Which of Tarantino's morally corrupt protagonists is your favourite? (That's quite a tough question to answer...)

@jondorsey2043

Ай бұрын

Mr. White, and Mr. Pink. Brilliantly acted and written. My first introduction to his films.

@toro5280

Ай бұрын

This is hard to answer because the acting elevates these characters above the script. But sure, Mr. Pink is a great choice.

@michaelwhalen5836

Ай бұрын

Cliff

@robt4390

Ай бұрын

Butch - as he said: “They keep underestimating you!” A would-be victim Marcellas thought he could coerce into doing what he wanted. Used that perception to manipulate the situation to his advantage. Resists the urge to physically lash out at Fabienne when she lets him down (though, it surely wouldn’t have killed him to have packed the watch himself) and does the right thing by Marcellas at the end of his segment (going back to rescue him from the rapists). Don’t feel sorry for Vincent either. In the subsequent section, you see that he has the opportunity to walk away from “the life” with Jules - which would’ve saved him. His response was “…freak occurrence…”

@deraykrause4517

Ай бұрын

Mr. Pink and The Bride.

He never corrupted me with these guys. I knew they were scumbags, but then so was The Dirty Dozen.

@tedwojtasik8781

19 күн бұрын

Maggot. The single most obviously bad and disgusting character in movie history. Savalas was brilliant. The scene where he makes the German woman scream and then guts her was cold as ice.

@matthewatwood8641

17 күн бұрын

Not corrupted you as an individual, but got you to root for a villain

@user-bw4jm1bv1i

16 күн бұрын

Same.

@AminJones

15 күн бұрын

Telly savalas* played a learning disabled soldier trying to live his best life.

@UpperDarbyDetailing

15 күн бұрын

If you liked The Dirty Dozen, watch The Fat Electrician tell the story of Jake “McNasty” McNiece, who was the basis for the movie.

You skipped Butch's motivation for throwing the fight, it was how Vincent talked to him at the bar, so Butch keyed his Malibu. Butch was ready to throw the fight until a junkie that worked for Wallace denigrated him.

@jameswelch7403

Ай бұрын

AS MANY TIMES AS I HAVE SEEN PULP FICTION I NEVER PIECED THAT TOGETHER

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Interesting! I've always considered Butch's decision to throw the fight to have been the plan from the beginning. When he's on the payphone to Scotty, it seems like this all took quite a lot of planning, which he wouldn't have been able to cook up in the time between taking the money from Marsellus and the fight. I think Vince's behaviour in the bar was just something that pissed Butch off and created some animosity between the two. Still, you may be right. More importantly, Butch's keying of Vince's Malibu is a little-known fact indeed. Barely anyone seems to have noticed this - bravo! Thanks for watching and commenting. I really hope you enjoyed the video! - Luke

@SoyRaulEVM

13 күн бұрын

imagine being Butch and sharing your plan with your french gf they have to leave town, risking their lives because a dude in a bar called you "punchy". I believe it's 2 different revenge acts from Butch, one careful planned and the other out of his anger issues.

@beowulf_of_wall_st

10 күн бұрын

@@luke.hoffman Marsellus' speech about "pride fucking with you" is key to that interaction. Butch was willing to let go of his pride as a professional fighter, but Vincent made it personal and that was too much for him to bear.

@pyropulseIXXI

8 күн бұрын

If a junkie has this much power over you, then that is pathetic. Imagine keying a junkies car and going back on the deal you made because a junkie made you feel insecure…. Lmao

When its kill or be killed, morality takes a back seat

@mistasomen

Ай бұрын

yeah, but a great many of tatantino's killings are done witht the victim helpless. Just watch the inglorious basterds scene... also, torture and killing of innocent bystanders...

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

I think it all depends on the ethical stance you take. Some would argue that murder is never morally permissible. Others would say it is in certain situations. I opted for a very black-and-white view when writing this video, but I appreciate that this is a more nuanced topic. Thanks for getting involved in the discussion and watching. I appreciate the interaction a lot! - Luke

@johnathoncorliss7828

Ай бұрын

Agreed. It only seems bad when you’re so far removed from the wild nature of reality.

@xdemonikgamingx9168

Ай бұрын

Amen

@ethanhegel8576

Ай бұрын

the back seat is a dangerous place in a tarantino movie.

Hateful 8 is tarantinos love letter to "The Thing"

@DIOBrando-ij2bp

Ай бұрын

It is that. But it’s like a love letter to a lot of stuff. The door thing, while not exactly the same, seems to be a reference to The Thing from Another World.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Indeed. I love how he recycled the leftover Morricone music and made it almost like a 'bottle episode' in his filmography. I think every time I rewatch it I like it more and more. It's probably his most underrated film in my eyes. I'm glad I'm not the only one who's a big fan of it. I'm still hoping that he turns it into a theatre production at some point! Thanks for watching! I really hope you enjoyed it. - Luke

@colderman

Ай бұрын

It's legit my favorite movie and upon ready this I just did I side by side montage in my head. My mind is blown😂😂😂

@andrewk.7498

17 күн бұрын

More like him unzipping and pissing on it

@finnpendleton4615

12 күн бұрын

It's his love letter to the n-word.

Theres no reason for violence, til there is.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

An interesting perspective. Thanks for watching! Hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

I always believe Butch was going to take the dive but when Vincent said what he said to him at the bar Butch changed his mind

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Someone else shared this view, too. It's definitely a plausible one! Thanks for watching and commenting. Hope you enjoyed it! - Luke

Tarantino never writes good or bad guys ....he just writes people who find themselves in situations and do what they gotta do

@evanyes5762

28 күн бұрын

Exactly, morality doesn't exist. Good and Evil animals and people don't exist, it's just a game of 'Point of Views'

@Uwhwvwgwh

25 күн бұрын

Bad guys

@coffeeknight1916

17 күн бұрын

They don't gotta do things, they choose to do bad things

@wambokodavid7109

17 күн бұрын

@@coffeeknight1916 he writes human beings.ill leave it at that.good or bad is irrelevant.theres only the situation and the choices

@braedenh6858

17 күн бұрын

Choices to do bad things

His best character is Hans Landa. I love that guy. The whole movie is in another gear when he is on the screen. And You don't have to pull for him, you just know that he does not need that. With the exception of the last minute of the movie he is always in control and on the winning side. Aldo's action in the last minute is the only thing which make the balance right. He is just like Heath Ledger's Joker. Makes you craving to have him on the screen again. And he is so much above anybody in intellect, charisma, vision, one cannot help but love the guy.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Completely agree. I think Hans Landa is possibly my favourite Tarantino character, too. One of the things I like the most about Hans is his ability to use language, both verbal and non-verbal, as a weapon. He's a master of communication and I love the way Tarantino (and Waltz) showcase this in his interactions. No one is able to hide from him and, as you say, he's always in control and never has to fire a gun to do it - very unusual for a Tarantino character. I think he's one of the most well-written characters of all time. Thanks for watching and taking the time to share this comment. I appreciate it a lot! - Luke

@jeffsmith3747

Ай бұрын

I truly didnt care for Hans lands never saw what was so special about him

@SuperMrHiggins

8 күн бұрын

That last shot from him in the opening? The one were he doesn't take the shot and instead wishes her a fond farewell? Years later and that still is probably one of the strongest scenes.

@hugovonpayns9291

4 күн бұрын

Look at him again than​@@jeffsmith3747

Sam jackson is the only "good" character in pulp fiction. By the end he realized he didnt want to be that anymore.

@jessejames8900

Ай бұрын

He wanted to wander the land like Cain from Kungfu, he wants to be like Jesus.

@MatthewGill-nv4tb

Ай бұрын

@@jessejames8900 goddamn. Wouldn't that be a good movie.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Totally agree. I think by the end he makes a bit of a shift, for sure. But early on, he's not quite there yet. And even at the end, he still lets Ringo and Yolanda leave with all the diner customers' wallets when he could have forced them to return them. I think there's still some moral greyness in Jules yet! 😆 Thanks for watching and commenting. Hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

@braedenh6858

17 күн бұрын

Cue up the scene where Jules murders a man because Brad's talking is boring him...

@MatthewGill-nv4tb

17 күн бұрын

@braedenh6858 chronology I guess...

Butch takes a major risk to rescue Marcellus - compelled by a sense of honor, like Jules. Vincent also has a sense of honor, but is closed to the spiritual encounter that has impacted Jules so much. How'd they end up? I would argue that Tarantino's writing became angry and corrupted after Django.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Indeed. I think the honour (or "twisted sense of morality", as I put it in the video) that he instills into many of these characters definitely adds to that moral greyness and makes it harder to argue that they are entirely bad. Vince is an interesting one indeed. He'll dispassionately kill people for Marsellus, but (presumably) only if he's asked to do it nicely 😆 what a fascinating guy! Interesting take on Tarantino's writing. I don't view Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood as a particularly angry narrative. I'm very keen to see what he does for his final film, though. Thanks for watching and commenting. I appreciate the insight and support. - Luke

What's that line from Rusty Cohle in True Detective Season 1? "The world needs bad men. Keeps the other bad men from the door."

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

What a character. What a series (S1, that is). And what a quote! I couldn't agree more. Thank you for watching and commenting. I hope you enjoyed the video! - Luke

I watched Inglorious Bastards with my dad. When the bat scene happened, he said “well that’s excessive.” Then I told him these are Jewish men and he was like “Oh, well that makes sense then.”

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

😆 I suppose it does make sense on many levels. Particularly for those who subscribe to the policy of 'an eye for an eye'. Thanks for watching and commenting. I appreciate it and hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

@jeffsmith3747

Ай бұрын

Wait are you saying your dad hates Jews or that it’s normal for Jews to be violent

@kaosisback8376

29 күн бұрын

Nah this Jewish revenge porn is nonsense

@saberhap2639

29 күн бұрын

They were clearly the villains.

@fgoindarkg

28 күн бұрын

​@@kaosisback8376 Funny that you can use those words but I can't.

Butch killing Vince/Marcellus/Zed/Maynard could be considered self defense. He didn't kill the Gimp.

@gamervet4760

Ай бұрын

The gimp was hanging by his neck. He also could've suffered brain damage from Butches punch. He killed his opponent in his last fight, so he's got some powerful fists. Just some food for thought.

@chattanoogachop5154

Ай бұрын

​@gamervet4760 after some cursory investigation, it appears you are correct. the gimp choked to death after getting knocked out.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

So, according to an interview with Tarantino, the Gimp did die (I was very careful to fact check that before including it in the video 😅). But I see you've also read this now. Still, thank you for challenging my view in the video. Even though the video is mainly about Tarantino's writing techniques, my intention was to be quite provocative/black-and-white in my ethical evaluation of these characters to stimulate discussions like this. I already mentioned it in a reply to another comment, but I took an approach that is arguably characterised best by Kantian Ethics, which judges the morality of an act in itself as opposed to the character or consequences of an action (i.e. murder = bad, irrespective of the context/consequences). It's quite rigid and not really how I would make moral judgments in real life, but it's a nice way to stimulate discussion in cases like this. I like your perspective, but I would challenge it with the following: - Vince was unarmed. Butch could have probably incapacitated him without killing him (e.g. knock him out, tie him up - we all know Butch would probably take Vince in a fist fight 🤣). There was clearly some animosity between the two, as we see from their meeting in the bar. So, I think Butch killing him that way was quite cold-blooded and not entirely self-defence. - I would argue the similarly for the case of Marcellus. Firstly, he could have reversed his car rather than accelerated. And in the pawn shop, he could have left him knocked out on the floor and still escaped. Maybe Marcellus would have hunted him down, I think that's more than plausible. But still, the way Butch was about to execute him was hilariously brutal, and Marcellus was already incapacitated at that point. So, again, I would argue not self-defence. - Zed is presumably killed by Marcellus and his "hard, pipe-hitting n-words", so that one isn't on Butch 😆 - And Maynard could have been knocked out with the baseball bat, but (in one of the coolest scenes, I'll admit) Butch chooses the katana and then attacks Maynard while his back is turned. Morally justified? I would argue, yes. Self-defence? I would say, no. What are your thoughts? Also, thank you for the comment and for watching. I really appreciate the support and hope you enjoyed the video! - Luke

@chattanoogachop5154

Ай бұрын

@luke.hoffman I'd say the only reason Vince was unarmed was because he forgot his machine gun on the kitchen counter when he went to the bathroom. There is no doubt he and Marcellus were going to kill/torture Butch if they caught him, and since Marcellus was prepared to "scour the earth for that mf", Butch would be looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life. Given the oppurtunity to deal with his enemies permanently, he took it. I would say shooting Vince (and running over Marcellus) was justified in the sense that the stakes were already clear that it was life or death. Sparing the life of the person who is trying to kill you (and will continue to try to kill you, unless you save them from being raped and tortured by rednecks, one of the only unlikely scenarios where a truce could be negotiated) its a matter of survival. That being said, I'm certainly not making a case for Butch bring a good guy, but rather his actions regarding killing who he did was more akin to the do or die situation of combat than a reflection on his morality. I wouldn't consider it immoral to kill an unarmed soldier (not a civilian) during a declared war, since it's understood they would do the same to you if given the chance, and in that way I'd argue Butch was justified. Should do one on King Shultz (who I think was a bad person under your terms) and Django (who slaughtered the matriarch of Candyland towards the end of film). Anyway, interesting video, thanks for the reply

@HellBoy-id6ss

Ай бұрын

💯% correct.. Vincent wasn't waiting in his apartment to have a thoughtful conversation of morally ambiguous characters in film..

The Basterds are definitely akin to the Glanton Gang. In a group like that the moral code is pitch coloured but even still there are little greys and small honours as the true evil emerges. Even Bathcat had a limit. And as for the gang from Blood Meridian, it’s fascinating that the most evil among them has such an exacting hold on what being good might mean, and how limited it is in the face of evil

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

I'm so pleased to see that the Glanton Gang reference resonated with someone! Such a fascinating group (and story). Ever since reading the book I'm convinced that this is where Tarantino got his inspiration for Aldo and his group, but I've never seen him speak on it. If I'm ever lucky enough to speak to him (😅) I'll make sure to ask him. Thanks for watching and commenting. Really hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

@basementmadetapes

Ай бұрын

@@luke.hoffman ftr the glanton gang is far worse, far more depraved and unambiguously their own worst cancer. But I can see the spectrum between the basterds and them

The thing with his movies, is that it doesn't matter who kills over, because they are all bad so you never feel too bad when it happens. One monster will win, the other will lose, we all lose with them but sometimes we lose less... And we feel good about liking something that's definitely not good.

You could've also included "Natural Born Killers" "Four Rooms" and "True Romance" to further your point. Well made sir.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Oh trust me, there were quite a few examples I wanted to include (my original script was probably twice the length of this one!). Maybe I'll have to do another part to this video in the future 😆 Thank you for watching and commenting. I really appreciate the feedback and am glad you enjoyed the video. - Luke

@w.neuman

8 күн бұрын

I Don't Know About The Other Two BUT "NaturaL•Born•KiLLers" WAS-NOT Directed By °Quentin•Tarentino ••••••• I BeLieve It Was °Martin•Scorcesse !

@illuminahde

8 күн бұрын

@@w.neuman He wrote it though. It was directed by Oliver Stone

@w.neuman

7 күн бұрын

@@illuminahde : Oh, O.K.

@w.neuman

7 күн бұрын

@@illuminahde : Oh, O.K.

One time Tarantino did not get me was Brad Pitt's character in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. I kept remembering he killed his wife throughout the movie and refused to root for him. Just wanted his character to get killed off LMAO extremely unlikable throughout.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment! I don't think you're the only one who holds this opinion. Personally, I found him to be likeable despite his ambiguous past. When I first watched the film, I chose to believe his wife dying was an accident. It wasn't until my later rewatches and, more recently, reading the book, that I realised his true nature. All in all, he's a fascinating character. Thanks for watching! - Luke

@stills5deep

Ай бұрын

Wrong he was cool and his wife was a bitch

@wambokodavid7109

Ай бұрын

That was the point tho.... nobody was meant to like him.hell in the movie u even see di caprio is the one that tries to get people to like him.

@KJT4888

Ай бұрын

@@wambokodavid7109 No you were definitely supposed to like him as an anti-hero. When he beats up the Manson family member over his tire being flattened you are supposed to think he is cool. I don't even want to get started because personally I think this movie is absolutely awful. It's up there with Death Proof as Tarantino's worst movies ever.

@wambokodavid7109

Ай бұрын

@@KJT4888 you've made up your mind so I won't waste my time going over this with you.good day

No matter how horrific amd brutal, no harm you do to a nazi can count as immoral.

@3HourSleepHeartAttack

13 сағат бұрын

I disagree,

You bring up that snippet from his book where he’s talking about Dirty Harry, (someone recently made a video about that bit of the book) but Tarantino has also specifically talked about the thing you’re talking about here in relation to his own movies too in interviews. He talked about this with Django Unchained, and brought it up in relation to Sergio Corbucci westerners like Django, but more specifically The Great Silence. He talked about how the characters are the kinds of characters that in any other movie would be the villains, but juxtaposed against the villains of the movie they’re the heroes. Like Dr. King Schultz in Django Unchained may seem like a good guy in Django Unchained, but he does kill people for money, and he does have Django kill a guy in front of his own son. He’s talked about this in reaction to Butch as well... maybe in the Pulp Fiction related Charlie Rose interview he did, I don’t quite remember where he talked about it specifically anymore. But it was probably that interview since that interview is on the DVD. The Hateful Eight was all about this. It’s built around a particularly type of episode Western tv of the ‘50s and ‘60s would do from time to time where a bunch of guest stars (these were usually guys you’d see showing up in Spaghetti Western later, or they were Roger Corman’s crew) playing villains would show up and hold some characters up (maybe even the main characters) and the leads of the show would have to take care of them. These episodes in particular are always pretty cool, and almost function a little movies. Sometimes the main characters of the show are barely in these episodes. It’s a style of episode TV (be it actually TV or streaming) doesn’t really do anymore. Hateful Eight is that but without the hero characters. Originally it did have a hero character though, since Tarantino started writing it with the idea of it being a Django paperback.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Yes! This was an awesome comment to read. Thanks for sharing it. His book, 'Cinema Speculation', is a really fascinating insight into his filmmaking philosophy and influences. As I read through it, I was able to see exactly where many of his characters, stories and set pieces etc. came from. It's a really cool read and I'd highly recommend it. Your point RE Sergio Corbucci is bang on. I think you're referring to the documentary 'Django & Django', right? I remember when he talks about Sonny & Jed and how he regards Sonny & Jed as the antagonists, despite the title suggesting otherwise. He views the sheriff played by Telly Savalas (who is originally intended as the villain) as the good guy/hero. I think he's always challenging us to view his characters through different lenses, and try to view things from their different perspectives before we decide who is good and who is bad etc. Also, Dalton's role in Lancer in Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood definitely seems to be a nod to the Western TV show guest star trope you mentioned. Thanks again for the comment and for watching. Glad you enjoyed it and had so much to say! - Luke

Once Upon A Time in Hollywood was one of the times Tarantino's main characters were not "bad"

@jk3253

13 күн бұрын

Didn’t Brad Pitt kill his wife in that movie?

@mr_0n10n5

13 күн бұрын

He did Which is why "bad" is in quotes They were very clearly bad people but that is presented in the background and not as their day to day actions

@RickGreg-nt1nt

12 күн бұрын

Dude killed his wife....so yea pretty good guy in my book

Thank you I've never understood why I don't like any of his movies but now I do.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

🤣 that's hilarious! You're more than welcome (even though I love his films! 😆). Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. It's appreciated. - Luke

@tritone11

Ай бұрын

That just means you get caught up in genre and style, it clashes with your taste. If you love cinema and writing itself, you enjoy QT at least to some degree.

@MrEvans1

12 күн бұрын

​@@tritone11 shhh let them show off their moral superiority 😂.

@leroilapue15

12 күн бұрын

@@MrEvans1 what's wrong with being morally superior to filth and scum?

@earlybird3668

11 күн бұрын

Just stick to The Chosen.. be you.

I've seen all the movies you've discussed but I didn't pick up on how once a character is an under dog, the audience will tolerate a great degree of moral ambiguity or them being "bad." I also like how Tarantino humanizes his villains. Great stuff for any writer to know. Thanks for making this video!

@donsolos

5 күн бұрын

When someone becomes endeared to us we are willing to overlook things in them that we wouldnt in strangers

They're called anti-heroes and they aren't exclusive to Tarantino movies. The reason I root for them is because I can relate more to imperfect characters more than I can morally perfect characters.

I don't know. I'd say the protagonists of inglorious bastards are mostly morally gray, not necessarily bad in context of their world. Unless most people would tell you it's it's basically pointless to interpret morals in a vacuum in any meaningful way

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment, Ryan. I think I agree for the most part. Have a look at some of my replies to comments that came before yours and you'll see that, in reality, I would view most of the characters as 'morally grey'. For the sake of the video and sparking discussion, I took a more deontological/Kantian approach when writing the script. Definitely more black-and-white (and, therefore, provocative 😆). I studied Philosophy at university, though, so I can't help it! Thanks for watching and interacting with the video. I really appreciate it! - Luke

@MrEvans1

12 күн бұрын

The girl yes, the soldiers mostly no. They were very cruel. Its quite strange since usually i dont deal with absolutes but i dont see how sadistic people might be anything but bad. It looks like they found the perfect job and the perfect excuse.

@ryanfitzgerald9833

12 күн бұрын

@@MrEvans1 I dunno i got the impression outside the most apocalyptic war ever they would be douchebags not killing machines... except aldo.

Remember in Django Unchained when the "hero" shoots an unarmed woman who posed no physical threat to him, and the audience cheered?

@djdoombot4612

18 күн бұрын

This is all corroborated by QTs take on Joker. He basically gushes over the film because when Fleck is about to crash out, the audience knows it and WANTS it to happen, even tho Deniros character, while an asshole, has done nothing to deserve murder. You can find it on KZread

@braedenh6858

17 күн бұрын

Django also shot a dad who was plowing a field with his son. The audience laughed.

@andrewk.7498

17 күн бұрын

Don't forget the racial charge to django

@blackrahk2037

16 күн бұрын

That lady was a slaver. F her😂😂

@christophergreen6595

16 күн бұрын

You mean the literal owner of the land and all the slaves, who has surely had dozens or even hundreds whipped or killed over her lifetime?

Great video and the editing was amazing. Well done and keep them coming 👏🏽🔥

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it (and thank you for the editing appreciation!)

Tarantino's movies are like a baroque painting by Caravaggio : the idea of the Sacred and the Profane in perfect harmony

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

This is a cool way of looking at it. I'm guessing that means you like his work? Thanks for watching and commenting. I hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

In the scene with the Bear Jew and the bat, that German infantry sergeant is definitely the honorable man. I had mad respect for his character.

This also happens to be EXACTLY what the mainstream media does. Manipulate. Using those tactics. Tarantino is a reflection of this kind of manipulation, but on the big screen. It is easier to see it in his films, but few really grasp or wish to admit how MSM has engaged in this for decades.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

A valid point. As I say in the video, he's not the only one to use these writing/storytelling techniques 😅 Thank you for watching and commenting. I hope you enjoyed the video! - Luke

@richlisola1

Ай бұрын

It’s called enjoying a story. Letting it engage with you. At least filmmakers don’t feign to present non-fiction. (Well most filmmakers).

I remember in Inglourious Basterds when the Basterd known as the Jew Bear beat that very brave German officer to death and the audience cheered. I was disgusted with the audience. It really bothers me that people find it so easy to dehumanize the enemy. It requires all most no effort to turn people into war criminals and the perpetrators of genocides. I'm guilty too because I like Tarantino's films. The guy is a brilliant writer and director and I own almost all of his films. But sometimes I feel like Tarantino's audiences are like the audiences in 1984. Where the party shows films to its members that show the enemy being slaughtered on screen and everyone is cheering.

@snowmanmanvideo

8 күн бұрын

Yet isn't that the point? The Germans dehumanize the jews. The American jews dehumanize the Germans. No one treats each other as human and grotesque violence is the outcome.

@drooke2773

Күн бұрын

Wtf are you yappin about?

The simple ingredient for making a morally ambiguous character seem better is to reduce the 'good light' shown in the movie. So, in removing any people that have no connections to 'the drama', it leaves us with only people that have some incentive for the end to come about in a specific way. The 'good people' in these productions are extras, with no names, seen shopping, or playing games with their children, or just depositing their check at the bank. Facts.

Great video. Shame we didn't get a section about the Bride. I've always loved her character. She's not necessarily a good woman, being an assassin and all. We never learn who she kills but we can assume they weren't all bad people. But she gets screwed over by her former team and that's what makes her the protagonist not really the 'hero'. Great writing.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

A great point indeed. You hit the nail on the head with her being the 'protagonist' as opposed to the 'hero'. I think that's true of almost all of Tarantino's protagonists. I actually very nearly used The Bride as an example, but simply ran out of time (17 minutes was already long enough 😅). She's also a great example of all three tropes I discussed in the video, though: she's an underdog, a lesser evil (compared to her former colleagues), and also has a highly ambiguous past that we're never really given a clear view of. She's a fantastic character. Thanks for watching and commenting. Really appreciate the interaction and am glad you enjoyed the video. - Luke

Worth the wait bro. Such a good watch. Every vid is getting better and better!!!

@JackSawRidge

Ай бұрын

Also I’m a big inglorious b’s fan, so this one hurt. I refuse to see Aldo as a bad guy!!! Haha the man is Tarantino’s coolest character!!

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

As always, I really appreciate you continuing to show up, Jack! Glad you enjoyed it. And I apologise for skewing your view of Aldo 🤣 (but, I do agree that he's one of Tarantino's coolest characters). Now, I challenge you to go and rewatch Tarantino's movies with this perspective of his other characters. It definitely makes for some interesting viewing!

@JackSawRidge

Ай бұрын

No probs bro. Really enjoy ur stuff as u know!! Will do. Going to revisit some pulp fiction and Jackie brown this weekend!!!

As they say: It takes a thief to catch a thief. That's why Godzzilla vs. Kong works, while Godzilla vs. Laura Ingalls-Wilder wouldn't. In From Dusk til Dawn we see, what happens to those, who don't belong to the "bad mofo club": As the son hesitates just for a second to kill the vampire that once was his father, he's just prey. Also: Tarantino uses stages of bad people. From underdogs, who just toughened up due to bad experiences to outright evil. And Tarantino took a lot of inspiration from italo western movies, which themselves were based on premises, found in italian realism: When life's hard, it's not easy to remain a good person. And then it starts to matter less, what lines you cross, but more, which ones you wouldn't, in order to keep living with yourself and seeing yourself still as some kind of decent person.

@jessejames8900

Ай бұрын

"You want to catch a wolf you have to become a wolf!"

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Reminds me of the line from Demolition Man: "Send a maniac to catch a maniac." Lovely perspective and references, sir. I agree entirely on his use of stages of bad people and how he juxtaposes them against one another throughout his stories. I think Jules and Vincent are two great examples of this, particularly in terms of how they react to the 'miracle' they are each a part of. And in all fairness, even though I'm giving quite a black-and-white view in the video (sometimes being intentionally provocative is an interesting tactic to spark discussion 😆), I agree that it's not so clear cut in real life, particularly when you bring different moral/ethical theories into the mix. For the sake of the video, I've come at the topic from a Kantian Ethical perspective, which is a highly problematic theory in itself; often overly rigid in how it determines what is and isn't a moral act. Hence, it's ruffled some feathers. In reality, I would agree that most of these characters are indeed sitting somewhere in the middle, more morally grey than bad, so it's nice to see people like you challenging the perspective I've given in the video. My aim here was to push people to consider things a bit more deeply, and, fortunately, it seems to have worked! 😅 Thank you for taking the time to watch and provide such an interesting comment. I hope to see you in some of the comment sections of my future videos! - Luke

@karstenvoigt7280

Ай бұрын

@@luke.hoffman Thanks. It indeed worked and got your channel my subsciption. Another great example for the stages are the characters in Kill Bill. What is fascinating here, is that we get different kinds of explanations, from a backstory (O-Ren) over a portrayal of a broken character (Budd) to a mix of flashbacks and random facts in conversations to a forced self anylysis (Beatrix Kiddo). And imo the protagonist isn't the least bad of the bad people, just like the antagonist isn't the most evil. She's just kicked into the underdog position, while he's just the top of the food chain. And it works perfectly, because Tarantino takes time for his characters. And wouldn't it be amazzing, if there'd be a 3rd volume? "Kill Kiddo"? With the former perspective switched? Copperhead's daughter, trained and equipped by Bill's other brother (because I'd love to see Keith Carradine in it) is coming for her mother's murderer? Applying the categorical imperative on Tarantino characters is definitely a courageous and thought provoking route. I remember an interview, in which he mentioned, how a scene from "Roots", in which a former slave dismisses the oppotunity to whip some of his own medicine into a slaver, being the better human being, had inspired him for Django unchained. He is clearly more of a "What goes atound, comes around." kind of guy. 😏 And that's probably, why Kant may have become a giant in philosophy, but his career in entertainment didn't even manage to take off in Königsberg. 😛

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

@@karstenvoigt7280 This was an awesome read. Thank you for taking the time to write it out (and thank you for subscribing!) I'll be honest, even though Kill Bill isn't my favourite of Tarantino's movies (still think it's great), your sequel pitch sounds pretty interesting 😆with that said, I'm hoping he does something entirely original and leaves us with some new fascinating characters before he checks out of filmmaking. Agreed on Beatrix, though. I said something similar in reply to another comment; she very nearly made it into the video. She's an underdog, a lesser evil and also has a highly ambiguous past, which all make her an incredibly fascinating character. I also like the level self-awareness and acceptance she demonstrates in her interaction with Copperhead's daughter. She knows exactly who she is and owns it, and the possible consequences that may befall her later down the line as a result of it. It's a big part of what makes her such a badass, in my opinion. Glad you appreciated the Kantian approach to this analysis, too! Thanks again for the support and awesome commentary. - Luke

Don't know if you're an anime fan, but... this video explains the difference between how villains are portrayed in One Piece specifically Kaido vs Doflamingo. Thanks for putting it into words, the idea was burning a whole in my mind.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Ah I'm so glad you enjoyed the video. Thank you for the kind words. I haven't actually checked out One Piece but I'll keep an eye out for it. - Luke

Great content and quality production 👍🏻

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Thank you, sir! Glad you enjoyed it 🤟🏽

Why are morally corrupt characters so appealing. Cuz they're amusing. Heroes aren't amusing.

@MightyEFX

Ай бұрын

this guy mever heard of anti heroes.. and it pisses me off! good to see im not the only sane one here

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

I think heroes can be amusing, too. But I get your point. Thanks for watching!

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

I apologise for giving you the impression that I haven't heard of anti-heroes. Definitely not the case (I do actually acknowledge this in the video 😅). I just think 'anti-heroes' are hard to define. Some definitions of 'anti-hero' label them as individuals who lack conventional heroic traits (such as morality) but still often perform actions that benefit society/the greater good. Most of Tarantino's characters I've brought up here aren't really killing/hurting others for the benefit of the greater good; their motivations are mostly selfish. I think Aldo is the closest we could get to an anti-hero because he's obviously going up against the Nazis. And, as I say in the video, you can argue quite successfully that he and his team are morally justified. But he seems to enjoy the violence a lot, which makes it harder to call him an 'anti-hero' in my mind. Again, this all just comes down to how you choose to define an 'anti-hero'. If your definition differs to mine, that's absolutely fine. I just hope you found some value/entertainment in the video. Thank you for watching and engaging in the comment section. - Luke

@user-go1jm7ib6j

Ай бұрын

@@luke.hoffman Pitt's character blurs the line between 'hero' and douche. Those are the most interesting characters to me. And Pitt's character has a reality to it. In the real world, some Vietnam vets kept Viet Cong ears and made necklaces out of them. Marines in the Pacific would pull gold teeth out of the mouths of dead Japanese. They would keep skulls and scalps as souvenirs. When the line is blurred between good and bad, the character is more interesting, more amusing. What I dig about Tarantino flicks is every character is a douchebag to a degree. In Pulp, every character is a selfish douche. In Inglorious, Pitt is a sadist, but given the context, he's a 'hero.' One of Friedken's last flicks, Killer Joe, is hilarious, cuz every friggin character is a massive, unredeemable douchebag. Great flick, as a result. One of my fave characters ever is the Claude Rains character in Lawrence. He's so duplicitous, so cynical, it's just a major crackup. And this was 60 years ago. Tarantino isn't the first to 'corrupt' his audience.

@madsismad9113

19 күн бұрын

Morally corrupt characters are liked by morally corrupt people that enjoy seeing someone else behaving the same way as them, it makes them feel justified in their daily actions, they see themselves in the morally corrupt so now they belong

Great video and analysis.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Thank you for the support, as always.

This can a form of social proframming, as it teaches that the ends justify the means

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

It does indeed seem to be rooted in a Consequentialist ethical stance. Thanks for watching and commenting! - Luke

You mean revenge? Because that’s what the “protagonists” often do in these Tarantino movies. Other than that, Jules knew how improbable his survival was and knew he likely wasn’t going survive another such incident, so he left working for Marcellus. As for going around to save Marcellus, it was a case of even Butch felt like a person getting raped was worse than just killing him. I do agree that the underdog works in getting you to root for a character.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Interesting! For me, the only films of his where 'revenge' is a central theme would be Inglourious Basterds and Kill Bill, but I'd be keen to see where else you see this being the case. Thanks for watching and commenting. I hope you enjoyed it! - Luke

@KaosNova2

Ай бұрын

@@luke.hoffman Pulp Fiction? Reservoir Dogs, Hateful Eight? Inglorious Basterds? And yes while the guys like Hans Landa were horrible individuals that was payback

I'm not sure how far Bruce Willis's condition has progressed at this point but if it was in any way possible the last Tarantino film I would want to see is Butch's final chapter..... it's left so open ended. I don't really want another kill Bill movie anyway

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

I final film seeing an older Butch encountering a wandering older Jules and a reformed older Marsellus could be an interesting way to end the career 🤣 Thanks for watching and commenting. Hope you enjoyed the video! - Luke

@vinchenzo2502

Ай бұрын

@@luke.hoffman I did man, really good stuff

I have a traumatic childhood. It was very bad. I got free of it at 16 and recovered a bit but decided to join the army at 21. I decided on artillery. Figured I wouldn't be in any real danger and still be combat arms because it sounded cool. Trained for a whole year doing artillery and kicking in doors. My platoon didn't think much of me and never put me in line. Always a gunner in a hummer. I play a lot of video games. It's my main hobby besides hiking and my son's T ball practice and games. They hated me for that. When it came time to deploy and test our reaction time and mental awareness, I exceeded everyone. They gave me an M9 to test with, and I shot expert, mostly one handed in full kit. So, they made me the front man to charge in first. I survived a few missions and explosions that weren't timed correctly. I just brushed all this off. Like it was nothing. Because of my already warped brain, I compartmentalized it all to deal with later. Scared my platoon as they thought I was psychopath in the making. I'm not. I was pushed to my limit and adjusted accordingly on the fly. My brain doesn't work the way a normal person's does because of my traumatic childhood. I think this was Tarantino putting himself in the characters. He even made up a bible quote that had people believing it was actually from the bible. Just some food for thought.

@gamervet4760

Ай бұрын

@@Dagenspear Get a life!

@williamdixon-gk2sk

Ай бұрын

​@gamervet4760 they can't. If they got a life, they wouldn't have time to tell others how to live their's.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

I'm sorry to hear about the traumatic childhood, but thank you for the insights regarding Tarantino's writing. I think every writer will put some of themselves in their characters, so I mostly agree. The bible quote is also an interesting one. I always view it as Tarantino's way of saying we shouldn't take these sorts of things too seriously. Thanks for watching! - Luke

@gamervet4760

Ай бұрын

@luke.hoffman No worries. I'm a happy man today. I was just thinking Quinten may have had a rough childhood and views killing as easy as breathing. It is when you have the tools and know how, but I felt every single one. Quinten wants that to be viewed as a sign of strength. A symbol of badassery that, in his mind, makes the ultimate badass. I don't like his movies for that reason and many more. His films are not deep or intellectual at all. They just pretend to be. They're just vehicles so he can show off as much violence and human debauchery as much as possible. Right from his first movie of Resivor Dogs. Just my thoughts.

@darlalathan6143

Ай бұрын

@@gamervet4760 I have often had similar feelings about his movies, especially his use of ethnic slurs in Reservoir Dogs, and Django Unchained (which I couldn't watch for that reason). The male rape scene in Pulp Fiction was quite triggering and contrived.

1 person that fits in this category is The Bride from the Kill Bill series. You root for her because she's on a revenge mission to kill those who attempted to kill her. But throughout both films, you can see that there is serious contempt and disgust for all of the former members of the VIPer Squad have towards her. The film never outright says it, but it does heavily hint that by attempting to kill her, it was seen as justifiable by the other members. Plus, her prior profession was being part of an assassination-for-hire outfit. So while they likely killed some loathsome people along the way, they very likely took innocent lives as well. On repeat viewings of both films, The Bride just seems like the least evil in a group of detestable people. Like in the whole series, she is the hero of the film, but by default. The audience roots for her because the film needs somebody to root for and not because she was some innocent civilian caught in a cross fire (also add the pregnancyfactor as well). In actuality, she was probably just as twisted and evil as any of them

Inglorious Bastards aka The beginnings of The Mossad

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Hope you enjoyed the video! - Luke

Butch is not so much a bad guy as he is a survivor. There is a significant difference. He doesn't really do anything immoral, just violent, but for survival sake. And he does rescue Marcelis. That's a big deal. He pitied his enemy. Very angelic.

@joelmbaumgartner

13 күн бұрын

The immoral part was agreeing to take a dive and then double crossing Marcellus. That was the catalyst that started the whole scenario.

@EricGray-zr2es

13 күн бұрын

@joelmbaumgartner but even then, he's hustling the hustlers in my minds eye it's not essentially immoral. Crooked, but still. That's just me

You've got it all wrong: the protagonist of Inglourious Basterds is Hans Landa.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

😆I don't know how much sarcasm there is meant to be in this comment, but, in all seriousness, this is a compelling perspective. It definitely makes for an interesting time when you watch the film with this view in mind. I think the key thing to remember is that the word 'protagonist' doesn't actually mean 'hero' or 'good person'. It simply means "the leading/central character." With that in mind, it's definitely plausible that Hans Landa fits that title. Thanks for watching and commenting. I hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

Those characters have this aura of power, the ability of not giving a damn. I fliped on on my boss once and lost my job. Was hired one month later ny the same company for a higher pay, while my boss got fired. This feeling of telling anybody to go ef themselfes is priceless.

Great channel! Subscribed :) Good luck on your journey!!

AMAAAAAAZING analysis. This makes so many Tarantino scenes and choices make sense… even as far back as his writing in True Romance. In his universe THERE ARE NO GOOD GUYS.

Call me Homelander because I was gaslit into being the villain.

Yes! Some great questions have been asked. Another sentence for the tube. Another as well. Keep up the awesome! :)

So being from Canada and knowing our contribution to the Geneva Convention Laws, The Bastards, are pretty Vanilla😂

@briandobkins2902

13 күн бұрын

I thought they were The Geneva Checklist or the Geneva Suggestions

Very good analysis. I'm going to talk about anti-heroes for my analysis. In addition, Tarantino does not include a third character who serves as a moral compass to show that his protagonists are anti-heroes. Whereas this is what we see in Falling Down (with the policeman or his ex-wife), The Godfather (Kay his wife), ... And there is no redemption arc. He is very Scorsesian about it. Tarantino lets us into a world of shades of grey moralities without holding our hands. --- And I specify that I am not a very big fan of Tarantino, he has qualities and he is a real director (an auteur). But for me he is chapter 1 of book 1 of cinephilia.

I don’t think that morally corrupt characters are more engaging than conventional hero archetypes. It’s more about the fact that telling a good story about a morally pure character is way more difficult. Also we live in a time and age where audiences literally have been pushed towards the morally ambiguous. Cultivating these tendencies is the key. Recognising ourselves in these characters is more straightforward as long as communicating goes. Showing people a “hero”, inspiring them to be better, and making a good story out of it is a real challenge only few can pull off. All this to be said I LOVE Tarantino. He’s a genius and love his films.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Lovely perspective here. Thank you for sharing it. For the most part, I agree; I think moral characters can be just as fascinating as immoral ones. The thing that creates engaging characters seems to mainly be conflict, and there are many ways to create this, even with heroes. I think Fargo (both film and TV series) is an amazing example of this. The 'moral' character in each of these stories is often entirely unambiguous. They're good people through and through, but they're still fascinating to watch and engage with. And that's usually because of their conflict with the world and the evil/chaos that they come up against. Their struggle doesn't involve them having to bend their morals to get by, it's instead about them trying to make sense of something completely alien and antagonistic. The conflict of realising the true nature of the world they live in and being presented with the question of whether their good/moral approach is enough to contend with it. What are your thoughts? Thanks again for commenting and watching. I hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

@entennstudio

Ай бұрын

@@luke.hoffman couldn’t agree more. Keep up the phenomenal work!

While not a Tarantino character, I feel Walter White also fits in very well with this idea of corrupting an audience into rooting for a morally bankrupt person. We see him initially as an underdog (he’s a failed chemistry genius, he’s teaching high school and having to work at a car wash to make ends meet, and to top it off, he has cancer) who’s forced into a life he doesn’t want to be in, but as the show goes on, you see his ego come more and more to the surface as he does more and more abhorrent things, yet we still want to see him succeed. Hell, it’s so corrupting that many people saw Skyler as the bad guy in the situation and while yeah, some of her actions are less than noble, especially in IFT, she’s also a wife who has grown more estranged from her husband and even scared of him with his actions and behavior. If Walter and Skyler were your neighbors, you’d probably feel more scared for Skyler than you would feel sympathy for Walt.

@adrianmizen5070

12 күн бұрын

which makes it kind of sad that CurrentYear commentators, and apparently even Vince Gilligan, have abandoned that interpretation of Walt starting out good and becoming evil. Rather they now say that WW was just evil all along, and was lying from the beginning about the drug manufacture being for his family.

Scorsese does the same in Goodfellas. You get seduced into liking these characters but then you're reminded, in characters like the Pesci character, that these people, these gangsters, are sociopathic.

In Kill Bill he practically admitted it himself more than once! Even Django does not allow King to save D’Artagnan from being ripped apart. It is not even for the greater good but to save another person!

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Django is a really fascinating case study. I may have to do a video on it in the future, as there are so many things about it that I think are noteworthy. Thanks for commenting and watching. I really hope you enjoyed it! - Luke

I love this break down of character traits. That being said...has anyone ever told you, YOU sir are the most British looking man I have ever seen. Good on ya!

I remember him talking about this with the Joker movie but lets be honest, todays audience is already corrupt.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

😆That's one way of putting it! Thanks for watching and commenting! - Luke

There’s a lot of things I loved when I was in my late teens early 20s that I don’t care for anymore now in my late 30s… Tarantino movies are NOT one of those things

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Glad to hear it. As you can probably tell, I am also a big fan of his work. Thanks for commenting and watching. Really pleased to see it resonated with you! - Luke

@fernandomaron87

11 күн бұрын

I don't like this new 'phase' of his career, the 90's tarantino was much cooler imo, in his last movies feels like he's too much in love with his dialogue writing skills and he keeps on dragging them just for the sake of breaking the pace and show audiences 'look how good of a writer i am'. His last movie i truly enjoyed was Basterds.

Question. If I am basically not a bad guy but, over the course of time, do a couple of bad things probably due to life circumstances that pop up, does that automatically negate any inate goodness I might possess and make me just a total bad guy through and through?

Great video and very accurated analisys. Bravo Luke!

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Grazie, Giulia. Sono cosi felice che ti sia piaciuto! 😁

great video essay, instant subscriber

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Much appreciated! Thank you for the support. See you in the comments of future videos! - Luke

I recommend you to watch Ross MacFarlane video essay on Once upon a time in Hollywood. He suggest that Pitt's caracter is the opposite personification of Harvey Weinstein. The video is called Once upon a time in Hollywood overanalysed

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the recommendation, Alexandre. I have actually watched that video, albeit a long time ago (I think shortly after it released a year ago). I'll revisit it with my revised perspective and see if it sparks some new thoughts. Thanks for watching. I hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

@JingleJangleJam

8 күн бұрын

Brad Pitt's uncharacteristic ethical standards when it comes to not committing statutory rape with any underage girl I took to be Quentin's using that character for expression of his moral interpretation of Roman Polanski's seeming recklessness in being able to throw away a terrific reputation as a director for an impulsive decision based on momentary lapsing of his moral standards.

The Basterds did NOTHING wrong the entire movie!

Liked and subscribed! Very well done.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Welcome aboard! And thank you very much for the kind words. Glad you enjoyed the video. - Luke

I think we like them because they express what we painstakingly struggle to suppress to an almost self harming level every day. Not that we urge to murder people every day but we swallow so much irritation and anger to be socially acceptable while still just being mammals.

I’m not trying to undermine the premise of the video or anything but I feel like this a thing all film makers do all the time. Every single story of every show or movie is a carefully curated selection of scenes put together to tell a story and so in a way they are all “manipulating” the audience. In the end though it’s ultimately up to the audience to feel how they want to feel about the story given.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

I really like your perspective, Casey, and would agree with it. Getting an audience to buy into a story and its characters is absolutely a form of manipulation that arguably every storyteller has to embrace. And with respect to this 'morally corrupt protagonist' trope, as I say in the video, Tarantino is definitely not the only writer/director to take this sort of approach in his storytelling. I just find that the consistency at which he creates these sorts of protagonists to be highly compelling. Thanks for taking the time to comment. I really appreciate it and hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

@caseyhart4999

Ай бұрын

@@luke.hoffman yea I was a little unsure whether to post the comment because I do ultimately agree with basically everything you said. I suppose the only point I was trying to make is that every story has a level of manipulation to it. You’re absolutely correct though in that Tarantino has a very special way of making you feel things about characters. One of the reasons I love his movies so much. Inglorious Basterds and especially Kill Bill are some of my favorite movies ever. I very much enjoyed your video so thank you for that.

We ourselves are flawed and self serving. We find comfort in the idea that they are worse than us. Like us? They have their righteous moments. We all try to forget our horrible base nature, and focus on those righteous moments. These stories make that easy for us.

This is where the similarity and also the difference, between Lynch and Tarantino, as some perspicuous authors have noted, becomes interesting. Both directors cast deeply unsympathetic and bad men, like in wild at heart, where Nicholas' Cage beat a man to death. The thing missing though in Tarantino's ouvre is the other pole aspect of the dualism between the evil and the beatific. That's because Lynch is artistically displaying violence and its consequences, how they are intertwined and have an effect on the spirit of love of the one affected by it. We see a trauma to violence. Tarantino's characters are above reacting to their violent scenes though; they chatter and splatter. At moments in Tarantino films is gets closer to not being like this - in Inglorious Basterds, for instance, there are scenes of the Shosanna Dreyfus proprietor of the Le Gamaar Cinema that almost come to moments of this vision of true moral complexity of good and light and darkness like in Lynch, as though a more serious, interesting and taut drama film could be made by taking certain scenes out of Inglorious Basterds and leaving behind the chatter and splatter to find a, earnest - not-comic-bookish - artistic film about the human interest of beauty and the fragility of that tenderness of compassion to this omniscient darkness and destructiveness omnipresent even in the blades of grass of Lynch's Blue Velvet - but the hilarious comic book scenes immediate after return us back again into the seat of a pulp story not meant to be taken to heart. I am interested, in what Tarantino could do, if he tried an entirely serious drama story for a change, and approached and attempted beauty and artistic endeavour entirely with no grindhouse or genre or pulp formula to make the characters into a Carnivále of B-cinema roles who we precariously enjoy having the power fantasies of. Underneath the comic book enjoyment of sharing the power fantasy of bad guys, Tarantino displays a deeply literary love of dialogue that I think is missing in more serious drama films, and that there are flashes in between the cheesiness of Tarantino's films to show aspects of a deeply artistic man who would have it in him to write an entirely serious film to take to heart without the ironic detachment we usually get.

7:45 oh wow, the small hats being bloodthirsty murderers? humanity lost when the good guys lost ww2.

Newly subscribed; thank you for this wonderful vid!!

I was watching once upon a time in Hollywood and think something similar. How brutally they kill the hippies and just shrug it off

@EricFarwell-gh9pw

Ай бұрын

The Manson family weren't hippies. In fact, some real hippies of the time looked almost straight-laced.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

I know right! While it's very in-keeping with Tarantino's style and the film's narrative, it definitely becomes more than self-defence (particularly Cliff's actions). I spoke about it in my other video analysing Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood (kzread.info/dash/bejne/k51rmsyamJOWd5s.html); I think it's Tarantino's way of taking fictional/metaphysical revenge on the Manson family for what they did to spoil such a sacred Hollywood (similar to how Inglourious Basterds was a way of taking a similar revenge on the Nazis). Still, I agree that there is a profound sense of brutality to how they are dealt with. Thank you for watching and joining in on the ethical discussion! I hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

@Lgx-ie4if

Ай бұрын

@@EricFarwell-gh9pwits crazy to me how everyone forgets they were literal neo nazis

Since, you referred to Better Call Saul in the video, remember Nacho's dad called out Mike on his facade.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

I do indeed! I'm glad to see another Better Call Saul fan here. If you get the chance, check out my previous video on it! Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. I appreciate it! - Luke

I am very impressed by this video. You are very underrated

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Thanks, Daniel. I really appreciate the feedback! Glad you enjoyed the video. - Luke

My favorite example of this kind of character is Kurosawa's "man with no name". He never gives his true name, never lets anyone get emotionally close, seems to help out of a sense of guilt for what he was in the past and then immediately leaves, and has no master, yet possesses the skill of a lord's vassal. Do I even want to know who this butcher of humans once was? Yet it still gives me great satisfaction watching him trick and destroy the wicked and corrupt.

Any soldier would be considered "bad" in a different situation. But that's ridiculous. You can only judge someone on a certain situation.

I thought about this after watching the movie A Good Time by Robert Pattinson. I thoroughly disliked the movie but it did make me think, these characters are scumbags and they’re trying to make me think they’re cool. It’s easier for Tarantino because he’s a skilled director, but he’s still guilty of it

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Interesting! Shockingly, I haven't seen Good Time, but I'm a big fan of Josh and Benny Safdie's work, so I may have to check it out. Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. I hope you enjoyed the video! - Luke

I think that part of creating a pretty effective lovable or likable bad guy or antihero is creating a character who can kind of manipulate or gaslight the audience to some extent.I would say that with a movie such as the Joker the scene before killing Murray is basically the antihero gas lighting and manipulating the audience and watchers to some extent despite the fact that most people watching a movie like The Joker still at least in some way deep down inside know full well that the main character is a scumbag and is definitely not a good person.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

There is definitely some manipulation going on. That's typically what makes good storytelling in any case 😅 Thanks for watching and commenting. Hope you enjoyed the video! - Luke

This is so weird. I think I'm being recommended your videos because you were in some gym video i watched ages ago. Pretty cool pivot.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

That's awesome! It has been quite a big pivot indeed, but I'm glad to see my content is still reaching you (and that you're enjoying it). Thank for the support!

I never really had a favorite in, Pulp Fiction, aside from Fabienne. Fabienne- "Where did you get the motorcycle?" Butch- "It's not a motorcycle, Baby, it's a chopper." F- "Where did you get the chopper?" B- "Zed...and Zed's dead." She was so cute and innocent.

Great video and insight

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Thank you very much. I'm glad you enjoyed it! - Luke

Pretty good analysis! I've been writing a series with these same elements without even noticing!

Great video 👍 You are onto something. I have always felt Tarantino's bad guy protagonists are very realistic. I feel that could make good food for thought when it comes to discerning satisfying from their ideas of what is morally just... and why. Dusk till dawn is another good example. Most real life "bad" people are rarely 100 bad, if they were they would have zero friends, no one would trust them let alone desire to assist or protect them. Sticking out too much, like a mustache twirling cartoon character. Real life "bad people" often have lines they will not cross for understandable reasons. Even if the rest of their actions make no sense in context. It is easy to hate someone if you only see bad in them. The obverse is seen in "inglorious bastards" where they humanize a few of the Nazis they killed. Revenge movies like inglorious bastards, revenge of the nerds and I spit on your grave; show people doing horrific, unacceptable things to horrible people. Quality and options aside, that genre is made to be satisfying on screen, and remain there in the film. Where no one really gets hurt and there are no laws broken. Not used as blueprint for anything other than how to make a revenge film.

Great vid, dude! I salute thee

This made me think about rob zombie and his films he takes this to a hole nother level

I look at these films more as character studies. You're definitely on point about these things and influence that movies have Is real! A person who can hit another person in the head with a baseball bat is not a human being I would ever want to be around ever. This is the flaw with a lot of revenge films! If you kill someone you change your reality you are no longer innocent really. Most films really are about egocentric people in how they serve their own egos. I am a man in my 40s now and a lot of the violence I used to enjoy in films honestly bothers me a great deal now. It's like violence and film has to be more and more shocking to be original! Look at television shows I used to like a lot like The shield or The sopranos... There really is no protagonist... It's just watching the unpredictable paths that people's lives take based on their actions that are self-serving. The world is so cynical now people don't want a hero. People want to look at others to make themselves feel more justified. Shout out to justified for being one of the few shows that had a hero who was actually a good guy... Everything is a reflection of our society! These are just my opinions, thoughts, and feelings.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

I know what you mean! I don't think I'd invite any of Tarantino's characters to a dinner party 😆 Tarantino himself maybe, but his characters may prove to be questionable company! I really like your perspective, though, Sean. I think you're bang on about many stories these days being (or attempting to be) reflections of society, but in a more negative light. I think Civil War is a very good and recent example of this (but I still think it was very good). There's a film called 'Perfect Days' by Wim Wenders, that came out recently that is a real breath of fresh air with respect to some of this cynicism and negativity many of today's other films are promoting. I'd highly recommend checking it out! Thanks for watching and providing such an insightful comment. I really hope you enjoyed the video, and I also hope to see you in the comment sections of some of my future videos! - Luke

The Lesser Evil is a good choice of name. I always saw the Basterds as Nominal Heroes, a type of anti-hero that is anything but good, a “hero” in name alone. Unlike the Unscrupulous Hero (or any other anti-hero), the Nominal Hero does not redeem oneself. As a Non-Escapist, the Nominal Heroes have been my favorite type of anti-hero.

The cellar is Butch's Hanoi Pit of Hell. He redeems himself and banishes those ghosts of the past

Haven’t seen once upon a time in Hollywood; but I’d argue that the Bastards seemed like they were doing what they saw as necessary to win a war against a bunch of genocidal psychopaths. Butch’s girlfriend/wife/whatever was used to soften his character in the eyes of the viewers. Re Hateful 8: Hard to feel bad for someone who fought to keep the institution of slavery (with all of its atrocities) alive. Either way, great stuff. Newly subscribed

One interesting scene I like to analyze is the Vet scene from Inglorious Bastards. Remember, when Aldo said Nazi need to be killed because they got no humanity, then I wonder how they personally feel about having to put the vet, who’s obviously just an innocent bystander, in the middle of all that drama and insanity? But you can clearly see a difference between Aldo and his men with Hans and his men if you compare this scene with the 20 minute opening scene. But one thing that I’m curious about is what they did about the vet? The movie didn’t address that.

I remember hearing an interview with Tarantino about the Joker movie, and how he thought the movie was just a ripoff of Taxi Driver until the final interview, where he praised the massive subversion the movie puts on the audience, convincing us to cheer for the Joker brutally murdering Murray on live TV even though there's nothing in the story that would make Murray seem like a bad person.

@adrianmizen5070

12 күн бұрын

making fun of a clearly mentally ill guy on national TV is pretty bad. Then acting nicey-nice to him to get him on the show so he could be made fun of more. Doesn't justify what Joker did to him, but still.

It’s really not surprising if you think about it, he’s exposing the dark side of humanity by tapping into the most psychotic aspects of certain people. Society cheers war, capital punishment, police brutality, and many other disgusting things. You can really learn a lot about a person based on how they react to the actions of a fictional character.

If you have a basket of only rotten fruit and you have to take one, you will obviously choose the least rotten one.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Nice way of putting it. Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. Hope you enjoyed the video! - Luke

Awesome video essay

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

Thanks, Thomas. Much appreciated! - Luke

Victor Frankl’s decent/indecent distinction, gleaned in the Nazi concentration camp he survived, may be helpful. See Man’s Search for Meaning.

@luke.hoffman

Ай бұрын

A fantastic book indeed, and a great and highly relevant point. Thanks for commenting and watching. Hope you enjoyed the video. - Luke

I feel like you’re looking at things in a very British context as an American we don’t separate actions from the context of our situations we feel like when someone is doing that it’s a way for them to look down on you without ever having to have lived through what you’ve been through

My favorite character in Inglourious Basterds was Landa, by far. I enjoyed every scene he was in. But I didn't feel at all bad when Pitt gave him a little something he couldn't take off.

An excellent video essay. Thank you for sharing,.