3 ms·
Well considering most (all?) of Tarantino's films are exploitation films, it's certainly possible to make exploitation films respectfully. Consider that Taranti
by gnulinux 8y ago
Well considering most (all?) of Tarantino's films are exploitation films, it's certainly possible to make exploitation films respectfully. Consider that Tarantino is one of the most critically acclaimed and influential directors, ever.
- busterarm 8y agoThanks for the Whataboutism. That's really the one example. It's the same situation where horror movies have to be elevated above the genre to be discussed.
- gnulinux 8y agoWhat whataboutism? You suggested exploitation films are even less respected than porn, I gave you example of a highly respected director who almost exclusively made exploitation films. I was trying to provide a counter-example, especially since I cannot think of a Tarantino-equivalent director making porn.
- busterarm 8y agoTarantino is literally the only director and when his movies are talked about, they're elevated above their respective genres exactly the same way horror movies are as discussed in this article we're commenting about...
- gnulinux 8y agoI'm sorry for the miscommunication but I thought we were comparing exploitation and porn. Tarantino was able to make very obviously, almost "cringely" exploitive movies like Jackie Brown, Kill Bill, Death Proof, Inglorious Basterds and somehow gained the title of one of the most influential directors ever. I understand that this is N=1 data -- and certainly Tarantino is an artistic genius -- but the fact that this single data is so worthwhile and that there is no porn director who even remotely came close to Tarantino, it seems to me exploitation films are not less regarded than porn.