Just curious what people thought of the discussion between him and Elvis Mitchell.
Why don’t you tell us about the highlights.
There would be actual highlights if Elvis Mitchell was a half-way decent interviewer. Tarantino was being very gracious about it, but, the guy was acting like a dimwit. Luckily QT is so gifted as a film-theorist and cinephile that he barely needs to be asked a question and he is off and running talking a (if you are paying attention) coherent circle around a topic. It just made me long for an interviewer who was on his level – then the night would have been even more fantastic.
I am not sure if I am just being a snob about Mitchell, that is why I was reaching out to hear what others thought.
“Luckily QT is so gifted as a film-theorist”. ????
I hope Tarantino had to purchase an admission like everyone else.
Right up there with Christian Metz, huh? Hmmm…
>>Luckily QT is so gifted as a film-theorist<<
Funnily enough that’s how I’d describe Mitchell …
wow. so that answers my question. obviously, y’all weren’t there.
Here’s some video of the event http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2009/12/about_last_nigh.php
Tarantino spent five minutes talking about how he spent 4 days rehearsing the soldiers in the background table in the basement scene, creating a sense of reality for them to stick to while the main action is being filmmed at the foreground table. It was actually fascinating if you like to hear about film directing technique. But Mitchell, for some stupid ass reason, called that “subtext”. so then QT spent another 2 minutes trying, very kindly, to convince Mitchell that, no, that is not what subtext is. But EM, in a very embarrassing way, kept trying to say it was. I literally put my head down, trying not to watch the car wreck. painful.