Why does tarantino use violence

A quick Google search will tell you just how many characters Tarantino has killed since Django Unchained , and even though the death toll reaches over , it doesn't even make it on the top 10 list for most on-screen deaths in a movie. That honor belongs to Guardians of the Galaxy with 83, deaths. That is not a typo. Credit: Slash Film But wait a second—how is it that a movie that kills off over 83, characters can walk away with a PG rating while one like Jackie Brown , which has only 4, walks away with an R?

Okay, okay—there are other categories that influence a rating, like language, sexual content, substance abuse, and nudity, all of which are widely used in Tarantino films, but still—83, on-screen deaths. I think this is one of the main points the video tries to explain, how one death can be considered brutal and cruel, while another can be comical and almost unimportant.

Perhaps it's not about how many characters you kill off in a film, but how you do it. Not really, in fact most people laugh at that scene. But when it's Ordell shooting Louis at point blank range in the front seat of a car, it's startling mostly due to the facts that the scene and the setting are so intimate, and Ordell is a ruthless m-fer. But even though scenes from Kill Bill, Pulp Fiction, and Django Unchained are full of blood, bullets, and all-out carnage, there seems to be some sort of rhyme and reason for it.

Tarantino himself is not a big fan of real-world violence, but he appears to see a huge chasm between actual violence and movie violence—the two are not closely related. At a press conference, he told Newsday :. Violence is just one of many things you can do in movies. People ask me, 'Where does all this violence come from in your movies? It's one of the worst aspects of America. In movies, violence is cool. I like it. What do you think about how Quentin Tarantino uses violence in his films?

Do you think there's a limit to how much a filmmaker can include depictions of violence in their work before it becomes "irresponsible"? And it's much more than that. It helps shape characters, helps create mood and narrative devices and realism, and, yes, it's exciting. United States. Type keyword s to search. Today's Top Stories. Every 'Bond' Film Ever, Ranked. As all amateurs of blood and gore, Tarantino knows his history.

Beyond offering a post-revisionist reading of the plight of women, Jews and African-Americans, a subtle account of historical change is also discernible in his work. In particular, his films Inglorious Basterds and Django Unchained both rely on the magnificent performance delivered by Christoph Waltz. Indeed, the characters Landa and Schultz are two sides of the same actor and two sides of the same historical coin.

Crucially, the interpretation of both roles by Waltz highlights the fundamental impact on the birth of the Civil Rights movements that was induced by the hypocrisy of a segregated American force sent to fight a racist regime in the Second World War.

The racism that was fought and killed in Europe gave the impulse for broader liberation from racism at home in the aftermath of the war. For Tarantino, good can therefore come out of evil — but only under the right conditions. The point is not that Landa resurrected as Schultz is a liberator for the slave Django. Rather he is an enabler, giving Django the skills and material he needs to fight his own battle and succeed.

This understanding of violence adds a further layer of complexity onto the highly stylized violence of the earlier films produced by the director. But even violence that is purely evil can create a ripple that will yield a good outcome in a different place, at a different time. In fact, competing notions of violence and the purpose it serves are delivered through his work. The earliest Tarantino films correspond to the gratuitous definition of violence that has become synonymous with his name and which sees violence as neither good nor bad — merely aesthetic.

The later Tarantino films explore the conception of illegitimate violence and the cleansing effect of corrective violence both as strong narrative devices and as part of a cultural healing process to run parallel to a broader historical memorialization. The final conception of violence which Tarantino offers and which can be seen between his two latest films is more nuanced.