QdobaCasanova said
Your question is as equally as vague as you allege my response was.
Nothing Tarantino does is revolutionary or intrinsic to him. This is the en passé I usually encounter with casual film goers who lionize Tarantino as a cinematic genius: they simply have no desire to actually look at the films he draws “inspiration” from.
And by “inspiration”, I mean blatantly copy.
So, again, I don’t understand what the original poster is even looking for because everything Tarantino does, film wise, is derivative and oftentimes not recognized by casuals.
Like I imagine youve never seen none of the De Palma films Tarantino has ripped off and you just associate certain Tarantino cinematography ticks as intrinsic to him, versus something that existed prior to him — e.g. split diopters aka “split screen”.
You associate that with the caliber of Tarantino when it’s not.
In summation, watch more film; stop limiting yourself to movies that have people you recognize/American-based.
Damn bro lol De Palma is top 5 legendary director of all time. Split shots and inspired QT for sure. QT will tell you he has never made anything original, but let's say you were raised in the 90s and not the 60s-80s you may be more familiar with QT that's not a bad thing imo. Funny De Palma story, he started his film career following his doctor dad around filming him cheating on his mom
He made Carrie which is a classic, Scarface classic, Blowout classic, The Untouchables classic...
Let's not act like Goddard and Hitchcock don't exist though, since you brought up how much you hate not being original. "Dressed to kill" or "Psycho"? Same flick or nah? "Blowout" inspired or nah?
Point being all these film makers were inspired by someone before them. Can't just call out QT for that.