[Livia]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

It may have been in the light of the comments made by Jamie Foxx? whose opinion differs to Tarantinos on the subject quite dramatically.

Tarantino answered that adequately by saying if he's interested in Jamie Foxx's opinion, then he should talk to Jamie Foxx.

If I see Tarantino is being interviewed about his new film, as a fan, that's what I want to see. I don't want it hijacked by a journalist with an agenda.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

Tarantino answered that adequately by saying if he's interested in Jamie Foxx's opinion, then he should talk to Jamie Foxx.

If I see Tarantino is being interviewed about his new film, as a fan, that's what I want to see. I don't want it hijacked by a journalist with an agenda.

He was not hijacked, don't be so melodramatic.
He will have been well aware of the fact that the star of his movie has the opinion that the level of violence shown may be a contributory factor in the rise in violent crime.
If certain topics were tabboo he could have made it clear prior to the interview.
The cause of the outburst was the embarrassment he felt by the reaction to the comments, nothing to do with Krishnan.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Krishnan is an experienced professional who has interviewed some of the most powerful and influential people of our time.

Yes and went to USA
a few months back for CH4HD
docu on Right Wing DJ's.

That was Great

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

He was not hijacked, don't be so melodramatic.
He will have been well aware of the fact that the star of his movie has the opinion that the level of violence shown may be a contributory factor in the rise in violent crime.
If certain topics were tabboo he could have made it clear prior to the interview.
The cause of the outburst was the embarrassment he felt by the reaction to the comments, nothing to do with Krishnan.

First I'm vulgar now I'm melodramatic... Don't be rude Kizzy. This is my opinion, if you find it melodramatic, that's your problem.

You could start an argument in an empty room.

[Ammi]

..that was a dreadful interview, Krishnan was asking for his opinions on something which was nothing to do with his movie and wouldn’t accept that it wasn’t relevant....Tarantino stated that he didn’t think there was a connection between violence in movies and violence in real life and doesn’t have any ‘responsibility’ to explain it further if he doesn’t want to...Krishnan was obviously trying to ‘trap’ him and he knew that...his reaction was justified and he left Krishnan looking as stupid as he often does....imo, he's an awful interviewer.....

[Niamh.]

It'd be more in his line to question Jamie Foxx and ask him if he believes that violence in movies causes people to be violent, why did he star in a Quentin Tarantino film in the first place..........

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

It'd be more in his line to question Jamie Foxx and ask him if he believes that violence in movies causes people to be violent, why did he star in a Quentin Tarantino film in the first place..........

That's a very good question.

Krisnan could also have asked him why he changed his name from Eric Bishop to Jamie Foxx. Oh hang on... I know the answer to that one already.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

It'd be more in his line to question Jamie Foxx and ask him if he believes that violence in movies causes people to be violent, why did he star in a Quentin Tarantino film in the first place..........

..I imagine he got a big paycheck...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Livia

That's a very good question.

Krisnan could also have asked him why he changed his name from Eric Bishop to Jamie Foxx. Oh hang on... I know the answer to that one already.

Oh I don't, why did he?

[King Gizzard]

The reaction to this on twitter has mainly been about how Quentin's an asshole but I don't see it like that, this was an interview to plug his movie not discuss violence as a whole, he's not the only one that uses violence, if you want to ask anyone about that kind of stuff ask the sick people that make the Saw movies and **** like that..

He was on Film 2013 as well and he was really cool on that, he just gets annoyed at paps easily, understandably

Youtube video

[Shaun]

The media have painted all sorts of ridiculous sensationalism about him and it's not just the 'violence' stuff - there were the numerous Uma Thurman relationship rumours, the "WHY IS HE STILL SINGLE" bs and he's just generally portrayed as a weirdo, and it's ridiculous.

Krishnan would be better off working for the E! network.

[Ammi]

..Tarantino's in the industry of art and entertainment and the only thing he was there for is to talk about his movie...he's a very private person and doesn't offer his views beyond that, which I respect because they are only his opinions and subjective anyway...in my view Krishnan is always looking for an 'angle' to sensationalise his interviews..possibly to try to mask the fact that he's a fairly dull interviewer....

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Krishnan is an experienced professional who has interviewed some of the most powerful and influential people of our time.

And Stu thinks he is a terrible interviewer.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Stu

And Stu thinks he is a terrible interviewer.

No on Ch4News he is great
nothing like the Biased BBC

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

First I'm vulgar now I'm melodramatic... Don't be rude Kizzy. This is my opinion, if you find it melodramatic, that's your problem.

You could start an argument in an empty room.

I have NEVER said you were vulgar.
I felt your reaction to the interview was melodramatic is all, not you.
That was my opinion is was not rude or an attack on you personally.
There is no argument here livia.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

He was not hijacked, don't be so melodramatic.
He will have been well aware of the fact that the star of his movie has the opinion that the level of violence shown may be a contributory factor in the rise in violent crime.
If certain topics were tabboo he could have made it clear prior to the interview.
The cause of the outburst was the embarrassment he felt by the reaction to the comments, nothing to do with Krishnan.

.

[the truth]

im leaning towards quentin a bit here, a typically attention seeking english hournalist just likethat poisonous clown, martin bashir, who entrapped michael jackson and I think quentin is a very likeable inspiring genius. but I do think his movies whilst often utterly brilliant, are outrageously violent and graphic and even though the violence is often meant to me a metaphoror sym bollic or simply comic strip, I would be interested to know his opinions on the matter and also those in charge of movies. however in fairness movies are x rated and 18+ and shown privately....whereas dreadful poison like eastenders in shown on terrestrial tv at 7.30 three of four times a week, thats riddled with murder , rape , arsen etc etc

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

.

What does highlighting my comment prove? you misinterpretated the inference there livia.
And now you are trying to escalate this presumed argument, please don't.

[InOne]

Quentin Tarantino is on Graham Norton tonight.

Just so you all know

[Roy Mars III]

Quentin Tarantino is highly overrated, Reservoir Dogs it a top ten movie but Pulp Fiction is one of my least favourite movies of all time and the Kill Bill movies are almost just as bad. And I never really like Tatantion's personality just judging from interviews but I think he was good here

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

What does highlighting my comment prove? you misinterpretated the inference there livia.
And now you are trying to escalate this presumed argument, please don't.

"Don't be melodramatic". How can I misinterpret the inference? You thought I was being melodramatic and told me not to be. Unless you made a mistake, your meaning was clear.

I'm not trying to escalate an argument with you, I am replying to your attempts to argue semantics. I've said what I meant in this thread. 'I've said exactly what I meant. No need for anyone to infer anything. So unless you've got something else to say about the actual topic I'll leave it there.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

"Don't be melodramatic". How can I misinterpret the inference? You thought I was being melodramatic and told me not to be. Unless you made a mistake, your meaning was clear.

I'm not trying to escalate an argument with you, I am replying to your attempts to argue semantics. I've said what I meant in this thread. 'I've said exactly what I meant. No need for anyone to infer anything. So unless you've got something else to say about the actual topic I'll leave it there.

You are right, I thought your reaction was melodramatic...
I made no mistake.
Tarantino is overrated, he overreacted and made a show of himself.
His films are given far too much credit, I don't believe he deserves the adoration he recieves.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

You are right, I thought your reaction was melodramatic...
I made no mistake.
Tarantino is overrated, he overreacted and made a show of himself.
His films are given far too much credit, I don't believe he deserves the adoration he recieves.

Fine then. You thought my reaction was melodramatic.

I think your reaction is provincial. Kizzy, don't be provincial...

[Livia]

Originally Posted by InOne

Quentin Tarantino is on Graham Norton tonight.

Just so you all know

Acually, I didn't know that! Thanks.

[Ammi]

..I don’t think personal opinions of Tarantino’s movies are relevant to the topic...obviously that’s a matter of personal taste...what is relevant is that Krishnan pushed him on his own personal opinion on a subject that was nothing to do with his movie, which is what he was there to discuss..after making himself clear that he didn’t want to discuss it and Krishnan’s persistence, I think his reaction was totally understandable.... Krishnan needs to stop looking for a ‘big story’ and listen to what his interviewee is saying to him more...