just simply untrue. Beatrix Kiddo was a "mommy" who had never seen her kid. What was she supposed to do, live happily ever after with a murdering assassin? Yeah, that would have been so good.
I agree. I normally love wolfcrow's videos and really liked this one for the most part but yeah that whole Tarantino part felt unnatural. Very cherry picked moments from some films and very precisely worded depictions of those parts of the films. I don't think he's racist and I certainly don't think his films could be used as an example to prove he's racist otherwise he wouldn't be making them today
8:55 I think you'll recall 'Pulp Fiction"s largest black role by far is Jules, and the Gold Watch section of the film was written by Roger Avary anyway, not Quentin.
Exactly. And Jules is the only character in the film who even considers the idea of doing something morally right at any point. Also right after Pulp Fiction Tarantino made Jackie Brown. And before somebody tries to to throw the “well that’s based on a book” thing, Jackie is white in the book. And Tarantino has said that when he read the book and tried to imagine a strong, independent and resilient woman the first image that popped into his head was Pam Grier.
It doesn’t add up that someone intelligent enough to make this video would say something so rash and disprovable. I really feel like he must’ve been taught to think that by some film professor who was otherwise solid at their job. Just really out of left field there. So easily disprovable lol.
I agree that the way QT portrays violence is questionable cause he makes it look fun, but your comparison with JF doesn't make any sense, nothing looks similar. His dialogs may not have anything to do with the situation but they certanly are full of subtext, they tell you how characters think and their moral convictions. I think Bill's death is awsome and well deserved, and there would not be a movie if she kills him at the beginning. They use their own child as a shield, that doesn't makes QT a bad person, that makes antagonists evil. Jules decides to quit the thug life and lives on, Vincent doesn't, he gets killed. I don't see how Tarantino could be portraying diferent cultures in a negative way, he loves cinema from so many diferent places so he pays homage and haves fun with the material, he has good and bad guys in all different colors killing and getting killed.
Also, QT has JF pacing in all his films. He, like Ford, lets scenes breathe. It's actually my favourite part of Tarantino's work (and I know plenty of people hate it), not the violence or profanity. Of course, correlation is not causation but Tarantino does lean a fair bit in Ford's direction, regardless of how he feels about "the old man" of Hollywood.
8:23 Uhm, because she doesn't know where he is, because she needs to go to Okinawa to get a sword from Hanzo first (and get information from Sofie on where the other Squad members are), and because a movie protagonist can't kill the main villain first.
Bruh why are you trying to prove by commenting second for second on a TH-cam video? Do you have nothing better to do with your time if you're the smartest man in the comment section?
@@pjmaas4287 If this person doesn't speak up, someone else will. Or will we all accept wolfcrow's opinions about Quentin Tarantino to be correct? Many of the things wolfcrow said about Quentin are debatable. And Brian set out to debate.
@@thegrayyernaut I'm all for a debate and I understand how what I said might have been vague. What I meant to say was that based on the volume of comments he made on a TH-cam video, I cannot imagine that anyone takes him seriously as I find it preposterous to waste that much time analyzing and breaking down works of content creators. But here I am so good luck with your debate 🔥I'm out 😂
@@thegrayyernaut Also, I am perpetually busy breaking down videos of stuff I can apply to my individual circumstance, I definitely don't leave second for second breakdowns on the ones I feel are trash.
Loved the factual part of the analysis, but someone is obviously trying to cash in on the current awful state of affairs with a tasteless and cheap 'pop-shot' sort of bashing with cherry-picked examples. Jackie Brown is arguably his best movie, along with Django, and inglorious. And as you said, John Ford attempted to correct himself at the end of his career, so we'll just act like he didn't at least address his mistakes? As i said, someone is obviously just attempting minutely take advantage of the times.
@@SnailHatan If someone says they think it's his best, I'd say it's an interesting choice. The more I reflect on "Jackie Brown", the more I appreciate it. Hard to quantify sometimes what's a filmmaker's "best" film, in my opinion. I _usually_ stick with what's my "favorite". "Jackie Brown" would be high up in my picks for my favorite of Tarantino's films.
I don't know if this is true but I read a story in a book about how Spielberg once met John Ford himself who tested the kid (Spielberg) by asking him where the horizon on a painting was. When Spielberg answered, Ford was apparently satisfied and told him that if he remembered the appropriate placement for the horizon in the frame, Spielberg would make a good filmmaker. Guess Spielberg remembered that, if true.
Was an interesting video until the really odd, out-of-place rant against Tarantino with bizarrely inaccurate information. Calvin Candy *was* the antagonist of Django Unchained, not Stephen, even though Stephen was depicted as an equally or even more evil Character than Calvin, which was also a sad but true historical reality. In fact, Sam Jackson has gone on record multiple times that he was disappointed how much Tarantino had toned down Stephen's character in editing, having cut the majority of his scenes because they made even Tarantino feel uncomfortable. And saying Sam Jackson's characters are never morally right in Tarantino's movies is quite the hell of a statement and I guess someone wasn't paying attention to Pulp Fiction, where the inciting incident of the movie literally causes his character to have a religious awakening and go onto a path of deep self introspection throughout the movie that ultimately leads to him retiring from a life of crime. Pulp Fiction, btw, took place at a time where NO ONE was hiring black actors to be protagonists of mainstream movies, especially relatively unknown actors which Sam was at the time of Pulp Fiction's filming. Also being upset that the strong, female protagonist kills a guy named Bill in the end of a movie called "Kill Bill" is quite a take. As to his depictions of Asian stereotypes, you have to remember Tarantino is a massive Hong Kong cinefile. He's a life long collector of eastern film and music, and very often invokes their work in his films. Kill Bill itself was practically a love letter to that genre of dated film making. And Bruce Lee in Once Upon in Hollywood was just acting like Bruce Lee in my opinion.. there were real times in Bruce's career, at his peak, that he actually behaved like that. I don't see anything racist about that depiction at all. It's disappointing such an otherwise well written analysis of an intriguing topic is muddied by baseless accusations against another revolutionary director stemmed from the personal opinion and feelings of the narrator.
Well said. Many things about this video bothered me. There's a film John Ford made called "The Prisoner of Shark Island". It's *lengthy* condescending, racist portrayal of black Americans is what I always cite as the worst I've ever seen, as far as "problematic representation in Golden Age Hollywood". I've seen a lot of Golden Age films. I've never seen anything as jaw-dropping as "The Prisoner of Shark Island". No one should ever use John Ford as their example of racial equality in American cinema, he's not that guy.
Yes, but if we're talking about the one western (western world, not the genre, though that too I guess) director that had the most impact on other directors in the western world more than anyone, it's Ford. Ray had a huge impact as well, but none loom as large as Ford.
The only things satyajit ray doesn't have is wide range of audience.... Look inside india 90% of us haven't seen his work and people rarely talk about it
@@sameerahmed-gx8js Wow that's sad. But then, the great majority of "young" westerners have no idea who John Ford is nowadays. I'm a film student and even my fellow classmates have no clue, but everyone knows Quentin Tarantino.
Sam Jackson is never morally right in Pulp Fiction? His ENTIRE storyline is about pursuing the righteous path and forsaking his old way after he "witnesses a miracle". Smh
@@karlkarlos3545 yeah but why does this dude single him out if everyone else was an a'hole as well. I followed the video and thought it was very interesting but the insinuations that Tarantino is racist were kinda misplaced.
@@michiel1162 There is no reason to believe he is a racist. I think it was a silly reaction to Tarantino accusing Ford of being a racist (which I also disagree with).
Brilliant video, but I don’t think it was the right place for the Tarantino-bashing. When you squeeze that gnarly a subject into a mostly unrelated video essay, the limited time short-changes whatever nuance your arguments may have had. There are many holes and oversimplifications in your logic people will take issue with (as you’re currently finding out) that could’ve been addressed in a dedicated video. It’d be worth exploring, as I believe the question of Tarantino’s cultural and socio-political sensitivity is an interesting one, even as I disagree with your conclusions on it.
Great video as usual but I don't agree that Tarantino is a racist, or at least that those excerpts from his films can be used to prove he's a racist. Pulp Fiction; I can't remember whether the owner of the shop (Ving Rhames' character went to) was racist or not but maybe the message in Ving's character being saved was that they should work together to move forward? Or that there are bigger problems in the world (racism, the shop owner could represent that problem) that Bruce and Ving's characters should be aware of rather than their own problem in the film. As for Django, I really don't think Stephen is an example of Tarantino being racist. There are many interpretations, perhaps Calvin did something to Stephen to make him see his twisted world view, or perhaps Stephen just defended Calvin in his own self interest for survival and chose not to worry about Django or the other slaves' lives. There are lots of possible reasons and interpretations for why Stephen defends Calvin but if Tarantino was simply saying something racist in that casting and character choice, he would not be making films or doing much else today.
I totally agree. The video misses the mark with its Tarantino criticism. The character of Stephen was a representation of a slave who didn't believe he was a slave. He just believed that was the way the world was, and he was in his rightful place. And to have a black character be a bigger villain than a white one is not racist either.
The most influential directors were John Ford and Alfred Hitchcock who both started in the silent era followed closely by Orson Wells. Their influence is seen in the likes of Ingmar Bergman, Federico Fellini, Akira Kurosawa, Stanley Kubrick and Sergio Leone. Later, we have the trio who became famous and influential since the 1970s: Francis Ford Coppola, Steven Spielberg and Martin Scorsese.
@@kdizzle901 “The Quiet American” from 1952 is a delightful John Ford movie with great directing, acting and cinematography of Ireland. It’s my favorite John Ford which I’ve watched a good half a dozen times. Great cast including locals.
the video is nice, but the part about tarantino, oh boy, it's not even worth the time to correct you, so many absurds were said, that I honestly couldn't believe it. Nice to see that in the comments people know better, and are simply ignoring that...
One essential aspect of John Ford's filmmaking is he started out in silent movies, as did Ozu (and many others). In almost every Ford film there are long silent reaction shots of just people, sometimes the principals, sometimes 'the old folks' or just 'passersby.' All the shots here from The Grapes of Wrath are exactly this. There's a Swedish TV series where a group of wives kill their husbands. Visual enough to make it interesting. The Finns did a remake and they do what seems to happen so often in current Finnish filmmaking, everybody just stands around and talks (a lot.) A lot of really smart creative people in Finland, but their filmmakers seem to have missed some important lessons. In the movie Junebug a woman is seen across the street, she's a bit heavy set and ordinary but the camera just stays on her as she walks into her house. It's just one of the reasons this is such a great movie. By holding on her the film conveys to us deep respect for her. Powerful and very much something Ford would do. So you can watch a John Ford movie without the sound and understand what's happening. Sergio Leone is often, but not always, as good or better at this. (Be regrettable if a follower of Ford didn't take it a bit farther.) This is a sign of good filmmaking, but not necessarily great filmmaking. Kurosawa saying, "I studied John Ford:" Don't forget what Orson Welles and Greg Toland did before making Citizen Kane, they watched Stagecoach 42 times. (A friend tried this with Anonioni's Blow-up but never really got anywhere.) When I was young I worked on a low budget (bomb) that John Carradine was in. He had terrible arthritis in his fingers and hands so we'd like his Camel cigarettes for him. Of course we asked him about Stagecoach, and he said what he's always said, "It was just another Western gambler role for me. Had I any idea that movie would be as important as it's become I would've paid more attention, written something down." Another aspect of Ford, use and very much the overuse of archetypes. But all those archetypes in and driving that stagecoach? They're just background for John Wayne's the Ringo Kid meeting, seeing the decency in, Clare Trevor's Dallas. The moralizing talk in Ford's films get a bit tedious. With Tarantino -- and Seinfeld -- they start at the tedious and then play the funny bits. My Boomer generation might claim to have invented this, and we might get away with it -- so long as you don't go back to1761!! and Laurence Stern's Tristram Shandy. The Fincher variation of the Ford dialogue, scenery, action scene repeat has a simple essential purpose: keep your audience interested, don't bore them. (Ever been back on the tour bus at an amazing place? Everybody is increasingly bored and anxious until the bus starts moving - away from the spectacular place and toward just another piece of road...) Here's a tip to young filmmakers. Sure it's great to learn from the giants, but make experimental movies too. (And I don't mean Stan Brakage. Hours I'll never get back...) instead try to convey an emotion or information without using language you've already learned and seen on TV. I did this a couple times in the 1970s and think I did pretty good for college level. I had a whole slew of ideas I thought were good. Here's what happened next. First, I didn't cut it in the movie business, then every one of those ideas turned up in M TV videos in its first year. Even to the point I wondered at least once, 'did these people copy me?' Nope. Those were just some of the ideas that were in the air for my generation. What happened over the next two years is these ideas (plus many many more) were developed and made much much better. That's where you want to aim for. Just get started so you're working when you're at the 4th or 8th iteration of your ideas and what you've learned. This is also a formula for becoming Steven Spielberg, Kurosawa, Leone, etc...
Highly recommend the biography "Print the Legened." Ford was a heavily private soul who desperately wanted to fit in with the "cool kids" he even points out the real him is only expressed in film. He also was a huge advocate for hiring minorities of all kind. A few specific examples: he constantly hired African-Americans for set work and below the line job. He also worked with regularly a gay set designer who was not necessarily open, but was necessarily closeted either. He was a man who said never enough but somehow said too much, and he let his actions speak for him. Master filmmaker.
You have to willfully ignore a lot of Ford films to push the idea that he marginalized female characters. But no director is obligated to do anything- if Ford’s films were all male characters all the time that would be perfectly valid.
Samuel's characters in Tarantino movies is akways the smartest one. What about great women characters in Jackie Brown, Death Proof & Inglorious Basterds.
Don't even dignify this idiots opinion with excuses for something the guy is not guilty of. He admits that since Tarantino said that he disliked Ford, he has a vendetta against him.
My favorite Ford film is My Darling Clementine. Victor Mature's performance, Joe MacDonald's indoor & outdoor camerawork, the concentration of time. "No, I've been a bartender all my life."
These classic directors still inspire me today: Spielberg, Kurosawa, Fincher, and Kaza, Buñuel (not mentioned). Interesting analysis on Ford's style. I should study more of his work 👍
I think the greatest achievement of the great ford is the flow of his movies the way of the seamless camera movement like it was not there like an eye that just follows the characters in the story, he is not saying look at me I'm great director he is just saying look at these people and feel for them.
John Ford was unique. He used to keep the camera fixed on the scene (with only a few small movements when absolutely necessary). The movement was given by the actors (horses, indians, stagecoaches, etc.) who moved in and out of the shot. Unequaled great director.
Thank you for both your channel and recognizing the work of one of the true artists of film. He is both, one of the greatest and most innovative directors and one of my favorites, personally.
I spent a great deal of my life in the film/tv industry and I can tell you that one essential trait of success in the Industry is the love of, study of, acknowledgement of the work of those who came before. Steven Spielberg was my brother's roommate in college for a year and so I know that he was obsessed with the study of film and film history. No matter how talented one is, one must learn from those who came before one in order to create one's own style and work.
Hilarious opening response by John Ford! Thanks for that, Sareesh. Otherwise very enjoyable and it ends well with your reflections on the quality of Ford's characters that sets his films apart. Thank heaven for that.
Man, I am loving those videos. I feel you really are stepping up peoples eyes, recognition, appreciation for cinema by teaching the sublte art. Keep up the good work. Truly amazing and fun to watch. Thank you.
@wolfcrow Great that you really watched, understand John Ford's influence on All Directors. Now you need a Sequel, focus on Orson Welles: Why Every Film Director Owes Orson Welles...A Triple Threat: Masterpieces in Radio, Theater/Stage, & FILM....
Otto Preminger also had long takes and complex camera moves with blocking. He once said he used long takes so that executives couldn't easily re-edit his work.
I just thank you for mentioning Preminger in a TH-cam comment at all, lol...There's a lot of people online who think they're "film scholars" because they've seen all of Nolan's films and they know who Kubrick was. But mention Preminger and their eyes glaze over. I'm reading Foster Hirch's biography of him. Highly recommend it if you haven't read it.
Wolfcrow, you need to be teaching cinema in universities. Thank you for sharing your insights with the world. But perhaps better than a university you have found the best platform here.
What a delight to learn that one of my favorite films, Stagecoach, helped inspire another favorite, Seven Samurai. Thank you for putting together this fascinating compendium of John Ford's enduring influence on cinema.
Stephen was smarter than Calvin, but rather than use his intelligence to educate him in compassion, he leveraged the man's ignorance to better his own situation at the expense of people like him.
Your opinion at 8:05 is contradictory and killed this video. Kill Bill is entirely about a woman. Because she gets emotional women are "insignificant"? And then he made a second one. He also has a women take out the SS in Inglorious Bastards. Django is about a Black protagonist who is a bounty hunter that catches white people. If anything Tarantino flips convention on its head.
I read through most of the comments. The latter ones were quite critical of Wolfcrow. I thought he did a very good job in his analysis of directors. I compliment you(Wolfcrow) on a job well done. For the critics, they should try to put together a TH-cam video. It is work and it takes time. I am glad you took the time to do it. Thanks!
Umm, the people who are critical of what this guy presented have valid opinions. And they are not the ones who Chose to be the presenter. Wolfcrow did. When you create fire for light, you also get heat.
@@charlie-obrien Well said, yeah. When you publilcy make a video accusing filmmakers of alleged "racism" with supporting arguments that are subpar, you gotta expect push back. Especially if the filmmaker you hold up as an example of racial equality is John Ford, of all people. The problematic representation in some of Ford's films gets pretty bad. I find this video venerating him to be mind-boggling.
Ford's last movie, 7 Women, is one of his best movies and one of the most important feminist movies ever made, yes, I've said FEMINIST because it's true. Tarantino on the other hand, well... his great weakness is that his movies almost have any moral or critical content, that's why you can find in them a portrait of a strong woman that for no reason becomes a sexist portrait. That's why Ford is who he is, it's not only that he perfected cinema language to its highest peaks, he did it being meaningful and relevant still to this very day
Some people view Tarantino's dialogue as fluff or meaningless ie Pulp Fiction's dialogue but they miss the point and the connections to the plot and character
All the analytical parts of your videos are always great, but you always also include (knowingly or unknowingly) your personal opinions and then it's so bad. For example here, starting at 6:30 you compare Tarantino to Ford, and just show random single shots. Like: a person sitting near a window, a person sitting near a boulder at a campfire. WTF is this? It's just random scenes. Why not show the shots that are actual influences, like crash zooms/pans combined with music? Or who says Uma T is mommy soft in Kill Bill or an insignificant female character? The problem is not that you voice your opinion, the problem is that you present it in the same way as the analytical arguments. Please don't do that - it gives a very wrong idea of the actual artists and ideas.
I disagree with you on Tarantino. Imo you have a jaded view warped by modern identity politics and are not seeing the whole picture, but rather just the surface level of black/white, woman/man. I believe Tarantino to be almost the opposite of what you say.
Awesome! Well I learned about John Ford's influence on Sergio Leone from John Carpenter's comment track on the Once...in the West DVD. I think there is even more to the carefully crafted cinematography. It's very likely the way our brain perceives reality and stores memory. Thanks for taking the time making this!
Thanks so much for this! I always get so much insight out of your content. I’m an Indigenous person in Canada and we are still dealing with the legacy of ‘our’ portrayal in western films. I both love and hate them! Fantastic films but often times so problematic.
A lot of butthurt folks in the comment section, I enjoy John Ford and have watched a handful of QT movies, I appreciate your perspective and the thoughts you bring to the table. Definitely should assess our own individual morality before trash talking others, is my take away (on the moral side). I love Stagecoach, and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. Will definitely check out more of his work!
8:35 dude thats a stupid analogy, she is a frmale badass, not a male badass. You will have your answer when you understand why people like The Bride while they don't like the wannabe men female heros like the one in Ghostbusters, captain marvel etc...
The Tarantino take is a stretch for being critical. I'm a mixed minority. You're attacking Tarantino's female characters for what? Are there other male writer/directors out there that show women in a role of control such as Tarantino? He's one of the few male writer/directors that give the cinema strong vocal female characters. Kill Bill? Revenge plot with a lead female character. As well as female minority representation throughout the film. Stereotypical? I'm Asian. Lucy Liu wasn't up there taking shit from white people or the men around her and she didn't talk like other Asian female characters who are stereotypical with their dainty shy submissive selves. If anything, he gave some of the best asian representation in that film for an white american writer/director. And we see this pattern of representation in Kill Bill, Jackie Brown, Deathproof and Inglorious basterds. His movies are hugely inspired by b-movies and exploitation films, as well as black exploitation films. Precisely why he has elements of them in all his films. Now I can't speak for Django or the other black characters he's created (because im not black) but I will say this and whatever anyone wants to say, they can say... Please notify me if there has ever been a western with a black lead that's been given that much respect. Where can I find a western where the black lead is going around giving the much needed justice of killing every fucking racist slave owner he comes across? And also the german white guy does not save him. He may have broken him out of the shackles but from the overall story, we gain the insight to know that yeah Django could've broken free himself because he shows the audience he has what it takes for whatever is put in front of him, but it probably would've taken a longer time and he probably wouldn't have been as sharp a sharp shooter or had been able to get within 10 feet of Calvin Candies plantation without alerting anyone who he is. So for story reasons we have the german white guy, who is killed before he can really save Django. The last act of Django Unchained is the most pure demonstration (in my opinion) in cinema of justice well served. A black cowboy blasts his way back into the arms of his lover only to end the day by blowing up one of the most despicable plantations as well as killing perhaps one of the most infamous horrible characters in reality's history --Uncle Tom-- A man who would turn on his own people. I mean we see Django whip a fucking slave owner. Has that ever been in cinema before? Regardless we can even talk about Jules in Pulp Fiction who is the smartest character in that movie. Completely turns around a robbery, holds control in pretty much every scene he's in (im going off memory, i believe he did). Lets not forget how Tarantino makes sure the dixie boys in the basement get their fucking much needed end. To ME, i dont know about anyone else, but Tarantino has been a voice for minorities and feminists from pretty much day one. Say what you will about Reservoir dogs, can't defend that one but no one in that movie is supposed to be some saint you're supposed to look up to. They're all low lives who rob banks and he tells the truth in that. They all die, they all get their much needed end. I'm tired of people shitting on Tarantino when i'm an mixed asian minority and literally grew up loving Lucy Liu's character as well as Uma Thurman's in Kill Bill and Jules from Pulp Fiction. Those are my favorite characters and they're all Tarantino's. I'd like to also note in The Hateful Eight, how Sam's character is also the smartest in that one too and kill's one of the generals of the confederacy as well as painting the picture that that generals son engulfed his cock and made him beg for a blanket in the snowy mountains. Again, at least for me, that's justice served in Cinema, when you can publically humiliate these racists on every silver screen in the world.
Also Sam's Uncle Tom in Django is the smartest character along with Django and the German. Even though he's a villain, he's smart, smarter than Calvin, smarter than pretty much anyone else. That character is given mad respect being who he is.
Humiliation isn’t justice. Making a character cool isn’t making them morally right. Don’t forget, the Bride is a killer that Bill underestimated. If these characters are good enough for you they’re good enough for you.
@@wolfcrow I don't get your point. And Humiliation isn't justice? First, why do I care about the morals of a character? It's a character. When The Hulk smashes through New York City, is that showing good morals? He just destroyed people's living spaces. But we perceive them as good because he's fighting evil. In reality, this character is a monster. But we're in the movies. So no, the Bride doesn't have the best morals, but we understand her as being good because for all we know and for all she knows, her child has been killed in her stomach and her husband and friends have been murdered horrifically and these murderers who were her work associates, tried killing her. So she kills every last one of them. I don't go to the movies for lessons in morals, I go to the movies for fun and if on the way throughout my movie going experience, there's representation, great stories, and justice being served in the context of reality and fiction now meeting, then way to go. Second, which brings me to my point of justice, what would you call it then? When in Blazing Saddles, we get a satirical comedy which doesn't let up on holding the racist subtexts of other westerns accountable? All throughout that movie is humiliation for the westerns before it who have skated past racial conflicts and all the bullshit from them aswell. Anyway man, I like your videos, you make great videos but i'm just saying, i think you got the Tarantino thing wrong. All love from over here, I appreciate your time that goes into analysis, that's a ton of work.
I forgot to get to my point about justice. But when Blazing Saddles does that and throughout the history of Cinema those points weren't being made, that's justice for representation and for voices not being heard. When we have D.W. Griffith make the first blockbuster about the KKK and how they're basically parading around and no one makes a blockbuster about a black cowboy driving real justice down racists skulls until Tarantino, i dont know man, that's pretty good justice in terms of the Cinema.
Great vid, from a technical point of view, on directing, the cinematographers eye and how to tell a great story through the application of innovation and minimalist choices. I take your point regarding the moral implications of the content of the individuals mentioned here, but I don't really come here for all that. I just want to learn to be a better filmmaker and understand how to get what is in my head onto the screen. And for that you do a wonderful job challenging me to think differently, study more and provide inspirational content that grows my confidence and self belief and for all of that I thank you.
The tangent you went on arguing that Tarantino is racist was not just silly but also downright unnecessary and irrelevant, which muddies the overall impact of your essay
I distinctly remember on the audio commentary for From Dusk Till Dawn, that Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez have a conversation about John Ford and doorways.
I had the honor of training as a script supervisor by John Fords script supervisor Robert Gary. He was in his late 80's when I trained under him. He had some wonderful stories about Ford. I am curious if you ever studied who Ford may have been influenced by.
That Tarantino rant was bad, not cause you mentioned it but how you don’t include the context to the argument. There a reason these black characters are in those situations but you avoid the context. Smh
Am so so glad youhave posted this to draw current viewers to the richness of John Ford...so much crap out there now. John Ford (and his brother) began in silent film. Storey, narrative, composition and light, contrast, conflict, humor, action and the inherent dignity of people. 150 films, Wow!
There were a lot of things in this video I disagree with, one of the more possibly nitpicky (?) ones is the video-maker inferring that Ford's large filmography is more notable than it actually....is. No argument, 150 films is a lot. Obviously. But I don't like how the video implies that it's _exceptional_ ...because at least within the era that Ford was working, he was hardly the only one cranking out films at a high rate. For instance, Ford's contemporary Michael Curtiz directed roughly 180 films. Allan Dwan directed 125. William Wellman directed 77. Lloyd Bacon directed 130. Robert Z. Leonard directed 162. Again, it's an achievement. But within the context of studio-era American cinema, Ford's filmography is not jaw-dropping. This video trades in way too much in myth-making for my taste.
Anybody know more about the line in here where "John Ford advised John Wayne to have one dialogue scene and follow it up with scenery or a visually striking scene."? I'd love more info on it, but I can't find anything trying to google it.
The section on Kill Bill and how it "adapts the bad aspects" doesn't make any sense. She "caves like a puppy" because despite the atrocity Bill committed they once had a deep connection and after seeing him act caring in front of her daughter that she didn't even know was alive her emotions were definitely colliding. And what do you mean why didn't she go for him first? You realise that it wasn't just bill who was involved. They all fucking went in and shot everyone! That's why she goes for all of them. Also from a certain perspective yeah maybe the whole concept of children make them "mommy soft" as you called it can be an outdated example of representation of women in film but the fact that part of her tragedy was the fact that she thought she lost her own child when she was pregnant kinda invalidates that stereotype as it's a very valid reason for that aspect of her character.
Perhaps the Tarantino effect comes from simply watching every single movie at the rental house to pay tribute to the greatest scene of each piece, perhaps Orson Welles, etc al felt this way about John Ford. Barry Lyndon compositions with lockdowns and movement matching movement ala Ford or Fincher is a fantastic through line to this video. Grateful to have this perspective as great art and story is like a tree with one central theme coming from the trunk.
I enjoy Tarantino's films and have great respect for his directorial work. But he had it coming. For those of you who want some perspective, Tarantino doesn't like Ford very much: thenewbev.com/blog/2019/03/ulzanas-raid/ Here's a quote from 2012: "One of my American Western heroes is not John Ford, obviously. To say the least, I hate him. Forget about faceless Indians he killed like zombies. It really is people like that that kept alive this idea of Anglo-Saxon humanity compared to everybody else’s humanity - and the idea that that’s hogwash is a very new idea in relative terms." You can google 'Tarantino John Ford' for older comments, etc. I just used his (Tarantino's) own yardstick to measure Tarantino. It might come as a shocker, but John Ford isn't the person Tarantino makes him out to be. Even during the shitty times Ford made films in, he found a way to make his characters moralize about humanity in general. Watch Young Mr. Lincoln and The Sun Shines Bright for amazing humanitarian work that truly shows Ford is not the racist Tarantino makes him out to be. Tarantino, on the other hand, hasn't made a film about anything that's actually useful to humanity. That's cool, entertainment is what it is. But when Tarantino the moralizer opens his mouth about morals... I don't want to waste my time or yours arguing about the details. I leave everyone here with enough juice to form their own opinions.
And this thing about humanity lacking in Tarantino movies is untrue. Objectively very untrue and really idk how you get to that point subjectively. If we look at his characters objectively, for fact, what happens, action/reaction, beat by beat, conflict and choices made we can find their humanity. When were given the flashback in Django, we glimpse reality in the face of fiction, Kerry Washington and Jamie Foxx being caught for running away, Kerry being whipped, Jamie pleading. We glimpse this also when the German and Django talk by the campfire in the morning, and we flashback to him getting branded and broomhilda getting branded. This is reality in cinema, and for me humanity. We understand from that point on, exactly why Django MUST blow the head off of every racist he comes across. No, were not going to get a scene where Django runs though the legal system and gets his justice there and where it ends in happy tears and we see very blatantly who's good and who's bad and Django took the moral Christian way of fighting without violence. Instead we get the better version, where these racists are handed their asses as should be. I have no sympathy for a racist and when one or a bunch or all of them die on screen, I laugh and take joy in it as Shoshanna does in Inglorious basterds. No were not going to get pacifist characters from Tarantino, and this is not Marvel so theres going to be blood, and also Tarantino has a style. But to say theres no humanity? Theres no humanity in these characters? Who wouldn't be as heartbroken as The Bride--her love for her child and husband and friends, we can feel that through her course on revenge. Who wouldn't want justice for Django or any of the slaves in that movie? Or In history. I want to see every racist handed his ass and I don't care how because hes a racist. Humanity has nothing to do with the choices we make at the end of the day, humanity has everything to do with why we make those choices. Understanding why instead of taking just the very blatant surface material is what needs to be seen.
I dont care how many humanitarian films John Ford made, throughout his career, he has weaved racist bs in his movies. Now can we learn from him? Sure. Can we take from D.W. Griffith too? Of course. They made cinematic history, you cant be a film major without having heard these names anyways. So you learn their technical craft but that's it. Theres no love for John Ford, as Tarantino says, "To say the least, I hate him."
It's not about you saying how John Ford influenced Cinema, which is fully agreeable. But about the sexist and slightly racist accusations you sarcastically threw in, where you also at one point give Ford a pass for his racist and sexist portrayals in films because of the time he was in. But yet accuse tarantino, who is at every black protest there is out there. There is no excuse for John Ford a man who was one of the most powerful men in cinema. That's what I'm trying to point out. Now are his films amazing? Yes, still there are no excuses there. I'm not a tarantino fan boy by the way. I like some of his films and don't like some of his others. All I can point out is that those sarcastic remarks u did about him, especially at a time like this are not fair.
Pulp Fiction is about redemption, and the foibles that come with it. In each of the three intertwined stories, every main character’s primary action is to save someone else in a way that runs counter to their amoral character - and this puts them in a place of unfamiliar moral potential. They then exercise (or don’t exercise) that potential, and reap the benefits and consequences of their action or inaction. Notice the Black character is the one who acts positively on it in the strongest way. I suspect you may have an absolute view of morality, and value sincerity and transparency above all in its cinematic representation. I can empathize. But cinematic morals, as with real-life morals, are best expressed through action, not dialogue - and this translates to story structure. I’d argue Tarantino’s moralistic story structure is more nuanced than almost anyone else’s, precisely because he embraces the contradictions morality poses in extreme situations. The overall truths he finds are hidden in the mechanism of the narrative itself - where the strength of that mechanism is what validates them. Those truths are not superficially parroted in his characters’ dialogue, which any screenwriter can easily do. With Tarantino, characters are characters, not mouthpieces. And yes, Tarantino’s kind of character nuance is also extended to minorities. He is not going to give us (literal) black and white heroes, where the minorities easily check the boxes of #empowerment. He’s going to give us powder kegs of unexpected flaws, virtues, and vulnerabilities - and the genius behind them is that, in spite of endless contradictions, almost all of them still adhere to character logic. He does this under the disguise of entertainment. The fact that you’re taking it at face value leads me to believe you’d benefit from a deeper look at his work.
The fade to black effect was criticized in John Carpenter's The Thing ironically but when I watched it, it caught me off guar and actually made the next scene very tense and suspenseful. Fade to black works but not so much with Modern cinema in my opinion due to the quality of cameras and the digital editing style and the texturing of the picture. Its a technique that should be used maybe once or twice in a film. Sometimes, it can work effectively to highlight the end of an act of a film and the beginning of a new one.
"Where's your art?" is the laziest, most pointless and most butt-hurt attempt at deflection someone can make. It's not an argument and people don't need to be artists to be good critics. Usually a symptom of deep insecurity.
I'm so fortunate to have found your channel. Every video is a gem! So many insights, and not just for filmmakers, but for all appreciators of film and art.
Very interesting video essay. Much thanks. I disagree somewhat with your takes on Kurosawa and Ford. Kurosawa has a number of great films about regular people, including "Ikiru," the ultimate film about the heroism of an ordinary man. And in 1960's "Sgt Rutledge," Ford tried to present non-white characters in a favorable light.
Why filmmakers shouldn't care about film reviews th-cam.com/video/isveb9OsWOs/w-d-xo.html
You're way off about Tarantino having a "racist" intent. You are basing it on the fact that you are young and have been brainwashed. Everything that you see, infers "Racism" because you are programmed to. The things that you connected were not intentional . People with attitudes based on insanity like yours , really ruin the things that we all used to enjoy. You see Tarantino treating his characters as characters and NOT their racial identity, as somehow an intentional, what? a jab at black people ? Race is not a factor in his films in the way that you wish it was and are programmed to see it. You see him having Sam Jackson portray "The House Negro" and having him act what your limited brain perceives as "Bad" as an intentional casting of another Black man who is a bad guy. In reality he is showing a phenomena that is known but not many know about. How House slaves felt about their Masters and how they would die for them. This went over your head and you instead cooked up something, again based on your narrative. The Head of the Mob , who HAPPENED to be Black, WAS raped, because unlike what your brain sees, Tarantino wasn't looking at it like that . I'm really troubled by the way that you think and what you have inferred in your video. It's very untrue, but I deal with twentysomethings every day and know where it comes from.
Interviewer: how did you shoot that
John Ford: with a camera.
He is now the biggest legend on planet earth
Oh John, you grumpy genius
I wish people talk more about him. Today only I learned how big of a influence he has on other filims.
As a black fan of Tarantino, I praise his depiction of characters how he sees fit, that's what an artist does, he's not supposed to be "politically correct".
Nah it clearly shows the Ford influence...he shot with a camera didn't he.
Fun fact: Orson Welles watched "Stagecoach" dozens of times while making "Citizen Kane"
Welles commented that Ford was where the cliches began. Note in Drums Along the Mohawk (1939) where a character peering out of the fort says it quiet, too quiet, out there.
there's the innovators then there's the ones that popularize the innovators work
Fun fact: Orson Welles ballooned up to the size of an actual Stagecoach later in life.
@@Valkonnenhe was also the greatest director in all of cinema you fucking idiot
@JJ KK john ford won the best picture and best director against citizen kane, do I need to say more?
8:09 'You see, Quentin, you may have spent twelve straight years of your life writing and directing movies about women kicking men's asses six ways till Sunday, but one of those women was a mother who cared a lot about her child and slew her mortal enemy merely by causing his heart to explode inside his body. So I gotta dock you some MAJOR points there.'
Lol I know wtf was that
Tarantino's movies are often about karmic revenge, I don't see how Bill's death is any less deserved than Buck's death.
12 years of women being raped, abused, spat on, killed, and whipped. The man is disgusting.
And she doesn't just "crumble" when she finally confronts Bill, he freaking shoots her with a freaking neurotoxin and stops her right there... Then she kills him.
You see, this is what we call forced moral judgement, kids!
😂❤
8:19 Uhm......... 'the deadliest blow in all of martial arts' is a 'death he doesn't deserve'?
wolfcrow too caught up in identity politics to understand.
i think he meant he didnt deserve it because it was in Bill's eyes an honorable way to go, and it was their teachers move so it held some gravitas
John Ford influenced Star Wars, Breaking Bad, Taxi Driver, Paris Texas, Lawrence of Arabia, and so much more. Truly a legend.
Breaking Bad! Really? how so
TAXI DRIVER?
@@surajjha6255 Ethan Edwards is an direct influence on Travis Bickle, my friend, and Scorcese himself who'd say it.
@@davetheman2615 breaking bad is basically a western
@@fernandomaron87 i thought the main influence on Travis Bickle was Arthur Bremer.
those Tarantino comparisons were senseless to me. I’ve watched hundreds of westerns and literally the majority have similar shots
A funny comparison is the Danny as a greaser reveal in Grease and how QT emulated it for Calvin Candy in DU, same snap zoom turn over the shoulder cigarette smile and everything lol
Tarantino is a shameless plagiarist.
There is nt single original idea or scene in his movies. All are stolen from other movies.
The man is so shameless he plagiarize a whole HK movie, scen by scene, and called it his own creation.
@@parapoliticos52 And yet, filtered through QT's mind by some sort of alchemy, Reservoir Dogs is regarded by many as a superior film to 'City on Fire' -- a quality flick in its own right -- or at least is easily distinguishable from it (for Dogs he also borrows liberally from 'The Killing' and 'Kansas City Confidential'). The ability of QT to transcend the sources he draws from is the defining characteristic of his craft, one that neutralises the dusty argument that he is nothing but a pale imitator.
Funnily enough, I consider Tarantino's plundering to be one of the most unique pleasures his films offer to the cinephile. He knows where he got this idea, that costume, this shot etc. from, and he hopes you do too. He is not hiding his references like so many lesser filmmakers. Knowledge of the margins of film history enhances the meta aspect of his stories, which is why he cross references his own films as well.
But I know that for some this will never be enough to justify his remix/pastiche style, and that's ok. I don't care for every movie he's made either. But he is a living legend in the biz, like him or not.
The Searchers: an older veteran of campaigns takes a young man under his wing to rescue a girl kidnapped into slavery. Django: a seasoned campaigner takes young man under his wing to rescue a woman enslaved by a villain. In both movies, the two protagonists are welcomed into the villains home and shown trophies. In both movies the older protagonist kills the villain.
@@riverottermcqueen2079 And? Who cares. There's nothing new under the sun. We don't give points to originality. We only give points to execution.
When it turns into moralizing about how Tarantino should write his scripts it totally goes off the rails.
Yea, woke shit
@@prajwalts1530 so in other words. he was right and you are a triggered incel.
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance is monumentally underrated. Easily one of Ford's best, if not his very best.
@Randy White, it's not even widely considered these days. People are too busy wanking off to Chris Nolan's latest farcical attempts at moviemaking.
@Randy White, I'm not disputing its standing with scholars, but with regular people. Walk down the street and ask everyone you pass if they even heard of it. You will be out quite a long time, so bring snacks.
It’s not underrated at all.
His very best is The Searchers, and Duke Wayne's finest performance.
It’s an amazing, touching, heartfelt film.
8:32 So a mother caring for her child above all else is a 'stereotype'. Got it.
Yeah whole video was great, but that part about Tarantino felt a bit.. forced.
Those parts were obviously forced and just simply untrue. Beatrix Kiddo was a "mommy" who had never seen her kid. What was she supposed to do, live happily ever after with a murdering assassin? Yeah, that would have been so good.
I agree. I normally love wolfcrow's videos and really liked this one for the most part but yeah that whole Tarantino part felt unnatural. Very cherry picked moments from some films and very precisely worded depictions of those parts of the films. I don't think he's racist and I certainly don't think his films could be used as an example to prove he's racist otherwise he wouldn't be making them today
yep, it is.
@@cgollimusic "It is impossible for Tarantino to be racist" - Samuel L Jackson
8:30 love your in-depth analysis, but the SJW style of interpreting everything as some sort of negative stereotype was difficult to sit through.
at least it was brief...
yea, stop telling us the truth, i'm here for the cowboys!
8:55 I think you'll recall 'Pulp Fiction"s largest black role by far is Jules, and the Gold Watch section of the film was written by Roger Avary anyway, not Quentin.
Exactly. And Jules is the only character in the film who even considers the idea of doing something morally right at any point. Also right after Pulp Fiction Tarantino made Jackie Brown. And before somebody tries to to throw the “well that’s based on a book” thing, Jackie is white in the book. And Tarantino has said that when he read the book and tried to imagine a strong, independent and resilient woman the first image that popped into his head was Pam Grier.
Jules is also the most morally just after Bruce Willis's character, idk what bro was on about
It doesn’t add up that someone intelligent enough to make this video would say something so rash and disprovable.
I really feel like he must’ve been taught to think that by some film professor who was otherwise solid at their job. Just really out of left field there. So easily disprovable lol.
@@tommunist10 it adds up when there’s malice behind it
I agree that the way QT portrays violence is questionable cause he makes it look fun, but your comparison with JF doesn't make any sense, nothing looks similar. His dialogs may not have anything to do with the situation but they certanly are full of subtext, they tell you how characters think and their moral convictions. I think Bill's death is awsome and well deserved, and there would not be a movie if she kills him at the beginning. They use their own child as a shield, that doesn't makes QT a bad person, that makes antagonists evil. Jules decides to quit the thug life and lives on, Vincent doesn't, he gets killed. I don't see how Tarantino could be portraying diferent cultures in a negative way, he loves cinema from so many diferent places so he pays homage and haves fun with the material, he has good and bad guys in all different colors killing and getting killed.
I think it was more the plots in The Searchers v the plot in Dangjo. An old timer and a young pup trying to rescue a young woman enslaved by a villain
@@riverottermcqueen2079 haha youre right, I got carried away
Kill bill was a mindless boring story only ppl with low iq enjoyed
Also, QT has JF pacing in all his films. He, like Ford, lets scenes breathe. It's actually my favourite part of Tarantino's work (and I know plenty of people hate it), not the violence or profanity.
Of course, correlation is not causation but Tarantino does lean a fair bit in Ford's direction, regardless of how he feels about "the old man" of Hollywood.
@@riverottermcqueen2079 The video made no mention of plots, just techniques.
8:23 Uhm, because she doesn't know where he is, because she needs to go to Okinawa to get a sword from Hanzo first (and get information from Sofie on where the other Squad members are), and because a movie protagonist can't kill the main villain first.
Dude really liked your comments, he is like one of my most favourite Director.
+, and also she doesn't even know her kid is ALIVE?!
8:39 Not hearing a peep about 'Jackie Brown', 'Death Proof' or 'Inglourious Basterds' anywhere in here.
"Jackie Brown" is the last adult film that T made. It bombed and he's been making live action cartoons ever since
Bruh why are you trying to prove by commenting second for second on a TH-cam video? Do you have nothing better to do with your time if you're the smartest man in the comment section?
@@pjmaas4287 If this person doesn't speak up, someone else will. Or will we all accept wolfcrow's opinions about Quentin Tarantino to be correct?
Many of the things wolfcrow said about Quentin are debatable. And Brian set out to debate.
@@thegrayyernaut I'm all for a debate and I understand how what I said might have been vague. What I meant to say was that based on the volume of comments he made on a TH-cam video, I cannot imagine that anyone takes him seriously as I find it preposterous to waste that much time analyzing and breaking down works of content creators.
But here I am so good luck with your debate 🔥I'm out 😂
@@thegrayyernaut Also, I am perpetually busy breaking down videos of stuff I can apply to my individual circumstance, I definitely don't leave second for second breakdowns on the ones I feel are trash.
8:36 Thousand-year-old kung-fu master hermits and ruthless mob bosses aren't stereotypes; they're archetypes.
Loved the factual part of the analysis, but someone is obviously trying to cash in on the current awful state of affairs with a tasteless and cheap 'pop-shot' sort of bashing with cherry-picked examples. Jackie Brown is arguably his best movie, along with Django, and inglorious. And as you said, John Ford attempted to correct himself at the end of his career, so we'll just act like he didn't at least address his mistakes? As i said, someone is obviously just attempting minutely take advantage of the times.
Spoelberg heath@ r o rourke
@@daniel-zh4qc Awww, Tarrantino simps feel hurt?
Jackie Brown is definitely not arguably his best movie.
@@SnailHatan If someone says they think it's his best, I'd say it's an interesting choice. The more I reflect on "Jackie Brown", the more I appreciate it.
Hard to quantify sometimes what's a filmmaker's "best" film, in my opinion. I _usually_ stick with what's my "favorite".
"Jackie Brown" would be high up in my picks for my favorite of Tarantino's films.
I don't know if this is true but I read a story in a book about how Spielberg once met John Ford himself who tested the kid (Spielberg) by asking him where the horizon on a painting was. When Spielberg answered, Ford was apparently satisfied and told him that if he remembered the appropriate placement for the horizon in the frame, Spielberg would make a good filmmaker. Guess Spielberg remembered that, if true.
You can actually find a TH-cam video in which Spielberg himself relates that story.
That's true, Spielberg says it on the documentary 'Directed by John Ford' his account of this meeting is hilarious.
He depicted that event in "The Fabelmans", casting David Lynch as John Ford.
you should go see the fabelmans
Spielberg has talked about that in interviews and it’s in his latest film courtesy of David Lynch
Was an interesting video until the really odd, out-of-place rant against Tarantino with bizarrely inaccurate information.
Calvin Candy *was* the antagonist of Django Unchained, not Stephen, even though Stephen was depicted as an equally or even more evil Character than Calvin, which was also a sad but true historical reality.
In fact, Sam Jackson has gone on record multiple times that he was disappointed how much Tarantino had toned down Stephen's character in editing, having cut the majority of his scenes because they made even Tarantino feel uncomfortable.
And saying Sam Jackson's characters are never morally right in Tarantino's movies is quite the hell of a statement and I guess someone wasn't paying attention to Pulp Fiction, where the inciting incident of the movie literally causes his character to have a religious awakening and go onto a path of deep self introspection throughout the movie that ultimately leads to him retiring from a life of crime.
Pulp Fiction, btw, took place at a time where NO ONE was hiring black actors to be protagonists of mainstream movies, especially relatively unknown actors which Sam was at the time of Pulp Fiction's filming.
Also being upset that the strong, female protagonist kills a guy named Bill in the end of a movie called "Kill Bill" is quite a take.
As to his depictions of Asian stereotypes, you have to remember Tarantino is a massive Hong Kong cinefile. He's a life long collector of eastern film and music, and very often invokes their work in his films. Kill Bill itself was practically a love letter to that genre of dated film making.
And Bruce Lee in Once Upon in Hollywood was just acting like Bruce Lee in my opinion.. there were real times in Bruce's career, at his peak, that he actually behaved like that. I don't see anything racist about that depiction at all.
It's disappointing such an otherwise well written analysis of an intriguing topic is muddied by baseless accusations against another revolutionary director stemmed from the personal opinion and feelings of the narrator.
Well said. Many things about this video bothered me.
There's a film John Ford made called "The Prisoner of Shark Island". It's *lengthy* condescending, racist portrayal of black Americans is what I always cite as the worst I've ever seen, as far as "problematic representation in Golden Age Hollywood".
I've seen a lot of Golden Age films. I've never seen anything as jaw-dropping as "The Prisoner of Shark Island". No one should ever use John Ford as their example of racial equality in American cinema, he's not that guy.
What about Satyajit Ray? His work was hugely influential to many acclaimed directors like Scorsese and Wes Anderson
Yes, but if we're talking about the one western (western world, not the genre, though that too I guess) director that had the most impact on other directors in the western world more than anyone, it's Ford. Ray had a huge impact as well, but none loom as large as Ford.
The only things satyajit ray doesn't have is wide range of audience.... Look inside india 90% of us haven't seen his work and people rarely talk about it
@@sameerahmed-gx8js Wow that's sad. But then, the great majority of "young" westerners have no idea who John Ford is nowadays. I'm a film student and even my fellow classmates have no clue, but everyone knows Quentin Tarantino.
Ray was influenced by De Sica
This video happens to not be about Satyajit Ray
Sam Jackson is never morally right in Pulp Fiction?
His ENTIRE storyline is about pursuing the righteous path and forsaking his old way after he "witnesses a miracle". Smh
That's only after he was almost killed. For the rest of the film he was just an asshole like everyone else.
He just killed ppl. Jackson character should be on death row.
@@karlkarlos3545 yeah but why does this dude single him out if everyone else was an a'hole as well. I followed the video and thought it was very interesting but the insinuations that Tarantino is racist were kinda misplaced.
@@michiel1162 There is no reason to believe he is a racist. I think it was a silly reaction to Tarantino accusing Ford of being a racist (which I also disagree with).
Bruh cmon now😂
Brilliant video, but I don’t think it was the right place for the Tarantino-bashing. When you squeeze that gnarly a subject into a mostly unrelated video essay, the limited time short-changes whatever nuance your arguments may have had.
There are many holes and oversimplifications in your logic people will take issue with (as you’re currently finding out) that could’ve been addressed in a dedicated video. It’d be worth exploring, as I believe the question of Tarantino’s cultural and socio-political sensitivity is an interesting one, even as I disagree with your conclusions on it.
no, he was spot-on. Ford was Catholic. Tarentino apparently atheistic.
Great video as usual but I don't agree that Tarantino is a racist, or at least that those excerpts from his films can be used to prove he's a racist.
Pulp Fiction; I can't remember whether the owner of the shop (Ving Rhames' character went to) was racist or not but maybe the message in Ving's character being saved was that they should work together to move forward? Or that there are bigger problems in the world (racism, the shop owner could represent that problem) that Bruce and Ving's characters should be aware of rather than their own problem in the film.
As for Django, I really don't think Stephen is an example of Tarantino being racist. There are many interpretations, perhaps Calvin did something to Stephen to make him see his twisted world view, or perhaps Stephen just defended Calvin in his own self interest for survival and chose not to worry about Django or the other slaves' lives. There are lots of possible reasons and interpretations for why Stephen defends Calvin but if Tarantino was simply saying something racist in that casting and character choice, he would not be making films or doing much else today.
Honestly, what wolf crow asserts its just patently stupid and lacks any sort of historical understanding.
I totally agree. The video misses the mark with its Tarantino criticism. The character of Stephen was a representation of a slave who didn't believe he was a slave. He just believed that was the way the world was, and he was in his rightful place. And to have a black character be a bigger villain than a white one is not racist either.
The most influential directors were John Ford and Alfred Hitchcock who both started in the silent era followed closely by Orson Wells. Their influence is seen in the likes of Ingmar Bergman, Federico Fellini, Akira Kurosawa, Stanley Kubrick and Sergio Leone. Later, we have the trio who became famous and influential since the 1970s: Francis Ford Coppola, Steven Spielberg and Martin Scorsese.
Most of John Fords film are incredibly dated except Grapes of Wrath and Stagecoach and maybe The Searchers
@@kdizzle901 “The Quiet American” from 1952 is a delightful John Ford movie with great directing, acting and cinematography of Ireland. It’s my favorite John Ford which I’ve watched a good half a dozen times. Great cast including locals.
@@kdizzle901 I agree but The Searchers is still a masterpiece imo. Lots of his other movies fell victim to the teeth of time.
A video about my favorite Director? And one that satisfies at that. Good job man.
the video is nice, but the part about tarantino, oh boy, it's not even worth the time to correct you, so many absurds were said, that I honestly couldn't believe it. Nice to see that in the comments people know better, and are simply ignoring that...
Wow, you really showed him, what with all those facts and logic. Brilliant.
I liked his take on it. I’ll try looking out for it and see
He is right about Tarantino
"People just stare at each other and wait until the music stops to shoot eachother." I had to laugh because you're right
One essential aspect of John Ford's filmmaking is he started out in silent movies, as did Ozu (and many others). In almost every Ford film there are long silent reaction shots of just people, sometimes the principals, sometimes 'the old folks' or just 'passersby.' All the shots here from The Grapes of Wrath are exactly this. There's a Swedish TV series where a group of wives kill their husbands. Visual enough to make it interesting. The Finns did a remake and they do what seems to happen so often in current Finnish filmmaking, everybody just stands around and talks (a lot.) A lot of really smart creative people in Finland, but their filmmakers seem to have missed some important lessons. In the movie Junebug a woman is seen across the street, she's a bit heavy set and ordinary but the camera just stays on her as she walks into her house. It's just one of the reasons this is such a great movie. By holding on her the film conveys to us deep respect for her. Powerful and very much something Ford would do.
So you can watch a John Ford movie without the sound and understand what's happening. Sergio Leone is often, but not always, as good or better at this. (Be regrettable if a follower of Ford didn't take it a bit farther.) This is a sign of good filmmaking, but not necessarily great filmmaking. Kurosawa saying, "I studied John Ford:" Don't forget what Orson Welles and Greg Toland did before making Citizen Kane, they watched Stagecoach 42 times. (A friend tried this with Anonioni's Blow-up but never really got anywhere.)
When I was young I worked on a low budget (bomb) that John Carradine was in. He had terrible arthritis in his fingers and hands so we'd like his Camel cigarettes for him. Of course we asked him about Stagecoach, and he said what he's always said, "It was just another Western gambler role for me. Had I any idea that movie would be as important as it's become I would've paid more attention, written something down." Another aspect of Ford, use and very much the overuse of archetypes. But all those archetypes in and driving that stagecoach? They're just background for John Wayne's the Ringo Kid meeting, seeing the decency in, Clare Trevor's Dallas.
The moralizing talk in Ford's films get a bit tedious. With Tarantino -- and Seinfeld -- they start at the tedious and then play the funny bits. My Boomer generation might claim to have invented this, and we might get away with it -- so long as you don't go back to1761!! and Laurence Stern's Tristram Shandy.
The Fincher variation of the Ford dialogue, scenery, action scene repeat has a simple essential purpose: keep your audience interested, don't bore them. (Ever been back on the tour bus at an amazing place? Everybody is increasingly bored and anxious until the bus starts moving - away from the spectacular place and toward just another piece of road...)
Here's a tip to young filmmakers. Sure it's great to learn from the giants, but make experimental movies too. (And I don't mean Stan Brakage. Hours I'll never get back...) instead try to convey an emotion or information without using language you've already learned and seen on TV. I did this a couple times in the 1970s and think I did pretty good for college level. I had a whole slew of ideas I thought were good. Here's what happened next. First, I didn't cut it in the movie business, then every one of those ideas turned up in M TV videos in its first year. Even to the point I wondered at least once, 'did these people copy me?' Nope. Those were just some of the ideas that were in the air for my generation. What happened over the next two years is these ideas (plus many many more) were developed and made much much better. That's where you want to aim for. Just get started so you're working when you're at the 4th or 8th iteration of your ideas and what you've learned. This is also a formula for becoming Steven Spielberg, Kurosawa, Leone, etc...
Highly recommend the biography "Print the Legened." Ford was a heavily private soul who desperately wanted to fit in with the "cool kids" he even points out the real him is only expressed in film. He also was a huge advocate for hiring minorities of all kind. A few specific examples: he constantly hired African-Americans for set work and below the line job. He also worked with regularly a gay set designer who was not necessarily open, but was necessarily closeted either. He was a man who said never enough but somehow said too much, and he let his actions speak for him. Master filmmaker.
You have to willfully ignore a lot of Ford films to push the idea that he marginalized female characters. But no director is obligated to do anything- if Ford’s films were all male characters all the time that would be perfectly valid.
Samuel's characters in Tarantino movies is akways the smartest one. What about great women characters in Jackie Brown, Death Proof & Inglorious Basterds.
Don't even dignify this idiots opinion with excuses for something the guy is not guilty of. He admits that since Tarantino said that he disliked Ford, he has a vendetta against him.
My favorite Ford film is My Darling Clementine. Victor Mature's performance, Joe MacDonald's indoor & outdoor camerawork, the concentration of time. "No, I've been a bartender all my life."
mine too
These classic directors still inspire me today: Spielberg, Kurosawa, Fincher, and Kaza, Buñuel (not mentioned). Interesting analysis on Ford's style. I should study more of his work 👍
I think the greatest achievement of the great ford is the flow of his movies the way of the seamless camera movement like it was not there like an eye that just follows the characters in the story, he is not saying look at me I'm great director he is just saying look at these people and feel for them.
John Ford was unique. He used to keep the camera fixed on the scene (with only a few small movements when absolutely necessary). The movement was given by the actors (horses, indians, stagecoaches, etc.) who moved in and out of the shot. Unequaled great director.
Noting the kindness and sweetness of Ford is something people don't do enough.
Thank you for both your channel and recognizing the work of one of the true artists of film. He is both, one of the greatest and most innovative directors and one of my favorites, personally.
You're welcome!
8:40 Except about 80% of the time in his 'Pulp Fiction' and 'Hateful Eight' characters. And a ratio like that is damn rare in Quentin's work.
All you need to know is that it's boring if the horizon is in the middle.
I spent a great deal of my life in the film/tv industry and I can tell you that one essential trait of success in the Industry is the love of, study of, acknowledgement of the work of those who came before. Steven Spielberg was my brother's roommate in college for a year and so I know that he was obsessed with the study of film and film history. No matter how talented one is, one must learn from those who came before one in order to create one's own style and work.
I can only imagine how much work you put into these videos. You deserve more subscribers. Thank you, you are awesome.
Hilarious opening response by John Ford! Thanks for that, Sareesh. Otherwise very enjoyable and it ends well with your reflections on the quality of Ford's characters that sets his films apart. Thank heaven for that.
Somehow I can’t hear John Ford without thinking of David Lynch playing him.
Love your insights brother! Really learned a lot of filmmaking stuff I was able to incorporate in my tutorials :)
Great work! .. So glad i found your channel!
Man, I am loving those videos. I feel you really are stepping up peoples eyes, recognition, appreciation for cinema by teaching the sublte art. Keep up the good work. Truly amazing and fun to watch. Thank you.
@wolfcrow Great that you really watched, understand John Ford's influence on All Directors. Now you need a Sequel, focus on Orson Welles: Why Every Film Director Owes Orson Welles...A Triple Threat: Masterpieces in Radio, Theater/Stage, & FILM....
"...I'll be there." is all that needs saying. Thank you for driving that point home.
Your virtue has been noted....now bore off.
Otto Preminger also had long takes and complex camera moves with blocking. He once said he used long takes so that executives couldn't easily re-edit his work.
I just thank you for mentioning Preminger in a TH-cam comment at all, lol...There's a lot of people online who think they're "film scholars" because they've seen all of Nolan's films and they know who Kubrick was.
But mention Preminger and their eyes glaze over.
I'm reading Foster Hirch's biography of him. Highly recommend it if you haven't read it.
Great video. Thx. Provokes one to want to research further. Please dont stop saying what you think. It's what makes the channel interesting.
Wolfcrow, you need to be teaching cinema in universities. Thank you for sharing your insights with the world. But perhaps better than a university you have found the best platform here.
What a delight to learn that one of my favorite films, Stagecoach, helped inspire another favorite, Seven Samurai. Thank you for putting together this fascinating compendium of John Ford's enduring influence on cinema.
8:50 How could could Stephen conceivably be considered worse - or even nearly as contemptible - than Calvin Candie?
Stephen was smarter than Calvin, but rather than use his intelligence to educate him in compassion, he leveraged the man's ignorance to better his own situation at the expense of people like him.
Just spent part of this afternoon watching the greatest western ever made The Searchers. Every time I watch it I find something new in it.
Lol I’m not a Tarantino fanboy, I find him overrated but that side by side has pretty much nothing in common....
Your opinion at 8:05 is contradictory and killed this video. Kill Bill is entirely about a woman. Because she gets emotional women are "insignificant"? And then he made a second one. He also has a women take out the SS in Inglorious Bastards. Django is about a Black protagonist who is a bounty hunter that catches white people. If anything Tarantino flips convention on its head.
I read through most of the comments. The latter ones were quite critical of Wolfcrow. I thought he did a very good job in his analysis of directors. I compliment you(Wolfcrow) on a job well done. For the critics, they should try to put together a TH-cam video. It is work and it takes time. I am glad you took the time to do it. Thanks!
Umm, the people who are critical of what this guy presented have valid opinions. And they are not the ones who Chose to be the presenter. Wolfcrow did.
When you create fire for light, you also get heat.
@@charlie-obrien Well said, yeah. When you publilcy make a video accusing filmmakers of alleged "racism" with supporting arguments that are subpar, you gotta expect push back.
Especially if the filmmaker you hold up as an example of racial equality is John Ford, of all people.
The problematic representation in some of Ford's films gets pretty bad. I find this video venerating him to be mind-boggling.
So glad to learn about John Ford and his cinematic technique. Will make a point of watching his important works.
Ford's last movie, 7 Women, is one of his best movies and one of the most important feminist movies ever made, yes, I've said FEMINIST because it's true.
Tarantino on the other hand, well... his great weakness is that his movies almost have any moral or critical content, that's why you can find in them a portrait of a strong woman that for no reason becomes a sexist portrait.
That's why Ford is who he is, it's not only that he perfected cinema language to its highest peaks, he did it being meaningful and relevant still to this very day
Some people view Tarantino's dialogue as fluff or meaningless ie Pulp Fiction's dialogue but they miss the point and the connections to the plot and character
All the analytical parts of your videos are always great, but you always also include (knowingly or unknowingly) your personal opinions and then it's so bad. For example here, starting at 6:30 you compare Tarantino to Ford, and just show random single shots. Like: a person sitting near a window, a person sitting near a boulder at a campfire. WTF is this? It's just random scenes. Why not show the shots that are actual influences, like crash zooms/pans combined with music? Or who says Uma T is mommy soft in Kill Bill or an insignificant female character? The problem is not that you voice your opinion, the problem is that you present it in the same way as the analytical arguments. Please don't do that - it gives a very wrong idea of the actual artists and ideas.
Excellent video. Thanks!
John Ford is the best director of all time
Great video, very well made, and easiest subscribe click I've made in a while!
feel not enough people respect John Ford. He is one of the greats.
I disagree with you on Tarantino. Imo you have a jaded view warped by modern identity politics and are not seeing the whole picture, but rather just the surface level of black/white, woman/man. I believe Tarantino to be almost the opposite of what you say.
Great Analysis. I like this TH-cam channel.
Brilliant filmmaker. Note, at 2:15 you can see the dolly track on the left side of the frame.
Awesome! Well I learned about John Ford's influence on Sergio Leone from John Carpenter's comment track on the Once...in the West DVD. I think there is even more to the carefully crafted cinematography. It's very likely the way our brain perceives reality and stores memory. Thanks for taking the time making this!
Thanks so much for this! I always get so much insight out of your content. I’m an Indigenous person in Canada and we are still dealing with the legacy of ‘our’ portrayal in western films. I both love and hate them! Fantastic films but often times so problematic.
Note the nobility of Cochise and the righteousness of his cause in Ford's Fort Apache.
thank you sudesh , your video r always enlightening ...keep the good work, god bless
WITH FOUR OSCARS, HE IS THE DIRECTOR WITH HIGHEST NUMBER OF OSCARS.
#johnford #stagecoach
Thank you for the video.. Informative
Just curious.. Are you from Kerala?
Well made and edited video. The clips you chose were excellent. But you went jarringly off topic.
Ingmar Bergman once said that Ford was the best director of the world.
Your contents are priceless!👌
A lot of butthurt folks in the comment section, I enjoy John Ford and have watched a handful of QT movies, I appreciate your perspective and the thoughts you bring to the table. Definitely should assess our own individual morality before trash talking others, is my take away (on the moral side). I love Stagecoach, and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. Will definitely check out more of his work!
8:35 dude thats a stupid analogy, she is a frmale badass, not a male badass. You will have your answer when you understand why people like The Bride while they don't like the wannabe men female heros like the one in Ghostbusters, captain marvel etc...
The Tarantino take is a stretch for being critical. I'm a mixed minority. You're attacking Tarantino's female characters for what? Are there other male writer/directors out there that show women in a role of control such as Tarantino? He's one of the few male writer/directors that give the cinema strong vocal female characters. Kill Bill? Revenge plot with a lead female character. As well as female minority representation throughout the film. Stereotypical? I'm Asian. Lucy Liu wasn't up there taking shit from white people or the men around her and she didn't talk like other Asian female characters who are stereotypical with their dainty shy submissive selves. If anything, he gave some of the best asian representation in that film for an white american writer/director. And we see this pattern of representation in Kill Bill, Jackie Brown, Deathproof and Inglorious basterds. His movies are hugely inspired by b-movies and exploitation films, as well as black exploitation films. Precisely why he has elements of them in all his films. Now I can't speak for Django or the other black characters he's created (because im not black) but I will say this and whatever anyone wants to say, they can say... Please notify me if there has ever been a western with a black lead that's been given that much respect. Where can I find a western where the black lead is going around giving the much needed justice of killing every fucking racist slave owner he comes across? And also the german white guy does not save him. He may have broken him out of the shackles but from the overall story, we gain the insight to know that yeah Django could've broken free himself because he shows the audience he has what it takes for whatever is put in front of him, but it probably would've taken a longer time and he probably wouldn't have been as sharp a sharp shooter or had been able to get within 10 feet of Calvin Candies plantation without alerting anyone who he is. So for story reasons we have the german white guy, who is killed before he can really save Django. The last act of Django Unchained is the most pure demonstration (in my opinion) in cinema of justice well served. A black cowboy blasts his way back into the arms of his lover only to end the day by blowing up one of the most despicable plantations as well as killing perhaps one of the most infamous horrible characters in reality's history --Uncle Tom-- A man who would turn on his own people. I mean we see Django whip a fucking slave owner. Has that ever been in cinema before? Regardless we can even talk about Jules in Pulp Fiction who is the smartest character in that movie. Completely turns around a robbery, holds control in pretty much every scene he's in (im going off memory, i believe he did). Lets not forget how Tarantino makes sure the dixie boys in the basement get their fucking much needed end. To ME, i dont know about anyone else, but Tarantino has been a voice for minorities and feminists from pretty much day one. Say what you will about Reservoir dogs, can't defend that one but no one in that movie is supposed to be some saint you're supposed to look up to. They're all low lives who rob banks and he tells the truth in that. They all die, they all get their much needed end. I'm tired of people shitting on Tarantino when i'm an mixed asian minority and literally grew up loving Lucy Liu's character as well as Uma Thurman's in Kill Bill and Jules from Pulp Fiction. Those are my favorite characters and they're all Tarantino's. I'd like to also note in The Hateful Eight, how Sam's character is also the smartest in that one too and kill's one of the generals of the confederacy as well as painting the picture that that generals son engulfed his cock and made him beg for a blanket in the snowy mountains. Again, at least for me, that's justice served in Cinema, when you can publically humiliate these racists on every silver screen in the world.
Also Sam's Uncle Tom in Django is the smartest character along with Django and the German. Even though he's a villain, he's smart, smarter than Calvin, smarter than pretty much anyone else. That character is given mad respect being who he is.
Humiliation isn’t justice. Making a character cool isn’t making them morally right. Don’t forget, the Bride is a killer that Bill underestimated. If these characters are good enough for you they’re good enough for you.
@@wolfcrow I don't get your point. And Humiliation isn't justice? First, why do I care about the morals of a character? It's a character. When The Hulk smashes through New York City, is that showing good morals? He just destroyed people's living spaces. But we perceive them as good because he's fighting evil. In reality, this character is a monster. But we're in the movies. So no, the Bride doesn't have the best morals, but we understand her as being good because for all we know and for all she knows, her child has been killed in her stomach and her husband and friends have been murdered horrifically and these murderers who were her work associates, tried killing her. So she kills every last one of them. I don't go to the movies for lessons in morals, I go to the movies for fun and if on the way throughout my movie going experience, there's representation, great stories, and justice being served in the context of reality and fiction now meeting, then way to go. Second, which brings me to my point of justice, what would you call it then? When in Blazing Saddles, we get a satirical comedy which doesn't let up on holding the racist subtexts of other westerns accountable? All throughout that movie is humiliation for the westerns before it who have skated past racial conflicts and all the bullshit from them aswell. Anyway man, I like your videos, you make great videos but i'm just saying, i think you got the Tarantino thing wrong. All love from over here, I appreciate your time that goes into analysis, that's a ton of work.
I forgot to get to my point about justice. But when Blazing Saddles does that and throughout the history of Cinema those points weren't being made, that's justice for representation and for voices not being heard. When we have D.W. Griffith make the first blockbuster about the KKK and how they're basically parading around and no one makes a blockbuster about a black cowboy driving real justice down racists skulls until Tarantino, i dont know man, that's pretty good justice in terms of the Cinema.
@@anarchyonyt7542 I think you're missing the point because you haven't read what Tarantino had to say about John Ford.
Great vid, from a technical point of view, on directing, the cinematographers eye and how to tell a great story through the application of innovation and minimalist choices.
I take your point regarding the moral implications of the content of the individuals mentioned here, but I don't really come here for all that. I just want to learn to be a better filmmaker and understand how to get what is in my head onto the screen. And for that you do a wonderful job challenging me to think differently, study more and provide inspirational content that grows my confidence and self belief and for all of that I thank you.
The tangent you went on arguing that Tarantino is racist was not just silly but also downright unnecessary and irrelevant, which muddies the overall impact of your essay
I distinctly remember on the audio commentary for From Dusk Till Dawn, that Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez have a conversation about John Ford and doorways.
I had the honor of training as a script supervisor by John Fords script supervisor Robert Gary. He was in his late 80's when I trained under him. He had some wonderful stories about Ford.
I am curious if you ever studied who Ford may have been influenced by.
I know that when Ford was at Fox studios he was blown away by F.W. Murnau, who was there making SUNRISE.
That Tarantino rant was bad, not cause you mentioned it but how you don’t include the context to the argument. There a reason these black characters are in those situations but you avoid the context. Smh
Man i love your videos!
Am so so glad youhave posted this to draw current viewers to the richness of John Ford...so much crap out there now. John Ford (and his brother) began in silent film. Storey, narrative, composition and light, contrast, conflict, humor, action and the inherent dignity of people. 150 films, Wow!
There were a lot of things in this video I disagree with, one of the more possibly nitpicky (?) ones is the video-maker inferring that Ford's large filmography is more notable than it actually....is.
No argument, 150 films is a lot. Obviously. But I don't like how the video implies that it's _exceptional_ ...because at least within the era that Ford was working, he was hardly the only one cranking out films at a high rate.
For instance, Ford's contemporary Michael Curtiz directed roughly 180 films.
Allan Dwan directed 125.
William Wellman directed 77.
Lloyd Bacon directed 130.
Robert Z. Leonard directed 162.
Again, it's an achievement. But within the context of studio-era American cinema, Ford's filmography is not jaw-dropping. This video trades in way too much in myth-making for my taste.
Anybody know more about the line in here where "John Ford advised John Wayne to have one dialogue scene and follow it up with scenery or a visually striking scene."? I'd love more info on it, but I can't find anything trying to google it.
The section on Kill Bill and how it "adapts the bad aspects" doesn't make any sense. She "caves like a puppy" because despite the atrocity Bill committed they once had a deep connection and after seeing him act caring in front of her daughter that she didn't even know was alive her emotions were definitely colliding. And what do you mean why didn't she go for him first? You realise that it wasn't just bill who was involved. They all fucking went in and shot everyone! That's why she goes for all of them. Also from a certain perspective yeah maybe the whole concept of children make them "mommy soft" as you called it can be an outdated example of representation of women in film but the fact that part of her tragedy was the fact that she thought she lost her own child when she was pregnant kinda invalidates that stereotype as it's a very valid reason for that aspect of her character.
Perhaps the Tarantino effect comes from simply watching every single movie at the rental house to pay tribute to the greatest scene of each piece, perhaps Orson Welles, etc al felt this way about John Ford. Barry Lyndon compositions with lockdowns and movement matching movement ala Ford or Fincher is a fantastic through line to this video. Grateful to have this perspective as great art and story is like a tree with one central theme coming from the trunk.
QT was stealing
@@badazzfeliciano lol...ah, I see. So you're just putting up glib, baseless condemnations of Tarantino all over the place.
I enjoy Tarantino's films and have great respect for his directorial work. But he had it coming.
For those of you who want some perspective, Tarantino doesn't like Ford very much: thenewbev.com/blog/2019/03/ulzanas-raid/
Here's a quote from 2012: "One of my American Western heroes is not John Ford, obviously. To say the least, I hate him. Forget about faceless Indians he killed like zombies. It really is people like that that kept alive this idea of Anglo-Saxon humanity compared to everybody else’s humanity - and the idea that that’s hogwash is a very new idea in relative terms."
You can google 'Tarantino John Ford' for older comments, etc. I just used his (Tarantino's) own yardstick to measure Tarantino. It might come as a shocker, but John Ford isn't the person Tarantino makes him out to be. Even during the shitty times Ford made films in, he found a way to make his characters moralize about humanity in general. Watch Young Mr. Lincoln and The Sun Shines Bright for amazing humanitarian work that truly shows Ford is not the racist Tarantino makes him out to be.
Tarantino, on the other hand, hasn't made a film about anything that's actually useful to humanity. That's cool, entertainment is what it is. But when Tarantino the moralizer opens his mouth about morals...
I don't want to waste my time or yours arguing about the details. I leave everyone here with enough juice to form their own opinions.
And this thing about humanity lacking in Tarantino movies is untrue. Objectively very untrue and really idk how you get to that point subjectively. If we look at his characters objectively, for fact, what happens, action/reaction, beat by beat, conflict and choices made we can find their humanity. When were given the flashback in Django, we glimpse reality in the face of fiction, Kerry Washington and Jamie Foxx being caught for running away, Kerry being whipped, Jamie pleading. We glimpse this also when the German and Django talk by the campfire in the morning, and we flashback to him getting branded and broomhilda getting branded. This is reality in cinema, and for me humanity. We understand from that point on, exactly why Django MUST blow the head off of every racist he comes across. No, were not going to get a scene where Django runs though the legal system and gets his justice there and where it ends in happy tears and we see very blatantly who's good and who's bad and Django took the moral Christian way of fighting without violence. Instead we get the better version, where these racists are handed their asses as should be. I have no sympathy for a racist and when one or a bunch or all of them die on screen, I laugh and take joy in it as Shoshanna does in Inglorious basterds. No were not going to get pacifist characters from Tarantino, and this is not Marvel so theres going to be blood, and also Tarantino has a style. But to say theres no humanity? Theres no humanity in these characters? Who wouldn't be as heartbroken as The Bride--her love for her child and husband and friends, we can feel that through her course on revenge. Who wouldn't want justice for Django or any of the slaves in that movie? Or In history. I want to see every racist handed his ass and I don't care how because hes a racist. Humanity has nothing to do with the choices we make at the end of the day, humanity has everything to do with why we make those choices. Understanding why instead of taking just the very blatant surface material is what needs to be seen.
I dont care how many humanitarian films John Ford made, throughout his career, he has weaved racist bs in his movies. Now can we learn from him? Sure. Can we take from D.W. Griffith too? Of course. They made cinematic history, you cant be a film major without having heard these names anyways. So you learn their technical craft but that's it. Theres no love for John Ford, as Tarantino says, "To say the least, I hate him."
It's not about you saying how John Ford influenced Cinema, which is fully agreeable. But about the sexist and slightly racist accusations you sarcastically threw in, where you also at one point give Ford a pass for his racist and sexist portrayals in films because of the time he was in. But yet accuse tarantino, who is at every black protest there is out there. There is no excuse for John Ford a man who was one of the most powerful men in cinema. That's what I'm trying to point out. Now are his films amazing? Yes, still there are no excuses there. I'm not a tarantino fan boy by the way. I like some of his films and don't like some of his others. All I can point out is that those sarcastic remarks u did about him, especially at a time like this are not fair.
Pulp Fiction is about redemption, and the foibles that come with it. In each of the three intertwined stories, every main character’s primary action is to save someone else in a way that runs counter to their amoral character - and this puts them in a place of unfamiliar moral potential. They then exercise (or don’t exercise) that potential, and reap the benefits and consequences of their action or inaction. Notice the Black character is the one who acts positively on it in the strongest way.
I suspect you may have an absolute view of morality, and value sincerity and transparency above all in its cinematic representation. I can empathize. But cinematic morals, as with real-life morals, are best expressed through action, not dialogue - and this translates to story structure. I’d argue Tarantino’s moralistic story structure is more nuanced than almost anyone else’s, precisely because he embraces the contradictions morality poses in extreme situations. The overall truths he finds are hidden in the mechanism of the narrative itself - where the strength of that mechanism is what validates them. Those truths are not superficially parroted in his characters’ dialogue, which any screenwriter can easily do. With Tarantino, characters are characters, not mouthpieces.
And yes, Tarantino’s kind of character nuance is also extended to minorities. He is not going to give us (literal) black and white heroes, where the minorities easily check the boxes of #empowerment. He’s going to give us powder kegs of unexpected flaws, virtues, and vulnerabilities - and the genius behind them is that, in spite of endless contradictions, almost all of them still adhere to character logic.
He does this under the disguise of entertainment. The fact that you’re taking it at face value leads me to believe you’d benefit from a deeper look at his work.
Fanboys are annoying.
The fade to black effect was criticized in John Carpenter's The Thing ironically but when I watched it, it caught me off guar and actually made the next scene very tense and suspenseful. Fade to black works but not so much with Modern cinema in my opinion due to the quality of cameras and the digital editing style and the texturing of the picture. Its a technique that should be used maybe once or twice in a film. Sometimes, it can work effectively to highlight the end of an act of a film and the beginning of a new one.
1:30 Terminator 2 ?
Looking forward to seeing some epic masterpieces soon to be directed by the many cinematic experts here.
Looking forward to any films you may have.
"Where's your art?" is the laziest, most pointless and most butt-hurt attempt at deflection someone can make. It's not an argument and people don't need to be artists to be good critics. Usually a symptom of deep insecurity.
they are and were all great in their own way. now i need to go find these movies and watch them again.
Probably my favorite director.
Sincerely a director.
I'm so fortunate to have found your channel. Every video is a gem! So many insights, and not just for filmmakers, but for all appreciators of film and art.
Very interesting video essay. Much thanks. I disagree somewhat with your takes on Kurosawa and Ford. Kurosawa has a number of great films about regular people, including "Ikiru," the ultimate film about the heroism of an ordinary man. And in 1960's "Sgt Rutledge," Ford tried to present non-white characters in a favorable light.
John Ford best director in my opinion his filming style was awesome amazing especially westerns in that time. The 3D and closeups scenes Amazing