Talk:Quentin Tarantino

message: In the music video of this song you can clearly see Quentin Tarantino at 0:55 minutes!!! Maxvorstadt (talk) 19:48, February 8, 2019 (UTC)
:I looked at the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0qBaBb1Y-U&t=55s) but that doesn't look like Tarantino. RandomGuyDTB (talk) 20:58, April 8, 2019 (UTC)
::Well, I watched it again (at 0.25 speed) and in the moment he turns his face to the camera he looks exactly like Quentin Tarantino. The mouth, the eyes, even the forehead. But I agree, that we can`t base an info in the article on just one meaning. So there should look others too into the video and I will search the net for clues now. Maxvorstadt (talk) 18:49, June 4, 2019 (UTC)
:::Hm, after searching the web, I found out that many people are asking if this guy in the video is QT, but I didn`t find an official statement about it. Weird. Is he or is he not in the video?Maxvorstadt (talk) 19:48, June 4, 2019 (UTC)
Nah man, that isn't him. It looks like him, but it ain't.165.73.227.21 (talk) 17:06, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phil Collins Video Sussudio 

message: Is there any evidence that this sub-section Quentin_Tarantino#Uma_Thurman's_car_accident is a notable controversy as related to the article's subject? It is already covered over at Kill_Bill:_Volume_1#Production and why is it duplicated on this page if the Thurman herself says she attributes the blame to Weinstein? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 02:12, September 30, 2019 (UTC)
:Was definitely excessive. Same as Bruce Lee. I trimmed them down and added redirects to the specific sections on the film pages. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 20:34, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  production accident 

message: :As a youth, Tarantino attended an Evangelical church, describing himself as "baptized, born again and everything inbetween." Tarantino said this was an act of rebellion against his Roman Catholic mother, as she had encouraged his interests in comic books and horror films. Throughout the 1990s, Tarantino was evasive about his specific religion despite making it clear that he believed in God. In recent interviews, Tarantino ascribes his talents to gifts from God although he expresses uncertainty regarding God's existence. "I think I was born Catholic, but I was never practiced," said Tarantino. "As time has gone on, as I've become a man and made my way further as an adult, I'm not sure how much any of that I believe in. I don't really know if I believe in God, especially not in this Santa Claus character that people seemed to have conjured up."
Why is this article dancing around his atheism?  He admitted he's an atheist tonight on Real Time. Shouldn't his Wikipedia entry at least make this clear? Viriditas (talk) 08:10, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't seen that. Just that the statements he's made which don't fall into any neat category. If he's outright said "I am a committed atheist, I retract my previous statements," cite the Real Time source and add it to the article. EDIT: I looked at the recent edit to the article. Considering the video where he stated he's an atheist went up literally a day ago at the time of me writing this, I don't think it's fair to claim we're "dancing around" his atheism. I also don't really think he "admitted" anything. It looks like this was a slow process where he gradually lost faith over the decades and only just now stated he's an outright atheist. Up to this point, he spent decades making varying claims. Look at his early statements about being a committed Evangelical Christian in his youth. Watch his 1990s interviews with Charlie Rose where he says he believes in God but follows no religion. Look at his recent statements about believing that his writing ability is a God-given talent despite "not really believing in God."  He was never hiding anything, his views just changed over time. It happens more than you'd think, even if most people like to whitewash their history so it seems like they always held what they now consider to be the correct position (and who knows, Tarantino might start whitewashing his own history, but we've got decades of his statements recorded on video and audio). Lynchenberg (talk) 18:28, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have time to argue with you, but your claims about his earlier films having overt religious references is garbage, as is your rationale for removing him from the atheists category, which I can only describe as discrimination on your part. Just because a film like Pulp Fiction, for example, dabbles with religious symbolism, particularly in relation to their characters, doesn't make Tarantino ineligible for the atheists category. Viriditas (talk) 02:45, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You've completely misinterpreted my rational for removing him from the atheists category. Someone saying "I'm an atheist, I'm a Catholic, or I'm a Muslim" are not sufficient grounds for including them in these categories. It has to be a relevant part of their public life. These are Wikipedia's rules, not mine. If you don't believe me, look it up. Your accusations of "discrimination" are also ridiculous. I'm the one who keeps adding the information that Kevin Smith became an atheist to his article, even though people keep removing this information despite it being sourced. I'm the one who edited the article on Guillermo Del Toro years ago to clarify he was an atheist and holds negative views on the Roman Catholic Church. Recently, I added a massive amount of material to the Garth Ennis article clarifying his reasons for not believing in God and feeling antipathy toward religion. I'm also the guy who edited the David Cronenberg article to discuss the role atheism plays in his work, which is significant enough to include him in the atheists category. As for my comments about Tarantino's earlier films (not just Pulp Fiction, but also From Dusk Till Dawn and Kill Bill) having religious content, it's equally ridiculous to claim I was using that to justify removing him from the atheists category. I was saying that it would be ridiculous to include him in the Christians category even if he had said "I am a Christian" because that has no bearing on his public life or his work save for some Christian influence in these films (which Tarantino was open about at the time if you look it up--not that it matters, as it's not relevant to including a religion category). It's as simple as this: the Catholic influence on Martin Scorsese movies is huge and it's a big part of his public image, so he goes in the Catholics category; the Episcopalian influence on Martin Rosen films is nonexistent so he doesn't go in the Episcopalian category despite how he self-identifies; Shane MacGowan referencing religion in a few songs and saying he's a Catholic who prays to Buddha are not sufficient grounds for putting him in either the Buddhists or Catholics category. If you don't like it, take it up with Wikipedia as it's their rules, not mine. If it was up to me, we wouldn't have religion categories at all except for those who have held clergy roles and those who are atheism advocates. Lynchenberg (talk) 05:24, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atheism 

message: This is a pretty important guy. And a lot of people would agree with me if it came to him this should be protected. Before some idiot ruins it.
Also, I didn't read anything about him beating up Don Murphy (who produced Natural Born Killers, and that movie was written by Quentin but then drastically re-written by Oliver Stone into whatever the hell it became.).
<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.fan.tarantino/c/AQEV8SCfDFE>
<https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1997-11-17-9711170084-story.html>
165.73.227.21 (talk) 12:54, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  This should be a PROTECTED article. 

message: If you've ONLY seen Breathless, Band of Outsiders, and La Chinoise, and you've seen at least Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Inglourious Basterds, and The Hateful Eight, the influence sticks out like sore thumb.
For example: Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman) in Pulp Fiction is not only made up to resemble Odile in Band of Outsiders, but both films have an ionic dance number.
The chapter numbering and descriptions of many of Quentin Tarantino's films follow Godard's use to titles separating sections of La Chinoise.
In many of his films there are references in dialogue to other films, just as Godard does.
For more:   https://www.vulture.com/2015/08/quentin-tarantino-the-complete-syllabus.html
Mumon7 (talk) 22:32, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Chapter numbering and referential dialogue isn't in itself a Godard invention/influence, but if there is a source saying Tarantino is a direct influence on Tarantino, feel free to add it. SweetTaylorJames (talk) 06:09, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Why doesn't it mention Kurrajong?--Jack Upland (talk) 01:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Probably worth mentioning that Q's old production company owes its name to a certain film of Godard's. 2A02:8109:A080:254C:178D:4A35:F9BC:3641 (talk) 17:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influences don't include Jean-Luc Godard???? 

message: The source given to back up that his films feature ‘foot fetishism’ clearly shows that Tarantino considers it merely a piece of direction to feature shots of feet and not fetishistic. This is also a very minor detail of his films and clearly not a defining feature of his craft. This prominent mention should therefore be removed. 81.109.85.15 (talk) 17:22, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foot fetishism 

message: There is a language dialect called this, and other people with this surname, I'm not sure that needs to be the redirect for "Tarantino." Middle river exports (talk) 20:24, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Middle river exports, I would first create a page Tarantino (disambiguation), which includes all listings from Tarantino (surname), a listing for Tarantino language, and a listing for Quentin Tarantino. You'd then want to go Talk:Tarantino (disambiguation) and do a move request and specifically look at section WP:RSPM for how to do the requested move nomination. TartarTorte 20:31, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes that makes sense. I can do this when I have more time later. Cheers --Middle river exports (talk) 20:39, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Middle river exports Feel free to ping me if you need any help/don't have the time to do so, but also there is no deadline. TartarTorte 03:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Done at Talk:Tarantino (disambiguation). I have opted to just link the Tarantino (surname) page instead of duplicating its contents, as that article contains information about the origin of the name which is helpful and I would rather not duplicate or merge it. Middle river exports (talk) 19:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this really the main subject for "Tarantino"? 

message: Just curious why there isn’t more detail about his upbringing in Knoxville: it just jumps right to his early film career! Never seen that in a Wikipedia entry before and I find that curious. Hell, this entry doesn't even address basic info such as who his mother is (or was). Does Mr QT have some exceptional influence regarding what is published here beyond the norm? I heard he worked as a 7-11 clerk writing early scripts for future films before he was ‘discovered’. Any truth to that? 2600:1012:B1CB:1599:CDA0:6310:F512:2E2B (talk) 04:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question on lack of detail about early life 

message: Last year QT did an episode of a podcast called Pure Cinema where he joked about quitting after ten films. This was referenced in quite a few articles as being serious and a reiteration of his earlier comments. Just after this QT went on WTF with Marc Maron and was clear about that he had a giggle in his voice when he said that. He does go on to say something like "I still got..." and is then cut off by Maron. 
I don't know what is the best way to reference this since WTF does not have the whole archive online. There is a copy of the episode on YouTube but that is no good as a reference either.
You can verify what the information for now by listening to the interview. Start at about 1:08:45 (pasting the url should take you to the timestamp).
https://youtu.be/cwEYLG_h_cY?t=4125
Óli Gneisti (talk) 21:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: He has been serious about quitting after ten in far, far more interviews than these. He has other projects coming up which include more fiction books, non-fiction books, a TV series, one or more plays, etc., but I don't think there's any question that there's only one more film based on his current plans. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 22:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately he doesn't say that in the Maron interview. The "I still got" doesn't seem to be in reference to more films. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 20:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Retire at sixty or after ten films 

message: * There doesn't seem like much reason to push this through a formal close. There's no consensus for this change. Thanks! Nemov (talk) 16:07, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: In the collaboration section, Samuel L. Jackson has been in 6 movies, not 4. 24.184.1.116 (talk) 01:36, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Lightoil (talk) 08:40, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 10 January 2023 

message: The reasons given above that this should be a protected article -- that Quentin Tarantino is a "pretty important guy" and that people would allegedly agree with the poster's own opinion -- are purely subjective, and of ridiculous criteria. We can't protect every article about every "pretty important guy." Furthermore, the current protection prevents the correction of multiple embarrassingly amateurish grammatical errors. 65.51.145.131 (talk) 21:47, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi!  What is your edit request? Mike Allen  21:55, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  This should NOT be a PROTECTED article. 

message: In the past this table has been taken down, and aside from original research the other main criticism has been that listing actors who have only appeared in two films is illogical. I tend to agree, as a second hiring is really just a reflection of Tarantino's satisfaction with one performance/production experience with the actor, 3+ seems to be a more accurate reflection of an ongoing professional relationship. What do people think? YouCanDoBetter (talk) 20:43, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally don't mind the collaboration chart from a reader perspective, but as you say there is some original research (a source column may help). You also need to clarify where the measure/reference is that 3+ performances are better than 2+. Rvert (talk) 04:29, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There are a lot of pages that use the 3+, like Wes Anderson and Lars von Trier. If we stick to two that's fine, but it just doesn't seem to justify the language "many times" or relate to the 'repertory' concept.YouCanDoBetter (talk) 04:08, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frequent collaborators 

message: The article discusses his love of many films, why not Titanic, precisely the sort of film you wouldn't expect him not to like, to reveal his eclectic tastes? Also, if the Titanic wiki page discusses Robert Altman's opinion of it, why not QT's?MagicatthemovieS (talk) 21:13, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Titanic'' 

message: in the section "collaboraters" it reads: "Most notable of these is Samuel L. Jackson, who has appeared in four films directed by Tarantino and a fifth written by him, True Romance"
Samuel L. Jackson now has worked in 6 films directed and 7 if you include true romance, a fact which that following table shows. 2A01:C22:C9BB:7C00:30C7:8192:63DB:E1B5 (talk) 22:35, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 03:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2023 

message: I asked @Rvert to find consensus for the lead change. Rvert made the change anyway bizarrly citing "TALK." I  rolled back the change pointing out the lack of consensus. The new version isn't an improvement. Rvert has reverted without further discussion. I would urge the editor to find consensus. Nemov (talk) 13:33, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you've "cherry-picked" the diffs to give your own narrative.  That isn't how the  discussion evolved.  Editors can see the earlier RFC.  When another experienced editor advised the RFC be reframed and the wording reduced to be less "tedious; I agreed.  The redrafted sentence is meant to be a summary, therefore every detail doesn't have to be in the lead and the main themes are enough. Rvert (talk) 03:55, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes to lead 

message: Change "Tarnentino" to "Tarantino" in the image caption. 185.154.228.48 (talk) 08:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Liu1126 (talk) 11:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 November 2023 

message: X=As the page is.
Y=Add "author" to the short description and main description. 82.21.83.129 (talk) 15:40, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: he is mainly known as a film-maker. M.Bitton (talk) 14:48, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2024 

message: You need to add that he likes feet unironically. This is a travesty that this information is not available here. 24.29.243.127 (talk) 03:39, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jamedeus (talk) 04:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2024