Tarantino has a long habit of making promises to "actresses" that he never keeps, talking up ideas. It's just his way of staying relevant.
But this movie will never happen. Death-Proof itself was a crude version of Faster Pussycat with ass-kicking murderous females, so why would anyone pony up the money to make that bomb a second time?
Baloney. Britney couldn't even be counted on to show up two consecutive days in a row. She'll flake out like she always does. Just put her in a group home for mentally challenged people and be done with it.
Well she already is a whore and a lesbian. She put her kids in harms way so way times she could have killed them. Perfect role for her or "roll" as she spells it. Dumb hick.
"Quentin Tarantino hasn't made a decent movie in 10 years."
Seriously? 1st, bad Tarantino is better than the best of 80% of the directors out there. Secondly, his work in Sin City and the Kill Bill movies, is exceptional(and ORIGINAL, by your terms, 789) and Death Proof was solid entertainment. However, originality is virtually nonexistent. It's been calculated that all stories are based on about 30 plots. They've existed since about 500 BC. Thus, the cliche, "there's nothing new since the Greeks". Shakespeare borrowed liberally from them, as have all great storytellers. The Dark Knight, considered to be one of the best movies this year is based on the Bat-Man which has had infinite incarnations. Bob Kane and Bill Finger credit no less than 5 sources for their character: the films The Mark of Zorro (1920) and The Bat Whispers (1930), Doc Savage, The Shadow, and Sherlock Holmes. All super heroes have their origins in the Greek gods and the deus ex machina that concluded almost all of Greek drama. So, if originality is the benchmark of good storytelling, don't go to the movies or theatre, read books, listen to music, tell jokes, or even sit around the campfire and try to scare each other. It's all been done before. The "new" stuff is about 10% new at best.
Tara patrick and her huge fake boobs are UGLY ,the bitch is a horrible porn whore she won't do anal or work with MAXHARDCORE if you don't do those two you ARE NOT A PORN STAR the cunt keeps calling herself a porn star
I don't know how that picture of SLUTney was taken, or why she made that idiotic stupid face. But, I LOVE IT! What a braindead dumbass hick. No matter what this on-her-knees slut does for the rest of her life, she'll always have to answer for her 2 years when she became the worlds most slutty retard. I say FUCK HER; let her go down the drain into total insanity. It's where a candyass do nothing like her belongs...
didn't brit brit make a movie before? Crossroads or some shiz like that. Bavk when she was "proclaiming it was so hard to wait to have sex" while doing the humpy schlumpy with JT during the matching outfit days. Regardless, i think one acting attempt was sufficient for the world brit. Oops-I meant 2...i read she was (cough cough) "hilarious" in some sitcom recently playing a ditzy receptionist..
Shitney has never looked better. I don't know why Mr I make stupid movies wants to give her the attention she craves? She can't sing or act or parent. She is a dirty dumb slut.
People who need to claim that all stories are based on 30 original plots (some other lit major told me it was 12, so...) to defend someone's work are seriously grasping at straws. Tarantino's only interesting and intelligent work was Jackie Brown. The rest: overrated shit supported by generation Y droolers who wouldn't know good film if it tickled their prostate.
Anon 02:04:52: You have a right to your opinion, of course, but since it flies in the face of what 80% of film critics and historians believe, that's all it is: your opinion. I wasn't using the "plots" argument to defend his work. It stands on its own merits. I was totally undermining the "originality" concept as nonexistent and meaningless. However, under the 10% different idea, and expanding the 10 year limitation of the previous posters' comment to include all of Tarantino's work, he's in the top 5 most original and influential directors of the last 15 years. If the only movie he had ever made was Pulp Fiction, it would have solidified his place in film history as a major influence for the years that followed. It pales in comparison to what I consider his best work: the screenplay for Natural Born Killers which, like the movie Network, looks less and less like satire and more like naturalism as each year passes. Both were 20 years ahead of their time. I'm not a gen Y drooler. I'm a baby boomer who pays(and has so for 34 years) to see 120-150 movies a year, plus cable and Netflix, etc.... That doesn't make my opinion any more valid than yours. I say it to illustrate that its based on a lot of movie watching, in a theatre, which is the only venue to fully experience the medium. TARANTINO ROCKS, BABY!!!
Well that's just it, you watch too many movies. You've lost sight of what actually makes a good picture; just like the film critics and historians who so often get it completely wrong.
It's like contemporary art. People are told by the critics and the know-it-alls that it's "art" - even "good" art - and people buy it even though what they're looking at is really just shit (sometimes quite literally). In my opinion, to judge the true value of any piece of art one must be somewhat removed from the world that surrounds it and its inner intricacies. If one has to know the history of film (or work in a video store) in order to appreciate a "Pulp Fiction" then that's a major weakness and the film will not stand the test of time. The merits of a Caravaggio, Rembrandt, Monet, Cezanne all speak for themselves; decades, centuries later. Even an illiterate child can see and understand them; imagine an adult.
By Anon 02:04:52, 02:43:50: So, less experience = better judgement. How did those artists stand the test of time? Historians and critics wrote about them. Dealers sold them. Art lovers bought them, and artists copied them...people IN THAT WORLD. And who are you to judge them? You said they so often get it wrong, but it's ONE opinion just as valid as yours. How many movies do YOU have to see before YOUR opinion becomes invalid ("you watch too many movies")? To address another point, I haven't, "lost sight of what actually makes a good picture" because it's not a black and white argument. Also, I've never liked something because somebody told me to. Fellini's 8&1/2, considered to be one of the greatest films of all time, gave me a headache with its arrogance and self-indulgence. However, I'm not so foolish as to dismiss it's place in film history just because I personally didn't like it. That's where education comes in. I can APPRECIATE something even when I don't LIKE it. I used to be just like you: telling everyone what an idiot they were for liking or not liking a certain film. One day I realized that I was the idiot. You can't tell someone who likes apples that they should like oranges instead because, just like all of the arts, it's about personal taste.
41 Comments:
Leave Your CommentGLAAD will never let this movie be made and with good reason.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 10:17:06
Meh. Faster Pussycat was a good band. Are they still around? Holy shit, they are too. How come nobody told me?
I've lost interest in anything Tarantino has done lately. So, meh.
By Vigilante, on August 6, 2008 10:19:48
He and Robert Rodriguez may want to look up the concept of "original idea."
By 789, on August 6, 2008 10:24:49
Tarantino has a long habit of making promises to "actresses" that he never keeps, talking up ideas. It's just his way of staying relevant.
But this movie will never happen. Death-Proof itself was a crude version of Faster Pussycat with ass-kicking murderous females, so why would anyone pony up the money to make that bomb a second time?
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 10:39:10
I love those tits! Fake? real? Whatever I wish I could have been born with those, I would be the happiest woman in the world
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 10:50:31
They Photoshopped out the fugly implant scars on Tera's nipples.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 10:53:41
10:50:31, if that's what would make you the happiest woman in the world then you're a shallow whore. You probably idolize Jenna Jameson.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 11:18:19
This juicy tidbit sounds like it comes straight from Britney's PR people. And, Quentin Tarentino hasn't made a decent movie in 10 years.
By Enough Already, on August 6, 2008 11:18:24
Tera was 100% perfect before the implants. Now, not so much ...
By jt, on August 6, 2008 11:21:18
I can't decide if these tits are real or fake.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 11:30:39
how old are these pix? she dont look like that when she lived next door to me - willy park!
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 11:37:19
Aaah yes, gratuitous Tera pics rule
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 12:12:12
10:53:41, You can still sort of see the scars around the nipples.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 12:15:51
11:18:19 I may be a shallow whore who loves tits and you may be an immature loser who starts fights on the web.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 12:20:52
10:53:41, You can still see some of the scars around the nipples despite the photoshop job.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 12:32:13
Baloney. Britney couldn't even be counted on to show up two consecutive days in a row. She'll flake out like she always does. Just put her in a group home for mentally challenged people and be done with it.
By She's done for, on August 6, 2008 12:53:14
I loved Death Proof.
I like Tera Patrick's tits.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 12:58:42
All that hack Tarantino does is remake other people's movies. You think he would have learned when Grindhouse/Deathproof bombed at the box office.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 13:00:22
Well she already is a whore and a lesbian. She put her kids in harms way so way times she could have killed them. Perfect role for her or "roll" as she spells it. Dumb hick.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 13:27:29
I love chicks who bash other chicks out of insecurity about their own looks. Ahhh, vanity. Definitely my favorite sin.
By You know it's true so admit it, on August 6, 2008 13:43:58
11:30:39, they're fake.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 14:19:39
Ick, Tera looked better without implants
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 15:01:26
"Quentin Tarantino hasn't made a decent movie in 10 years."
Seriously? 1st, bad Tarantino is better than the best of 80% of the directors out there. Secondly, his work in Sin City and the Kill Bill movies, is exceptional(and ORIGINAL, by your terms, 789) and Death Proof was solid entertainment. However, originality is virtually nonexistent. It's been calculated that all stories are based on about 30 plots. They've existed since about 500 BC. Thus, the cliche, "there's nothing new since the Greeks". Shakespeare borrowed liberally from them, as have all great storytellers. The Dark Knight, considered to be one of the best movies this year is based on the Bat-Man which has had infinite incarnations. Bob Kane and Bill Finger credit no less than 5 sources for their character: the films The Mark of Zorro (1920) and The Bat Whispers (1930), Doc Savage, The Shadow, and Sherlock Holmes. All super heroes have their origins in the Greek gods and the deus ex machina that concluded almost all of Greek drama. So, if originality is the benchmark of good storytelling, don't go to the movies or theatre, read books, listen to music, tell jokes, or even sit around the campfire and try to scare each other. It's all been done before. The "new" stuff is about 10% new at best.
By gregarb, on August 6, 2008 15:29:47
I don't think they're fake, she's always had those and you definitely can't see any scars on video
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 15:45:54
They're implants:
http://fleshbot.com/archives/porno-plastic-surgery-tera-patrick-022945.php
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 15:48:16
this movie could star a has-been, a porn star & kim kardashian,
& it would make no money.
In fact, Tarantino would never work again,
so i say go for it (the guy's a fucken hack)
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 15:48:23
Tara patrick and her huge fake boobs are UGLY ,the bitch is a horrible porn whore she won't do anal or work with MAXHARDCORE if you don't do those two you ARE NOT A PORN STAR the cunt keeps calling herself a porn star
By she is not a porn star, on August 6, 2008 16:27:20
I don't know how that picture of SLUTney was taken, or why she made that idiotic stupid face. But, I LOVE IT! What a braindead dumbass hick. No matter what this on-her-knees slut does for the rest of her life, she'll always have to answer for her 2 years when she became the worlds most slutty retard. I say FUCK HER; let her go down the drain into total insanity. It's where a candyass do nothing like her belongs...
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 17:17:05
No matter what the Britney Spears story is, that should always be the picture that accompanies it.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 17:54:27
Shitney in aother movie?Sounds like a one weekend run to me.
By hater, on August 6, 2008 18:07:08
didn't brit brit make a movie before? Crossroads or some shiz like that. Bavk when she was "proclaiming it was so hard to wait to have sex" while doing the humpy schlumpy with JT during the matching outfit days. Regardless, i think one acting attempt was sufficient for the world brit. Oops-I meant 2...i read she was (cough cough) "hilarious" in some sitcom recently playing a ditzy receptionist..
By desaudia, on August 6, 2008 18:19:25
williston park misses you tera!!
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 18:27:56
Shitney has never looked better. I don't know why Mr I make stupid movies wants to give her the attention she craves? She can't sing or act or parent. She is a dirty dumb slut.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 20:33:13
Fake-tits-on-a-stick
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 22:25:53
Tera has man hands.
By anonymous, on August 6, 2008 23:21:18
People who need to claim that all stories are based on 30 original plots (some other lit major told me it was 12, so...) to defend someone's work are seriously grasping at straws. Tarantino's only interesting and intelligent work was Jackie Brown. The rest: overrated shit supported by generation Y droolers who wouldn't know good film if it tickled their prostate.
By anonymous, on August 7, 2008 02:04:52
yo uhave posted that picture of Shittney at least a 100 times and I laugh ever freakin time...Kudos IDLYITW!!!!
By PK, on August 7, 2008 08:57:51
I like her tits just fine , but what's the point of a tera patrick pic that doesn't show her cooch?
By anonymous, on August 7, 2008 10:25:22
Anon 02:04:52: You have a right to your opinion, of course, but since it flies in the face of what 80% of film critics and historians believe, that's all it is: your opinion. I wasn't using the "plots" argument to defend his work. It stands on its own merits. I was totally undermining the "originality" concept as nonexistent and meaningless. However, under the 10% different idea, and expanding the 10 year limitation of the previous posters' comment to include all of Tarantino's work, he's in the top 5 most original and influential directors of the last 15 years. If the only movie he had ever made was Pulp Fiction, it would have solidified his place in film history as a major influence for the years that followed. It pales in comparison to what I consider his best work: the screenplay for Natural Born Killers which, like the movie Network, looks less and less like satire and more like naturalism as each year passes. Both were 20 years ahead of their time. I'm not a gen Y drooler. I'm a baby boomer who pays(and has so for 34 years) to see 120-150 movies a year, plus cable and Netflix, etc.... That doesn't make my opinion any more valid than yours. I say it to illustrate that its based on a lot of movie watching, in a theatre, which is the only venue to fully experience the medium. TARANTINO ROCKS, BABY!!!
By gregarb, on August 7, 2008 15:47:37
gregarb -
Well that's just it, you watch too many movies. You've lost sight of what actually makes a good picture; just like the film critics and historians who so often get it completely wrong.
It's like contemporary art. People are told by the critics and the know-it-alls that it's "art" - even "good" art - and people buy it even though what they're looking at is really just shit (sometimes quite literally).
In my opinion, to judge the true value of any piece of art one must be somewhat removed from the world that surrounds it and its inner intricacies. If one has to know the history of film (or work in a video store) in order to appreciate a "Pulp Fiction" then that's a major weakness and the film will not stand the test of time.
The merits of a Caravaggio, Rembrandt, Monet, Cezanne all speak for themselves; decades, centuries later. Even an illiterate child can see and understand them; imagine an adult.
By Anon 02:04:52, on August 8, 2008 02:43:50
By Anon 02:04:52, 02:43:50:
So, less experience = better judgement. How did those artists stand the test of time? Historians and critics wrote about them. Dealers sold them. Art lovers bought them, and artists copied them...people IN THAT WORLD. And who are you to judge them? You said they so often get it wrong, but it's ONE opinion just as valid as yours. How many movies do YOU have to see before YOUR opinion becomes invalid ("you watch too many movies")?
To address another point, I haven't, "lost sight of what actually makes a good picture" because it's not a black and white argument. Also, I've never liked something because somebody told me to. Fellini's 8&1/2, considered to be one of the greatest films of all time, gave me a headache with its arrogance and self-indulgence. However, I'm not so foolish as to dismiss it's place in film history just because I personally didn't like it. That's where education comes in. I can APPRECIATE something even when I don't LIKE it.
I used to be just like you: telling everyone what an idiot they were for liking or not liking a certain film. One day I realized that I was the idiot. You can't tell someone who likes apples that they should like oranges instead because, just like all of the arts, it's about personal taste.
By gregarb, on August 11, 2008 15:34:38
<< Continue Reading IDontLikeYouInThatWay.com