Tarantino and Postmodernism

The following essays was for my Cultural Studies course, therefore it is not of the same quality or style than that of my other writing.

In modern media, we often see pastiches of older works of art. Many artists are so heavily influenced by previous genres/styles that they literally recreate these styles in their own works. We seem to see this everywhere, from music to television to film. Sure, artists paying homage or in a more pejorative sense stealing from other artists is nothing new. With that being said, some artists have taken it to a new level, where their works are filled to the brim with references to other works. In particular, writer/director, Quentin Tarantino has made a name for himself as being a master of stylistic filmmaking in the past two decades and is held as one of the finest filmmakers around the world. To postmodernists theorists, Tarantino must be a menace for simply creating giant references, often references to other references, ultimately leaving us to question what is original or real anymore. Personally, I think his approaches are appropriate and a postmodernist analysis of his most popular film, Pulp Fiction (1994) would strongly differ from my viewing or reactions to it.
With Pulp Fiction Quentin Tarantino utilizes various techniques from previous filmmakers and makes countless references to films and other areas of pop culture. Frequently during dialogue, a character refers to a famous person, song, movie, etc. For example, the character Jules often calls characters by celebrity names; he refers to a British speaking character as “Ringo,” this is a reference to Beatles drummer Ringo Starr. Many works make such minor references, but in Tarantino’s films, viewers are literally inundated with hundreds. But, this is only the beginning. The hip director lifts lines straight out of older films. For instance, in one scene, a mobster by the name of Marcellus Wallace plans to torture his enemy “… with a pair of pliers and a blow torch.” This quote is a paraphrase of a line in the film Charley Varrick (1973), in which the line is “They’re gonna strip you naked and go to work on you with a pair of pliers and a blowtorch.” Tarantino also simulates various shots from his favorite films. In one scene, the character, Marcellus is crossing the street when he stops and realizes that the very man he is trying to track down is driving in the car in front of him. As he realizes this both men lock eyes. Though the circumstances are totally different, this shot is nearly identical to a shot in Alfred Hitchcock’s Horror classic, Psycho (1960).
This film is clearly an example of postmodernist culture because Quentin Tarantino rejects standard forms of filmmaking and pieces together elements from other works into his own creation. Most postmodernist thinkers would probably slam Tarantino for being just another entertainer that steals from others or presents his work to the public as if it’s original. I think Tarantino’s methods fall into the postmodernist category, but that does not mean that they are not worthy of praise. He throws various, often obscure, elements from numerous works into the mix and shapes them into his own story. Clearly, he is not the most original filmmaker, but the quality of his films are much higher than that of others, usually including those he references in the first place.

I used the follow source for information- http://www.tarantino.info/wiki/index.php/Pulp_Fiction_Movie_References_Guide

Chris

Question of the Week…

Is it wrong to endorse an artists’ work, even if they led or lead truly horrible lives? For example, some point to the gifted filmmaker, Roman Polanski. Polanski has won academy awards for his work, but he wasn’t in attendence. Why? Decades ago he fleed the U.S. after drugging and raping a thirteen year old girl. Yes, this is quite sickening, but if he makes a film that is a masterpiece itself, should it not be treated like other great works of art? Picture this, you run an independent record label and you enjoy documenting the best damn music to please your ears. Suddenly you hear the greatest record of all times and it’s none other than…. Charlies Manson. So, now you sign Charlie (if you could) and release his material. Is there anything wrong with this hypothetical situation? What if it was Hitler, Mao, or some of the other massive murderers from history? Would it be immoral to endorse their work? Where do you draw the line? Is there a line? Let’s hear some thoughts…

Chris

Ripping Deusner

Regarding Stephen Deusner’s review of Mark Sultan’s $:

Nice scarf, btw.

“He’s been fashioning harsh psych, rangey country, dreamy doo-wop, 50s juvie punk, and anarchic noise into strange, catchy, jubilant, occasionally jokey pop songs.“—> Good job of throwing in adjectives before every genre. Make no mistake about that. Your description really provides us an adequate look at Mark Sultan’s discography. Not.

“Sultan also resumed his role as BBQ Show for another album (and a coloring book!) with friend and longtime cohort King Khan.” –> You had me, Stephen. You really did. From your meaty words to start, I thought you may have actually listened to Sultan before. But “BBQ Show”? You can’t make a rookie mistake like that. Not at this stage in your professional career.

“Whatever banner he’s flying, however, the sound remains the same, and his latest effort– which isn’t titled so much as branded with a dollar sign– snaps and crackles with a familiar, flailing energy, as if any of these songs might fall apart at any moment.” –> The sound remains the same? This offering from Sultan is more musically diverse than most of what he’s put out in the past. You want the songs to fall apart. You are rooting against Sultan to start with. You want them to fall apart so you can listen to more Broken Social Scene.

“Ten of Hearts” may be one of his best doo-wop retreads, cutting through a lot of the revivalism to express something sincere and bittersweet, but there’s no reason for it to be five minutes long.” –> Why is there no reason for it to five minutes long? You make no attempt to explain why. And it’s not until the end of your review that you actually mention songs off of this record. Thanks for pointing out only what’s wrong with the album.

CD Review: Crystal Castles [2010]

Band: Crystal Castles
Release: 4/2010
Label: Fiction (Universal)

1. “Fainting Spells” – C
2. “Celestica” – B-
3. “Doe Deer” – C
4. “Baptism” – B-
5. “Year of Silence” – B-
6. “Empathy” – B+
7. “Suffocation” – B
8. “Violent Dreams” – C+
9. “Vietnam” – B
10. “Birds” – B–
11. “Pap Smear” – C+
12. “Not in Love” – C
13. “Intimate” – B-
14. “I Am Made of Chalk” – D

Comments: Crystal Castles. I want some crazy catchy stuff from you. That’s a demand actually. I don’t want spotty dance/noise punk. You hear me? “Empathy” is the first song that accomplishes the kind of catchy that I was looking for, equipped with dreamy vocals and a strong rhythm. “Vietnam” has some streaks of greatness, but isn’t really a hit from start to finish. Unfortunately, most of the album is just average minutes of electronica. Maybe that’s your thing.

Grade: C+ (78)

CD Review: Brothers [2010]

Band: The Black Keys
Release: 5/2010
Label: Nonesuch (Warner)

1. “Everlasting Light” – B-
2. “Next Girl” – B-
3. “Tighten Up” – B+
4. “Howlin’ For You” – B+
5. “She’s Long Gone” – B-
6. “Black Mud” – B-
7. “The Only One” – B
8. “Too Afraid to Love You” – C
9. “Ten Cent Pistol” – B-
10. “Sinister Kid” – B-
11. “The Go Getter” – B-
12. “I’m Not the One” – C+
13. “Unknown Brother” – C
14. “Never Give You Up” – C+
15. “These Days” – B

Comments: “Everlasting Light” is a bit like a spoiled Spoon offering, included in the deal: a consistent drum beat and a steady guitar. It’s about as forgettable as it is good. “Next Girl” is a great title for Justin Bieber’s next release and he can damn well have it. It’s not like Black Keys do a real solid job with it anyway. “Tighten Up” offers more variation than the first two and with good measure. Hardly do I run into a band/album that is this generically good. It’s like getting handed a plate of food. You eat mostly everything on the plate and remark that you like it, but you don’t go out of your way to inquire about what it is that you just ate. Black Keys get some kind of job done. Maybe it’s an obligation to get something done (I doubt it), but I’d get a little bored writing material for this album. By “Too Afraid” I just have had enough! Enough of these games, Black Keys! I’m not asking you to be Black Lips, but fuck, guys. Is the blues-rock genre really this limiting? OR IS IT NONESUCH RECORDS STICKING A PITCHFORK UP YOUR ASS, FORCING YOU TO BE THIS BLAND? COLD WAR KIDS ARE BETTER THAN YOU. There, I said it. Even your damn guitar solos are clean and without flavor. Okay, this is probably a good album for a straight listen. You get your dose of Black Keys and then you go to sleep or listen to Kings of Leon. Okay, good. You never listen to Black Keys until their next album drops in 2012. Then you do the same thing. Okay, good.

Grade: B- (81)

Boston based shows/fests – DIY, punk, noise