Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Tarantino - Importance of Music and Violence


Not only is Quentin Tarantino known for his remarkable work with movies, but he is also known for his excellent use of music to accompany the movie. Tarantino is someone whose use of music in his movies is, at times, masterful. His ability to use well known songs as well as tunes that may have disappeared from the public consciousness has made a number of key scenes in his movies even more notable. As a result from pairing songs with films, he has created some of the most iconic scenes in the last 21 years. Tarantino also has a very fine tuned connection to the soundtrack department. Not only has Tarantino talked openly about his huge interest in bloody scenes and violence driven movies; he’s also come out to the public about his vast knowledge of music. He actually owns an enormous record collection that he adds to constantly. His curiosity of music almost rivals that of his geekiness of movies, which must be saying something considering his massive knowledge of all things movie related.

Instead of using traditionally scored music to go along with the movie, Tarantino uses pop-music that exemplifies the scene. The use of pop songs in films has been seen since the 1950’s. Even though you can make the case for using pop songs for the film to be better advertised and earn more money, Tarantino argues that using pop music in his films is more of a cultural element than for commercial use. Before Tarantino seriously starts to think about doing a movie, he starts to find the one, perfect song that will fit the opening credit scene before he even starts to write the movie.

As we all know, Tarantino likes to dip into scenes where there are big operatic effects. After the story has been told and everything is set up, instead of breaking into a musical or a big musical sequence he adds pop music to an action filled scene where there is little to no dialogue and lets the song sell the story. In which he states that he learned this technique from Italian movies.


“... I find the personality of the piece through the music that is going to be in it... It is the rhythm of the film. Once I know I want to do something, then it is a simple matter of me diving into my record collection and finding the songs that give me the rhythm of my movie." - Quentin Tarantino


Throughout his films, Tarantino has his characters refer to and discuss the music that is either playing in the movie or is a song that is easily recognizable and allows the audience to agree or disagree with the characters opinions. This is something that typifies Tarantino’s films from other directors. In the beginning of Reservoir Dogs, the characters in the opening scene are actually arguing about what the meaning of “Like a Virgin” by Madonna is. The way they are talking about the song might have us believe that they already have a close relationship, but later on find out that, that song might have brought them closer together since they barely knew each other in the beginning of the movie. Having characters discuss music in movies partly reveals how the discourse around pop music works within a culture.

The music that accompanies the film is exclusively from the 1970’s. The official soundtrack to Reservoir Dogs only features 8 songs, 5 of which feature in the film. There are 2 scenes in Reservoir Dogs that have become so iconic that it’s almost impossible to listen to the song and not think of the movie. One is, “Little Green Bag” by The George Baker Selection, which accompanies one of the greatest title sequences. The other is “Stuck in the Middle” by Steelers Wheel. This song plays during an incredibly intense scene where a police officer is tortured. Tarantino is a rather convulsive director, constantly directing movies with incredibly varied themes, styles, and purpose; but the one constant that remains in all of his films is the amazing amount of gore and violence.

Tarantino doesn't display the same violence over and over like other directors; he tries to present violence itself in completely different methods. Using it as a versatile tool, from the needed to needless. The release of Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill Vol. 1 and 2 made him an instant role model to younger audiences and young film makers. His reputation was enhanced to someone who can break all the rules, making movies that are, at the same time; stylish, exciting and cheesy, and always get away with it.


“Violence is one of the most fun things to watch." - Quentin Tarantino


One criticism that Tarantino is familiar with is that he makes movies about what happens in the universe of the movie, not real life events. But his last 2 films, Inglorious Bastards and Django Unchained dealt with very real events of the past. He argues that we don’t necessarily have to deal with the subtext, but if we do there’s a lot there if we go digging for it. Tarantino stands behind the belief that violence is the best form of cinema entertainment. When he goes to the movies he expects to be controlled and made to laugh and cry at the will of the conductor, which is why he makes his movies full of scenes that intend to do just that.

The key to using violence in Tarantino’s words is, “Using violence in any way is to understand what it means in the context of the movie, not real life. Violence in the media, as with anything really, is only dangerous when the person using it lacks the ability to understand what it means in a greater context.”

He recently had an interview with a British TV journalist, the interview started turning sour once the reporter started to ask about how Tarantino’s use of violence is so prominent, even though the interview was about promoting the movie Django Unchained. Tarantino continued to rage on the reporter for continuing to antagonize him on his stance on using violence. Once the reporter started to question him one last time during the interview, Tarantino blew up and started to yell at the questions he was asking and told him that “he’s not a monkey and won’t dance to his tune.”

After all of the criticisms towards his standards on violence, he still hasn't changed his views “one iota.”




8 comments:

  1. With this information in mind, why would Tarantino not show the ear actually getting cut off? Do you think it's due to budget and makeup costs or something else. It seemed strange not to show it if people go to the movies for violence.

    ReplyDelete
  2. When I saw the ear bit, I was reminded of something I had read when researching Hitchcock’s classic film The Birds. Here’s a quote on what happened . . . “Subverted in classic Hitch style. Suzanne Pleshette, who played Annie, suggested for her character's death that her ear should be found half torn off and bloody. Hitchcock sent her to the makeup department to let them make her ear look like that, but when filming the actual scene placed her body with her other side facing the camera so that the viewer never sees the torn off ear.” I remember reading that, and then the author added a bit of editorial comments by suggesting that this story was the kind of twisted humor that Hitchcock was known for, and was also an indication of his very bizarre style of directing. When I saw the moment in Reservoir Dogs with the ear, I thought of that moment in The Birds because Tarantino was obsessed with film and read a lot about them, and perhaps it was a nod to that moment from Hitchcock’s famous film. . . That, or he couldn’t afford it, but I doubt that. The film showed the ear, the hole in his head, so it stands to reason that there would be another reason. Tarantino loves violence, so it would seem that his motives would lie elsewhere than budget constrictions. As a movie buff, he could have read the same story about Hitchcock’s film and made a decision based on that knowledge. Of course, this is all just guesswork on my part.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I would guess that he didn't show the ear being cut off because he would rather have the audience imagine it in their head so that they could have an even more gruesome picture than what could even be shown. But I'm only assuming this answer because of what was mentioned in class about not showing violence on screen just for that reason. I wouldn't think the make-up or budget cost just because they already had what they needed to make it look like he was getting it cut off; knife, blood, prosthetic ear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do agree with your comment on the budget costs of the movie. If they wanted to show the ear getting cut off they would have. I do think that as the audience pictures it in their mind the picture is more gruesome of what it might of actually looked like.

      Delete
  4. https://docs.google.com/a/students.ipfw.edu/file/d/0B-Da-QDZxZoDT1JqbjhPWXlDX0E/edit?usp=sharing

    ReplyDelete
  5. I have to admit I usually look away from scenes like that cause I'm a wimp when it comes to that
    type of violence in a movie. Watching someone get shot isn't a big deal most of the time. We did talk about it in class and I mentioned that I read that we fill in what we don't see and remember it more somehow than if we actually see it. Something to do with the "I can't believe I just saw that" theory. I think it pertains more to supernatural stuff, but works well here too.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oh,a note on music and movies. I was half watching a kid movie a while back (live actors) and at the end the two characters start to dance together. What really through this scene off was the editing along with the music - it didn't match. The music was a fun, beachy, jamaican style, but they slowed down the sequence to be rather romantic? or something and it just didn't work well.

    ReplyDelete
  7. In my opinion part of horror noir is what we think and what images are in our heads throughout these films. I think Hitchcock purposely didn't show the ear being cut off in attempts to make the audience visualize horror and what that might look like. In reflection I know that I was sort of let down that they didn't show it but I found myself very much into the film.

    ReplyDelete