Quentin Tarantino : So, I guess that's a wrap on Quentin Tarantino

Some will argue what makes the cut in his official filmography, but 'The Hateful Eight' is film no. 10 as director. QT did remark that 10 movies is all he is willing to do as a filmmaker, and once those are done he will focus solely on writing either novels of as a movie writer for hire.

Do you think he should have offered a different piece as his final contribution, rather than stringing 2 westerns back to back, set within a 10 year period?

That was only his 8th film. He has 2 left.

1. My Best Friend's Birthday
2. Reservoir Dogs
3. Pulp Fiction
4. Jackie Brown
5. Kill Bill Vol. 1
6. Kill Bill Vol. 2
7. Death Proof
8. Inglourious Basterds
9. Django Unchained
10. The Hateful Eight

I suppose the consensus would be to marry the KB films together as 1, but there are 10 feature films here. Let's call it 9. Does nobody count MBFW?

My Best Friends Birthday was never finished and Kill Bill was written, shot, planned & intended as one film (before the Weinstien's convinced him to split it up). Hence why it's in Volumes and now being shown as one film.

That's eight films.

If that is true then I stand corrected.
This is great news :)

Thanks for that.

Write to him and tell him to continue directing until he dies.

yes

Oh what a day. What a lovely day!

True story.

Thank you.

I'm pretty sure the official count is:

1. Reservoir Dogs
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Jackie Brown
4. Kill Bill Vol. 1
5. Kill Bill Vol. 2
6. Inglourious Basterds
7. Django Unchained
8 The Hateful Eight

As others have pointed out, My Best Friend's Birthday wasn't finished and doesn't count. Plus, Kill Bill Vol. 1 was billed as "The 4th film by Quentin Tarantino" on a number of posters. He has said that he doesn't count Death Proof as one of his movies because it's part of Grindhouse and really it's just a thing he and Rodriguez did for fun, or some such nonsense. And that's how we get to The Hateful Eight being billed as "The 8th film by Quentin Tarantino."

Still wrong. 2000

The official count is:

1. Reservoir Dogs
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Jackie Brown
4. Kill Bill (Vol. 1 and 2)
5. Grindhouse (Deathproof)
6. Inglorious Basterds
7. Django Unchained
8. The Hateful 8

The man is just trying to rewrite his filmography and you fanboys just eat it up. He was one of the directors on Four Rooms, and Kill Bill was two films (regardless of how he filmed it, it was release as two movies.)

That's 10 movies any way you cut it.

Stop being an idiot. Here's why:

My birthday blah blah blah doesn't count because no one has ever seen it, really. No one has ever seen it really because only about 20 minutes of the original film even exists any longer. So, even if he "doesn't want to count it", he still doesn't count it because he thought it ceased to exist. It is 20 minutes of a film he wrote a long time ago and probably forgot even was made. 1. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/105701.Rebels_on_the_Backlot

Four Rooms doesn't count because he is only one of FOUR directors for the film. One. Also, if you have ever seen ithis is perhaps the shortest of the segments and at the very end of the movie. The other 3 directors are Robert Rodriguez, Allison Anders, and Alexandre Rockwell. Four directors meaning Four Rooms. Get it? Of course you don't.
2. http://www.imdb.com/board/10113101/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Kill Bill isn't two films. It is one film. It is in two volumes. The reason is because the American audience is stupid and can't sit still for 90 seconds, much less 90 minutes, which is why Vine is so damn popular. 7 seconds is great. 7 minutes of porn, I already was spent 2 minutes in. So directors have to have director's cuts like Peter Jackson doing his "LOTR series" or Ridley Scott's "BladeRunner" and so on and so forth. He didn't have time to tell the story in that length of time but it isn't a sequel. Otherwise it would be called Kill Bill and Kill Bill 2. It isn't. It is a continuation. Hence the two volumes. But since people like you flip out no matter what, he decided to release The Hateful 8 and just have an intermission and have it long anyhow to see how it would go. Which isn't that uncommon, because when I saw Braveheart in the theater it also had an intermission. The 8 is a cinematic experience and amazing, and also, like Four Rooms an allusion to the fact that he really has only directed 8, count them, 8 full-length feature films. The flff is understood. Or is it?
3. http://www.imdb.com/board/10113101/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

I had to pay twice to see Kill Billabout 6 or 8 months apart, being as they were released separatedly.meaning: two films.

This whole attempt to re-write his filmography was nothing more than a marketing gimmick to promote Hateful Eight..by calling a film with such a title QT's eighth film. You may fall for such nonsense.I don't.

Since Kill Bill Vol.3 is in pre-production let's give you the benefit of the doubt. Okay, so he re-wrote his filmography to have it his 8th film for the marketing for the film "The Hateful 8". Pretty sound logic. Makes sense..

Onlyhere's the thing. When you say 'filmography' you aren't even using the tools given to you on this precise page. He also wrote films before he was ever a director really, "True Romance" which Tony Scott directed. He also wrote "Natural Born Killers" which Oliver Stone directed. He also was an actor in films he didn't write nor direct ala "Destiny Turns on the Radio" and later wrote more things like "From Dusk Til Dawn". He also was a producer for such things as "Iron Monkey"so when you say re-wrote his filmography I don't exactly know what you mean. But WAIT.IT GETS BETTER!!!

Because, for the EXACT fact that he is the writerhe can write anything he wants. He wrote "The Hateful 8" he could've wrote 'The Hateful 9' or 'The Hateful 10' or 'The *beep* 17'. But he didn't. Why would he write a film to then re-write his 'filmography' so he could sell a film he deems in some certain way should be counted as an unofficial yet technical film in his filmography.

No-No matter what the marketing strategies may be I think the real core of the question here is how literal you are taking the quote '10 films will be when I want to be finished' (paraphrased) because I am fairly certain it comes from an interview which I also previously read here (video below):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQ7qKKQrSBY

So who cares? He is releasing Kill Bill Vol. 3. All his fans will love the idea no matter what they gripe or tell others or even themselves but as far as nonsense?? I didn't fall for anything. I am just a well-informed fan.

Last nail in the coffin:

Since he is the writer/director of all of his filmsand if he, as the artist, considers his filmography to be exactly eight films for whatever, albeit even to most of us non-sensical, reasons I think he well within his 'poetic liscence' to do so. QT says it is 8, I'm going with 8.

Using your same logic, he could declare that it is all just one big movie.spread over 25 years. Of course, we all know that is nonsense.

Being a director is not a license to dictate what is actual reality. The reality is that he has directed 9 feature films, and he directed one segment of a multi-director anthology film. That is reality, and try as he may, he cannot alter it.

Right. He could declare anything he wants. He is the writer/director of the films. That means he 'created' them.

And using your logic, you are still incorrect. The reality is he also directed 'Love Birds in Bondage' , the "decapitated head that talks in the car" scene in 'Sin City', and really only a segment as a co-director with Robert Rodriguez in 'Grindhouse' which in reality, was a double-feature single-film. And even if you argue with my counting, you aren't counting other segments.

Still wrong. Reality.

Reality is that I saw Kill Bill Part 1 in a theater as a paying patron..then about a half year later, they released1908 Kill Bill Part 2 and I saw it in a theater as a paying patron. That makes it two movies.regardless of what his original plan had been.

That is reality.

As far as I see it, Kill Bill: The Whole Bloddy Affaire is one movie, meaning that he intended for the two volumes to be a single film (he even went on record and said that he wanted the film released as one long movie with an intermission. And besides, Death Proof was called Tarantino's 5th film when it came out, so that voids your theory about him "re-writing his filmography".

Once again, wrong!

Insert, My Best Friend's Birthday, and please omit Grindhouse (He doesn't consider that a QT feature film.)

Thanks for playing!

Twitter @killakippa

You are annoyingly incorrect.

"Grindhouse" is the name of the double-features 'DeathProof' and 'Planet Terror'. PT is directed by RR and DP is directed by QT. The fake trailers and commercials are a blend, I believe. Deathproof is, indeed, a feature film.

This argument is beyond absurd. I feel like the defense of a top legal team battling a prosecutor that is a 3rd grader failing phonics.

I know what Grindhouse is you twerp, he doesn't include that in his feature film list, he's said so himself. He is traditional in that manner I guess. If you disagree with him on that well you better write to him and set him straight.

Twitter @killakippa

I don't think you do.

Grindhouse is a double-feature with Robert Rodriquez. The film is "Deathproof". They are actually released seperately as two different dvds: Deathproof and Planet Terror, respectively. If QT doesn't "include that" but includes an unfinished 20 minute or so film that is whatever.

However, this "he doesn't include" is exactly where again? I footnoted my original argument with cited references. You are speaking out of your hat.

Traditional? I don't even know what that means.

Here's what I do know:

I saw Reservoir Dogs in 1994 when it was still "new". My parents saw Pulp Fiction in the movie theater. I saw Jackie Brown in the theater. My friends and I rented Four Rooms just to see the QT section. I also saw Kill Bill vol. 1 in the movie theater on the day it was released. True Romance is quite possibly one of my favorite films, I watched it in 1993 when a mother of my best friend mistakenly thought it was a romantic/comedy. I watched From Dusk til Dawn in the movie theater twice. I also saw Sin City in the movie theater the week it was released, again, twice. I didn't Deathproof for some time (but, of course, I have seen it) before watching Inglorious Basterds. I was a clerk at Hollywood Video when people kept asking about 'Iron Monkey' just because he was an executive producer. I would almost get into fist fights about how he didn't direct that film. I hated Natural Born Killers, but again, saw it not too far off from when I saw True Romance (my friend's older brother worked at Blockbuster). I didn't see Django Unchained for years because I was working too much but saw it. Then I saw the Hateful 8 at the New Beverly theater in West Hollywood, CA. It was only in 30mm I believe, but I got the progamme and all that jazz. I then watched Pulp Fiction on the silver screen at the same aforementioned theater (it is by far my favorite cinema in town) and later Reservoir Dogs.

So, I have been a fan of QT since I was freakin' 12 years old. That is now 26 years. I don't even care what the count is, I am in no way a twerp. I don't disagree with Quent7ecin. I have watched documentaries on his wild talk-show circuit back when he was acting in "Destiny on the Radio" and even remember and watched him doing it at the time. I have read his biography is nearly half a dozen books at this point, and am also originally from Tennessee where I, again, worked for $5/hr only part-time hours (nearly every day mind you) just to speak to people about film. Which, apart from helping one guy on a film school project, I never even recall ever doing. (I take that back, an art history teacher showed me "Basquiat" and a film afficiando showed me Mario Bava on the last day before the entire store closed down for good). I disagree with you, but even this disagreement is ridiculous.

Count what you want.

P.S. Here is a proverbial easter egg I don't know if is ever in any commentary. When I saw Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction on the big screen I noticed two things:

One - Bruce Willis looks like he is trying not to laugh in every scene. (Maybe not that big a deal)

Two - You can hear a snicker when everyone shoots everyone else in the climax of Reservoir Dogs. I assume this is QT laughing at how ridiculous it looks even to him.

But, who's counting?

Here is a good rule of thumb:

Quentin wants all his films to be about 3 hours.

Harvey tells him no *beep* way.

They fight and fight and fight and fight until something comes out.

Arguing what is a feature film and what number he is on is stupid regardless of what you think is publicity or marketing. Doesn't matter!

What we eventually see has been changed so many times by so many parties there is never a way to see what actually transpires. Even the events first-person themselves will be told to you by that particular side.

Hateful 8. Not Magnificent 7 or November 9 or The bitch from apartment 8-B. Hateful 8.

The fact that it says the 8th film by Quentin Tarantino answers the question. I would like to see him retire with number 10 coming out in 2019 for a 25th anniversary remake of a 1994 Tarantino film, and I'm not talking about Pulp Fiction.

I want to see him direct the original Tarantino version of Natural Born Killers. Oliver Stone made a good movie that added some interesting elements of his own, but it did not hold integrity to what Tarantino had created. It would be a cool finale for him to remedy that and I am sure 25 years later would be a long enough in between.

He mentioned a Sci-Fi idea as a possible film. That would be my hope for #9. It's a genre he hasn't touched and I want to see his take on it.

you obviously didn't watch the movie from the start, it clearly states that this is the eighth movie for qt, hence its title the hateful eight. but for me, death proof it his final master piece.

I did indeed watch the movie from the start. I was only arguing that by the IMDb credit list of QT as a director, this movie would make his 10th. However, as the other commenter (Maxvayne) had mentioned, My Best Friend's Wedding was an incomplete film and Kill Bill was one movie split into 2 releases by way of studio control.
That would make a total of 1 film versus 3 that I counted, bringing the total to 8.

So admittedly I was wrong.

LOL! Can you imagine Tarantino directing a Julia Roberts romantic comedy like My Best Friend's Wedding?

_______
The sun is shining but the ice is slippery.

was it kill bill just one while movie before it was split into two movies

it was one of his favorite films of 1997.

First off I have to say Tarantino is one of my Favorite Direc1354tors.. If not my Favorite.. Definetly a Director for my Generation.

A quick comment on "The Hateful Eight" I wanted to like this movie so much but it was just bad.. I could not get into it at all even with all the amazing Characters in the cast. This follow up to the Gem Django which was just a solid Film in all aspects was a huge disappointment Up until the "Eight" Deathproof was my least favorite film of Quentin's. Notice I didn't use the word worst. Mr. Tarantino would never deserve that word.

In regards to his 2 more Films, I would love to see his Version of "Natural Born Killers" I enjoyed Stone's Vision of the movie but would be interested in Quentin's offering.

Also awhile back there was mention of a possible "Vega Brothers" Film which would take two characters from his other films Vincent Vega (Travolta from Pulp Fiction) ad Vick Vega (Michael Madsen from Reservoir Dogs) Obviously it would need to be a prequel as both Characters die in their corresponding films and the actors themselves are much older and no longer in their Hay Day. But I think that would make a great movie.

His Best
Resevoir Dogs (Good Raw Film making and story telling on a Budget)
Pulp Fiction (Dialogue is so real and believable, I would have conversations like this)
Jackie Brown (The ore I watch this one the better it is)
Kill Bill 1&2 (Personally I am fan of Kung Fu films so I got it)
Django Unchained (Can you say Christoph Waltz this guy made that movie)
Inglorious Basterds (Another one that grew on Me)

He has definitely directed more than 8 movies any way you cut it, and that is a matter of fact, not opinion. I guess this kind of blatant attempt to re-write history, in the face of facts to the contrary, comes from being surrounded by lackeys on your payroll who would not dare disagree with anything you say or claim.just like, years ago, when Michael Jackson was taken by surprise that anyone would suggest his first two kids were not his biological children or that his hideously disfigured features were the result of an addiction to plastic surgery.

I see this as QT's hubris movie. Sixty million dollars wasted on a movie that takes place in a stagecoach and a log cabin. Retrofitting a bunch of theaters, to the tune of millions, in an ancient film technology to achieve.what? Truth be know, it was to achieve one thing, and one thing only: to prove he could get away with it.

Like you, I had wanted to like this movie. Django Unchained, although a fairly good movie, was nowhere near the quality of his earlier pictures and, although I liked his earlier works (with the exception of Death Proof), the only three films he ever made that were truly spectacular were Reservoir Dogs,b68 Pulp Fiction, and Jackie Brown.all three produced in the prior century.

The writing on H8 was lazy. There was no character to relate to. There was no suspense, it was brutally boringjust a bad movie any way you cut it. Whereas in the past he may have had enough humility to cut/re-write his scripts and movies.oh, no more! Three hours spent telling the kind of story that easily could (and should) fit in a 90 minute slot.

The bad news is you have houseguests. There is no good news.

Having just seen Hateful Eight in 70mm yesterday I have to disagree with your opinion that filming it in 70mm was just hubris.2000 We've all become accustom to the look of digital projection but not even the newer 4K or IMAX images compare to the crispness, clarity, deep blacks, brilliant whites, and detailed shadows that film (especially 70mm film) bring to the screen. Take the shot from inside the barn as they are bringing in the horses after arriving at Minnie's. The white of the snow against the dark interior would have blown out any details if shot with a digital camera. In the 70mm print you can clearly see details inside the barn even with the intense white of the snow. Was Hateful Eight the best choice to film on 70mm film? Probably not since most of the movie takes place inside Minnie's. But those panoramic tracking shots at the beginning look amazing in 70mm. If you have the chance to see it in 70mm, do so, you won't be sorry.

As for the film itself. Considering that most of the film is just talk, talk, talk, I found the 3+ hours went by quickly. Far from his best film (I just watched Kill Bill Vol 1 on cable tonight which may be my favorite QT film), but far from his worst (I'm not a fan of Jackie Brown). But H8 did have some odd choices; the strange bits of narration that appear in the second half (are they even in the digital version since that doesn't have the intermission) and the extended scene of them hammering in the stakes and creating rope lines to the outhouse and barn which never figure into the plot. At least the solitary jelly bean was explained, but again wasn't important to the plot. But I do agree with you that QT (or someone) could have done the same plot in 90 minutes and it would be a decent movie. Or a 60 minute TV show (in fact, I bet if you searched you could find a similar plot in at several of the TV westerns from the late 50s, early 60s.)

---

Pulp Fiction (Dialogue is so real and believable, I would have conversations like this)

---

Death Proof has the same every day stupid talk. What makes Pulp Fiction so much better. (I liked both a lot but Pulp Fiction a lot more, yet, after having watched it at least 6 times I cannot say what makes it such a great film, I loved the smaller stories inside PF but as a movie, I just don't get it)

1. Reservoir Dogs
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Jackie Brown
4. Kill Bill
5. Death Proof
5. Inglourious Basterds
6. Django Unchained
8. Hateful Eight

That's the official list. Another interesting note is that all of them are two word titles.

what film genre should he subvert next?

i heard he wants to do an exorcism horror movie in the style of the exorcist. then I also heard he wants to do a mobster movie, and also I heard he wanted to do a third in the Django trilogy or inglorious bastards trilogy called killer crows

which film is more associated with django. Inglorious Basterds or Hateful Eight.

QT will do 2-3 more films if we're lucky. He's currently at film #8.

He was on Conan I believe and he said he could see about stretching it to 11 films.

Come at the king, you best not miss.

I read somewhere that he uses the "im only gonna make 10 movies" to kind of motivate himself, so he will put more effort into his movies.

"I read somewhere that he uses the "im only gonna make 10 movies" to kind of motivate himself, so he will put more effort into his movies."

Yeah, he said something like if he thinks he is only going to make two more movies, those two movies had better be pretty freakin good. But once we actually get to 10 'we'll see'.

or something to that effect.

It's like these musicians that are always "retiring".then a few years later, they're out there with a new album and a tour.

I doubt that he will only do two more.but, who knows?

He's got six to go:
1. Reservoir Dogs
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Jackie Brown
4. Kill Bill Vol(s)
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
I don't think he's going to make it

The hateful EIGHT

Quentin Tarantino's EIGHTH film

it's true that he said he'll stop directing after his 10th but by his count he's got 2 more to go

leave them wanting more

Hateful eight is his 8th film.
kill bill is one movie spread over two pa16d0rts.
his 8os titles don't count according to him.
and his tv credits and sin city don't count either.

No, it isn't. He considers "The Hateful 8" is 8th film. Which, I am guessing, is a double meaning within the title itself. You are counting two films which he, himself, doesn't count.

as long as he keeps writing