Did you know that Tarantinoesque is a legitimate word and not just something used by movie reviewers to describe a move that has an abundance of (witty) dialogue and (bloody) violence? I just learned this today. The Oxford Dictionary describes it as an adjective meaning “resembling or imitative of the films of Quentin Tarantino; characteristic or reminiscent of these films.” It goes on further to say that “Tarantino’s films are typically characterized by graphic and stylized violence, non-linear storylines, cineliterate references, satirical themes, and sharp dialogue” (lexico.com)
In the late 90’s when I worked at Front Row Video, Tarantinoesque was indeed used by us clerks to describe a movie that, while not directed or written by Quentin Tarantino, did adhere to some of those characteristics. Honestly it was usually a lazy shorthand because even movies that are said to “rip off” Tarantino usually have something unique to them, but rather than get into that conversation with a casual renter, we’d just ask them if they liked Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction.
But is Tarantinoesque a fair label to use, both regarding the film in question and QT’s work. When he had only two directed films, and four written films to his name, it was a little easier. If it managed to have a criminal in a suit, some witty pop culture filled dialogue and/or monologues, and a once well regarded actor in need of some career rehabilitation, it was easy to say it was Tarantinoesque. As his career progressed, and some of those more obvious traits filtered out, it became harder to label a film as such. But again, in the 90’s, it was an easy pull quote to put on a film box to guarantee some rentals.
Certainly films slapped with that particular pull quote were not all the same. The five films I’m about to write about are obviously not the same films, though they could mark off many of the same squares were someone to invent a game of Quentin Tarantino bingo. (Spoiler Alert: I have, and I’ll list some of the squares below.) It was easy to lump them into the same category, but I’m here to ask, was that actually a detriment? I’m sure directors and writers don’t want to be labelled a QT knockoff, but do you think that stopped them from turning down the opportunity to write a script or direct a move? A screen credit is a screen credit, and for those just starting off in the industry I’m sure that paycheck was worth a few weak barbs from film critics.
And who could blame studios for green lighting these movies? Just in case anyone forgot, Pulp Fiction was a huge critical and financial success. While the chances of any movie replicating that success was certainly slim, the risks were small with potential for a large upside should any of them catch on. If they failed at the box office, there was always the potential for them to catch on in the rental market.
Personally I enjoyed the explosion of these films in the mid to late 90’s. I’ve always enjoyed crime films, going all the way back to my childhood love of the Great Muppet Caper, so I was ready to embrace this glut of films with open arms. While none of them failed to capture the magic of Pulp Fiction, many were enjoyable, especially for a young adult who is dying to feel hip and edgy. There were certainly some awful films, including one that became a cult success for reasons I still cannot comprehend, but overall, “Tarantinoesque” is a worthwhile subgenre to take a look at.
2 Days in the Valley
Mostly notable for the first credited film appearance of Charlize Theron (and she does make an impression) this Altman-esqu tale (see you can do it for other filmmakers as well) intertwines numerous stories told over the titled two days in the California valley. Checking off some QT boxes includes some hitmen, an esoteric soundtrack, lots and lots of dialogue, and a crime gone wrong as the murder of Peter Horton’s character has plenty of twists and turns to it. James Spader gives his usual cool/creepy performance and Danny Aiello gives the film it’s much needed heart. Sadly, Jeff Daniels gives an amazing performance as an angry racist cop but his story isn’t given enough attention. Extra points goes to writer/director John Herzfeld for utilizing Louise Fletcher and Keith Carradine in small roles.
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
Things to Do in Denver when You’re Dead
I’ll let you decide if you think the title is too clever or not, but I’ll admit, it got a lot of video store patrons to ask about it. The always reliable Andy Garcia plays Jimmy the Saint, a wise guy trying to stay legit operating a business that allows people to record messages to their loved ones before they die. The film spends a great deal of time focusing on mortality, especially after Jimmy and his unique crew mess up a job for the local crime boss played by the always weird and wonderful Christopher Walken. Treat Williams is given a bit of the boost playing the scenery chewing wildcard Critical Bill alongside fellow criminals Easy Wind (Bill Nunn), Pieces (Christopher Lloyd) and Franchise (William Forsythe). I’d go far enough to say they’re like QT’s Reservoir Dogs but with much cooler names. At least their lifespan is comparable. Director Gary Fleder and writer Scott Rosenberg craft a clever film that is well worth a watch.
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
Love and a .45
I’ll say it. This film, at least for those of us who grew up on alternative 90’s tunes, has a better soundtrack than any Tarantino film. Sadly, that’s the best thing it has going for it, as the movie plays more like a Texas redneck version of True Romance. That isn’t to say it’s worthwhile. Renee Zellweger definitely gives it her all as Alabama…I mean Starlene Cheatham, and Gil Bellows is certainly acceptable as her fellow lover in arms Watty Watts. Perhaps the highlight for a horror fan such as myself is to see Jeffrey Combs (Re-Animator) take a turn as a drug fueled hitman who gets a little too close for comfort with a tattoo gun. Perhaps the most surprising cameo is that of Peter Fonda, who trades heavily on his Easy Rider Captain America persona to play Renee Zellweger’s paralyzed father. Writer/director C.M. Talkington isn’t afraid to lean into the weirdness and quotes rather heavily from the I-Ching.
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
Killing Zoe
This film can actually lay some claim to being Tarantinoesque because it was written and directed by Pulp Fiction co-writer Roger Avary and was produced by Tarantino himself. While this tale of a bank robbery gone wrong doesn’t rely as heavily on witty dialogue, it certainly leans into the violence once the robbery starts. Tarantino alum Eric Stoltz (who also had a turn in 2 Days in the Valley) stars as Zed, an American in Paris who is there to rob a bank with his childhood friend Eric, who is played with wild intensity by Jean-Hugues Anglade. A chance encounter with local student/prostitue Zoe (Julie Delpy) may be the key to helping Zed get out of this alive.
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
Remember at the beginning when I said one particular film managed to gain success, cult-like status, and even a sequel despite it being the absolute worst example of Tarantinoesque? Well that movie is The Boondock Saints and I couldn’t actually convince myself to rewatch it. It’s not one of those “so bad it’s good” movies despite a bonkers appearance by personal favorite Willem Dafoe. Even the usual creepy/cool factor of Norman Reedus and my general love of the comedy of Billy Connolly could save this movie for me.
So instead, I’m going to recommend Overnight, the documentary about the overnight success and equally fast spiral into self-destruction wrought by the director/writer of The Boondock Saints, Troy Duffy. It’s almost too crazy to believe, but this man managed to write and direct a script, get a film company to buy him a bar, and get him a record label contract all while being an insufferable asshole. Regardless of your feelings of his movie, I can guarantee you will be hoping for this man to fail by the end of the documentary. Unsurprisingly it was not ever included as a special feature on the dvd or blu-ray, but can be rented or purchased on numerous streaming platforms. Well worth the rent.
Rated 3.5 out of 5.
So there you have it, some Tarantinoesque recommendations. If you’re anything like me you’ll note the similarities between many of the films, but if you’re exactly like me you’ll want to create your very own Tarantino Bingo Card. Here are some of my recommended squares:
-Gun standoff with more than two characters
-Narrative structure that plays with time
-multiple converging storylines
-”from the producers of” a Tarantino film on the box art/poster
-a Macguffin
-Excessive violence
-characters with interesting names/code names
-Lovers on the run from the law
-At least 25 uses of the word fuck in all its forms
-Murdered cops
-Crime gone wrong
-characters talking about pop culture
-Miramax film
-70’s or 80’s genre actor
-Quotes from a philosophical or religious text
-Criminals in suits
-esoteric soundtrack
-unfortunate use of the “n” word
-use of Tarantino alumni
Have fun and remember to shout “That’s a Bingo!” when you win so you too can be Tarantinoesque.
