Should Directors Retire Early or Keep Making Movies?

[@batman5224]

As a writer myself, I can understand the mentality. If anyone has ever written more than one book or made more than one movie, they will know that artists are in constant competition with themselves. We are constantly comparing our current work to our previous work. It often feels safer to go out with a bang than to continue and risk making something subpar. Of course, for me at least, the creative drive will always resume after a few months of hiatus. It’s impossible to live any other way. Even if Quentin never makes another film, he will never stop being creative.

[@jordand1345]

That’s just the problem though. He thinks he can retire from directing.. to write??? He should bring his director chops to worthy scripts by fresh voices. He’s too steeped in auteur theory, that’s the problem

[@TheSwordfish009]

I think it's just fear of failure. One should push forward. Art is a person's expression. It is their therapy and chance to connect with others. That's it.

[@taliamason7986]

@@jordand1345 He has already tried that and absolutely hated it. No its got nothing to with the Auteur theory (whatever that means). Its do with the fact that the vast majority of writer/directors only ever trust their vision and nobody else's. David Lynch is also like that and hasn't made a full feature length film in 17 years since Inland Empire back in 2006. Paul Thomas Anderson one his long time mates also has that mindset. Billy Wilder was one of the very few with that mindset in Old Hollywood. Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton also very much had that mindset in the Silent era. Other big examples include Andrei Tarkovsky, Ingmar Bergman, Akira Kurosawa, Rainer Werner Fassbinder and Werner Herzog. Just remember at the end day the vast majority of Directors do not write own their scripts. So its an entirely different mentality and creative mindset when they do it.

[@CreepyNoodlesK]

I don’t do that at all. I have toured created many bands in many genres, sometimes acts that existed/performed in the same periods. I didn’t compare any of it to one another. I don’t compare my film work to one another. Or my scripts. I don’t look back in that way. Each project requires something different. How can I compare them to one another? Create like no one is watching. Create in excess.

[@PengyDraws]

@@CreepyNoodlesK Well, good for you, but most artists think otherwise. This just feels like bragging, to be honest.

[@Jovanni_Ruiz]

I think Paul Thomas Anderson is a great example of a filmmaker whose films have matured throughout his career with his age. Most directors at the beginning of their careers go from smaller, more tight-nit stories to bigger, ensemble type films towards the later parts of their careers. PTA seemingly had an opposite trajectory with his early films being huge and ensemble filled dramatic epics, and now creates much more intimate and restrained work.

[@johnjohnsonjohn]

I think he peaked with there will be blood though

[@Jovanni_Ruiz]

@@johnjohnsonjohn That’s many people’s favorites but I honestly love his most recent films Phantom Thread and even Licorice Pizza, and The Master is my all time favorite of his. I just feel like there is way more introspection and emotion in these later films that was lacking a little bit in his earlier ones. This is just my opinion.

[@surfingbrrrd]

@@Jovanni_Ruizagreed completely. Also "There Will Be Blood" is of course phenomenal, but I think a big part is due to Daniel Day Lewis's performance, and while I know a director plays a part in an actors performance, it still is majority the actors doing.

[@fathel9221]

​@@johnjohnsonjohnPhantom Thread.

[@Thespeedrap]

Paul Thomas Anderson is a underrated filmmaker that never gets the recognition he rightfully deserves and is much better than Tarantino that seems to have a formula and likes sticking to it until he feels like he can't do it anymore.Its no wonder he wants to retire when Scorsese who's been doing it for so long knows what stories and projects he wants to tell and won't quit until he does and that's very what a good artist should be.

[@rootregis]

One important thing to keep in mind regarding Tarantino’s decision is that he didn’t come to this conclusion after his 10th movie. He placed this limitation upon himself way back, which means he started out knowing that he only gets to make so many movies. Each time he made another one he had to ask himself is this the story he wants to tell, is this good enough? In a way Tarantino and Scorsese are not so different - they both acknowledge they have limited time to tell their stories. They just approach it differently.

[@f4rt989]

You said it yourself though, it’s the same thing. Soo why limit yourself to 10 instead of trusting your future self to know more about you than your current self does. It really sounded like he just wants to go do other things, which again, why continue to make movies if you want to create something else? So idk, to me it’s very silly and more ego driven than anything

[@rbu2136]

This is Tarantino’s fear and ego and narcissism.

[@darkness5702]

@@rbu2136I don‘t know anything about that guy. But his movies are my favorites. Why even listen to the dude who made the stuff, when his art speaks for itself.

[@markw2183]

Yeah, totally agree with this, The Wolf of Wall Street is one of my favourite Scorsese films and I really liked The Irishman too, if the Coen Bros stopped at 10 we wouldn't have got No Country For Old Men! Hopefully Tarantino has a change of heart and keeps making films anyway.🙂

[@johnjohnsonjohn]

Silence is great too

[@oldmacheath4453]

Hell, Inside Llewyn Davis is my favourite Coen Brother movie so I'm glad they didn't stop

[@A-Grat-A]

Irishman is meh movie for old people who got a short memory loss. The characters are repeating half of conversations over and over.

[@chrisjfox8715]

​@@A-Grat-Ak

[@badconnection4383]

I still think he's right. Part of why Scorsese is still making movies is because a huge chunk of them are adaptations. Quentin Tarantino draws from his own imagination and as an aspiring writer. That can be really limited.

[@faizansheikh6010]

I agree with you. If a great director ends up making a "bad" movie accidentally, I won't forgot all the good work that they did (in fact, I'd hold all of that even more dearly).

[@delix787]

This topic has been my mind forever because of Quentin Tarantino. I believe Quentin Tarantino just doesn’t want the same fate that his heroes who did not end their career well, to happen to him as well. Obviously, Quentin is very aware that Martin Scorsese is alive and well still making movies. Maybe he believes he’s just not one of those directors that can just keep on going no matter what. And because of that self conscience behavior, he doesn’t believe he’s worth much after he gets to a certain age. Not everybody wants to keep working at the same age as Martin Scorsese, but Martin Scorsese believes he was born to make movies until the day he dies. Quentin Tarantino has been very open how he doesn’t want to be known for just directing. He wants to write books and plays and other things as well. I believe he just doesn’t think he can just keep going like everyone else that’s really it. 🎥

[@johnjohnsonjohn]

A big difference between the two is so many of Scorcese's movies are adaptations, or a pairing written by good screenwriter, whereas QT is all about writing original stories (Jackie Brown excepted) which (probably) takes a good deal more out of him. Not to diminish Scorcese at all, the man's never made a bad film

[@riverman6462]

​@@johnjohnsonjohn one of the biggest reason why Nolan is sucking hard nowadays. He should've retired ages ago

[@AMZ_official]

​@@riverman6462I'm excited for Openheimer though

[@chrisjfox8715]

​@@riverman6462I'm so glad I strongly disagree with you

[@jarelllevingston7882]

@@riverman6462 Nolan was better when he worked with his brother.

[@originaozz]

I think it's an ego thing, not wanting to taint your own lifestory by letting yourself go on forever. Still, the concept of you have a specific, limited time to do this might also add to the motivation of crafting out the best work possible with what's on hands.

[@dixonhill1108]

You're underestimating how much age drags you down. Directing well made movies is physically and mentally exhausting. The older directors spend past their inability to work hard and it shows in the final process. I'd also imagine part of it is he doesn't want to commit 2-3 years to a film when he only has a few years left of good health. It's all down hill after 60, I can promise you that. My guess is he wants to write a higher volume of movies, and let the youth direct them. Maybe pump out 10 more written by him before 70.

[@jorava8768]

A point on Hitchock - even if his last few films weren't great, his best films came out 30+ years and 40+ movies after he started. Rear Window was his 44th film.

[@jorava8768]

Sidenote: Frenzy is among Hitchock's best in my book.

I think it's less about the amount of movies, and more about age. Rear Window was his 44th film, but he was 55 when he directed; similar age to Tarantino when he directed "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood". It's a sad fact of life that cognitive functions decline as we age, sometimes without us even realizing it, and I think that's what Tarantino wants to avoid.

[@thecastiel69]

We're finally going to see Jay Sherman live action adaptation

[@MenkoDany]

The mona lisa comparison doesn't quite work though, because the Mona Lisa is famously an unfinished work of art. Leonardo never intended to leave it in this state

[@clarapilier]

I was looking for this comment. The only reason that painting is famous is because Da Vinvi carried it with him at the moment of his death since it wasn't finished. The painting itself received a lot of damage due to his manhandle.

[@alanlawrence6584]

Whenever I think about this issue Tarantino has raised, I think of Manuel Olveira, whose career begins in earnest at about 50, and whose films get more interesting and more appealing as Olveira ages past 100. There are other wonderful filmmakers like Theo Angelopoulos and Raul Ruiz who simply grew their passions and innovations in cinema as they grew older.

[@debrachambers1304]

To make a movie AFTER PASSING 100 is INSANE, absolutely MAD props to Manuel Olveira.

[@alanlawrence6584]

He lived to 106, and directed 3 feature films after he turned 100, 4 short films, and two segments of larger omnibus films. All 3 of his last feature films star his grandson, who is middle-aged in those movies. There's gotta be a lot of world records there. It's something I love to think about.@@debrachambers1304

[@ObiesieMaduegbuna]

As much as I love Tarantino and don’t want him to quit. All directors should do what they want to do. It’s their prerogative

[@atomsofstardust]

Three points: 1: no director (or any person really) owes nothing to anyone, so if they don’t wanna direct anymore - it’s their choice; 2: if you wanna tell stories - you will try to tell as many of them as you can, like Scorsese says (can be different mediums though); 3: if Ridley Scott actually thinks he’s doing his best work now, he is delusional😅(just take Prometheus and Alien:Covenant alone, oof).

[@mizal7893]

Maybe he's no longer making consistency making his best work, but The Martian and The Last Duel were both fantastic and I'm glad that both of those movies exist.

[@rfedinburgh]

Not to mention Napoleon that is soon to be released with one of the best actors of our generation.

[@sipsip2367]

@@mizal7893 i agree

[@josephjoe4180]

Speak for yourself. I loved Prometheus. It was a beautiful and ambitious film that unfortunately we did not get a worthy sequel to (because of stupid detractors that only wanted a new Alien movie). The music was great, visuals stunning, and there was a sense of wonder to it that captured my imagination back when I watched it in theaters. I guarantee that in years to come it will be looked back upon as a masterpiece.

[@genarosiles2951]

You should retract your comments for the Upcoming NAPOLEON

[@FluffeyPandasWorld]

In the case of directing in my opinion as stated in the video the peak should be considered by the director himself if he doesn't think he has the ability, drive, or want to keep making films then they probably shouldn't, but I definitely don't believe the peak is determined by age.

[@chrisjfox8715]

I don't think it has to be an age thing - for instance Eyes Wide Shut is my favorite Kubrick film - but QT's right about the trend of directors tending to fizzle out. I've always felt like it's a case of, despite age breeding further experience with the craft, there does tend to be a slowly dying hunger coupled with running out of things they're aching to *say* ...as well as perhaps getting a bit too familiar with their creative habits to the point of not expanding their muscle in a way that's organic.

[@dixonhill1108]

@@chrisjfox8715 Or just the science based approach, your fluid IQ drops off a cliff. Great directors are highly intelligent people, once they hit 60 that intelligence drops off. IQ correlates to your ability to react and make fast paced decisions. When you're a director your constantly making endless micro decisions. Your work will suffer as you age. Either you need excessive time to do basic tasks, or you create bloated bland movies, that look like they were made by corporations rather than individuals.

[@STICKFilmProductions]

To be honest, whenever Tarantino brings up aging directors who aren’t as good any more, I think of Dario Argento. He hasn’t really managed to make gold or truly interesting movies since Stockholm Syndrome and his last one was pretty lackluster. I’m glad he’s still going out there to work and offering more opportunities to his production teams, but the movies are nowhere up to the same quality as his older films

[@delix787]

Fans want content just for the sake of Content. But some people want good writing content, and think about the story first before the film needs to exist. Do you have a direction? you need great writing, great characters, great dialogue, everything etc.. Look at Marvel for example, they keep going after endgame giving us content for the sake of content and everyone is complaining because there’s no direction and nobody knows what is going on anymore.

[@boko7436]

Tarantino’s view is self-fulfilling. By worrying about his legacy, he has stopped taking risks- the very thing that diminishes a director who plays it safe to maintain a career. Instead, he could just accept that there are seasons to everything. He thinks he is being smart, but he has always lacked wisdom.

[@stephennootens916]

To be fair I have find that perhaps duo to ego Tarantino is kind of getting worse with time. And they things like his love for hyper violence have become more and more childish. I did not read his novelization of Once Upon A Time On Hollywood but I did read segments in his first non fiction til critic book and I was unimpress.

[@mrstrangeworld5977]

​@@stephennootens916I wouldn't call it childish

[@stephennootens916]

@@mrstrangeworld5977 at best in my view his views are more in line with a teenager at best and at worst slightly disturbing. In his book he talks about laughing when he saw Taxi Driver and claimed the rest of the audience did as well. He went on to say that most directors lie when it comes to talking about the violence on their films and in truth from his view they all love filming violence. He said that Scorsese defiantly had hard on film the violent ending of taxi driver. This is enough proof to be to question all Tarantino's views on film.

[@jeffcunningham0389]

@@stephennootens916maybe hes just speaking the truth and saying what others are afraid to say

[@jeffcunningham0389]

Thats total BS. OUATIH was anything but “safe” and you have no idea what his next film will be either

[@4Shaman]

It’s quite funny, Tarantino loves cinema like a holistic entity. He cares about cinema as an artform even more than loves creating stories. I bet he figured that he could get to make and see more masterpieces if he ran a studio or stuck to writing, giving the director’s chair to younger artists. Imagine if we could get 1-3 movies a year produced with Tarantino’s love and dedication to the craft, but in the hands of new voices and perspectives? That could be very exciting.

[@primarybufferpanel9939]

I completely respect Tarantino on this. I'm self-protecting and neurotic so I'd rather perfect things than ebb and flow between greatness and failure. That's not going to work for everyone, but if he'd rather go out with 10 great (or at least good) films I say more power to him. It's a powerful statement and very self aware. We might miss out on some greats from him but what a wonderful oeuvre he'll leave behind.

[@dynaguy3]

I’m on Tarantino’s side. Often times, I feel artists lose their touch in their later years. Sometimes it can even ruin their legacies by retroactively ruining the earlier works of art. There are exceptions, but it’s a risk each person must decide whether to take or not

[@mohamedrawadali7938]

I think it's fine to value finitude in this case, no matter the reason. As much as I cherish the idea of dying doing what you love, I think Tarantinos position is interesting to put into perspective regarding what's happening right now with AI, holograms and post mortem exploitation of artists' work. When I imagine myself at 80 years old drawing, I imagine doing it for myself, because there's so much in art to discover and learn. I think that's why old artists tend to be self indulgent. But when it's to please an audience, as part of an industry, I find this idea more bleak. Yes, ppl should keep doing their thing until they die because they love the art and want us to see what weird thing they got into lately. They shouldn't keep doing it to feed an insatiable demand or for the hope of birthing another masterpiece. That's my contribution to this discussion but this was a really great video 😊

[@kaziahmed1424]

Well if you are Martin Scorsese then there's no problem if you want to make more movies since he hasn't lost his touch. I think it also applies for Tarantino since he is one of the best filmmakers in the world. With Tarantino it is his call to end after 10 movies which is a pity for the world but since its his decision, you'll have to accept it.

[@jorava8768]

Definitely on Scorsese's boat here. Your perspective when you're 20, 50, 80 is very different and age and life experience influences your creativity in many ways. So you can always create something new from a different perspective. Whether your work is generally loved, hated or ignored should not be a key factor as a creator.

[@dixonhill1108]

Your mind will slow down as you age. What a 20 year old can write in a month will take 12 months for an 80 year old.

[@ck1941]

Very interesting video ; 2 things: first Kaleidoscope was an Hitchcock project, it never materialized into a film, he did make Marnie after The Birds which is very good or at least as Truffaut put it « a great ill movie ». Secondly De Palma could have been mentioned as he is one of the best example to defend Tarantino’s point of view , as his latest film « Domino » is painful and heartbroken to watch considering how bad it is. Let’s not forget Tarantino was a great fan of De Palma, especially « Blow out » and talked about De Palma’s Bonfire of the Vanities. But definitely both point of views have their pros and cons.

[@riverman6462]

My fav De palma has to be Mission impossible 1. Its amazing and has styles similiar to Blowout and Scarface

[@dustingmyguitars]

I loved this video. Only contention I have is what you said about the bad movies not being remembered with the good. I don't think Coppola could separate the two. He made one of the greatest 2 films of all time with Godfather one and two, only to make Jack a couple decades later....I don't see how that much of a drop off will not be remembered.

[@stephennootens916]

Coppola did a handful of later movies such as Jack and Rainmen to pay off massive debt he had from his own company failing most of his other movies were personal art house projects. Note he is still alive and working on his dream project as we speak.

[@Cadence733]

Same could be said for actors as well. I think they put their all into it when they're trying to get established and then over time they get type cast - Robert de Niro or just phone it in - Anthony Hopkins.

[@bfunderb5899]

Hopkins gave one of the best performances of his career in The Father a few years ago

[@Cadence733]

@@bfunderb5899 that's fair enough but I imagine that that was a smaller low budget film not your MCU, Werewolf, Hitchcock sort ot thing.

[@dixonhill1108]

De Niro's issue is that he got burst out playing psychos. You can't play a woman beater/rapist etc forever. He did a hard 180, once he gave up playing bad guys. It's quite clear that he got fed up with the emotional costs of being a true artist.

[@Cadence733]

@@dixonhill1108 he's also got a growing family so he needs easy money from lots of roles that aren't too taxing 😂

[@HeadCannon19]

Obviously any individual director should make whatever decision feels best for them, but in general I would agree with Scorsese's side of the argument. I mean even from an audience perspective, I would much rather that a director makes 5 mediocre movies and 1 masterpiece, than never making any of those movies and the masterpiece never having existed. That's my personal opinion but I'm sure most people would agree that they don't care too much about the consistency of the filmography as long as it has those good movies in it. I mean almost every director has some bad movies, and that doesn't diminish their great movies in the same way that a bad section of a movie can diminish another section of that same movie because they're meant to work together in a way that doesn't apply to distinct films within a filmography.

[@curiousworld7912]

It has to depend on the director. Perhaps, Tarantino has said all he had to say, or felt he might become repetitive. Many artists do, with time, only improve in the quality of their work; some do (or, should) know when to fold.

[@gretaenglish3519]

Total luxury problem, but it's a personal choice. I'm a fan of both Tarantino and Scorsese and wouldn't mind seeing more from each. As you stated, though, most directors need to work for a living.

[@Jeredos]

I think this retiring story is a strategy by Tarantino so that the academy can finally give him the Oscar for his "last film". In addition to the fact that he is going to make a lot of money.

[@Jeredos]

@@alexjackson2778 that's why he is making this strategy. But, probably it is just false hopes from me.

[@dixonhill1108]

@@alexjackson2778 I don't know why it's a shock to anyone that he wants to write only. It's taken 35 years to make 10 films. I'm sure he could write a great film once a year maybe even 2-3. When you write creatively the hardest part is sinking all your life into 1 project. Wasting 3 years while your in your 60s for a movie that bombs is such a waste.

[@RobbyRaccoon]

Ridley Scott is fooling himself if he truly thinks he's doing his best work now.

[@jothishprabu8]

The last duel was magnificent imo

[@nathanmontgomery1516]

And he only made like Two amazing films

[@elijahalbiston]

Comparison is rough, but looking at Scorsese and Scott, I know who I'm choosing.

[@tomasmartinezmutter4025]

Look at Akira Kurosawa some of his best films were after 60: "Dersu Uzala", "Ran" or "Dreams" could never have happened if he had retired... or Stanley Kubrick´s "Eyes Wide Shut".

[@garrykanter5773]

American football coach John Madden said 10 years was the maximum for coaching in the NFL. And for him, he was right. I hope both directors live happy lives making however # of movies they care to.

[@Frexican54]

Beethoven was near the end of his life/career and had completely lost his hearing when he composed his Magnum Opus the 9th Symphony.

[@diegolikescode]

Find what you love and let it kill you (Bukowski).

[@bfunderb5899]

Scorsese is an exception to me in that he’s still making some good movies. Not this best work to be sure but not bad like Coppolla or Woody Allen’s (presumably) final films.

[@stephennootens916]

Both Coppola and Woody Allen are making movies. Francis is working on his dream project now and has been doing experimental films for the last couple years and Woody is still pumping them out.

[@MrSmith1984]

​@@stephennootens916 It's fair to say that Woody Allen's best days are behind him. With Coppolla however, at least he has the opportunity to end his career on a high.

[@stephennootens916]

@@MrSmith1984 Woody Allen has had more than one slump in his long film career I can't say he will ever make another movie that the critics love and be another hit but I can't say it he will never will either. Hell I am not sure the man will make another film but for better or ill his legacy as a filmmaker is going to stand.

[@I_Am_The_Paulrus]

We should bear in mind that Tarantino isn't going to stop being creative, just stop directing specifically He said he's going to continue to write scripts, novels and non-fiction. Maybe still produce films for other directors, who knows? He may feel he won't have the energy to turn up on set in his 60s and 70s and have the same impact he did when he was a younger man I'm disappointed to hear his next movie will be his last but I respect his decision if that's what he truly wants to do

[@WillStephensArt]

What do you think happened to JPM in 66?

[@I_Am_The_Paulrus]

@@WillStephensArt I think he had a very successful year as an artist, both commercially and creatively. The highlight being the release of the Revolver album

[@NelsonStJames]

This is a weird question to ask of an artist, unless art is looked at as a "job". Just like it's always been strange to me when an artist announces their retirement. If an artist stops making art, people should get the hint that they've stopped creating art. Whether I dislike a film, or not has nothing to do with the desire of that artist to make the art they want to make.

[@bfunderb5899]

Tarantino told Tom Segua he’s already written a limited TV series

[@rebecca_stone]

First of all, I love your video essays. But dude - I don't agree with the way you're dismissing Tarantino's choice to call it a day as "ageist", or "micromanaging his own image". Comparing him to other directors' choices is disingenous too. When you ask "who is he trying to impress / not let down?" - have you considered that maybe he doesn't want to let himself down? He's unique, not attached to fanfare, so let him be. I respect him for this, rather than milking the cow dry like the rest of Hollywood.

[@PeeGeeThirteen]

Both are right. It all depends on will, desire and fervor

[@MrFlathands]

Well done video, and I come down on the Scorsese side. One of Hitchcock's best films, IMO, is Frenzy, his second-to-last movie. Besides, he had made 10 films in just the silent era. (I do also have to point out that Kaleidoscope is not a Hitchcock film). If Hitch had stopped at even 40 films we never would have got Rear Window, Vertigo, North by Northwest, Psycho or The Birds.

[@dou7902]

I believe it's because of Sally Manke. His movies dipped in quality after her passing

[@kayjaymatt6388]

I disagree. Django Unchained came out two years after she passed, and that film is Awesome!

[@Athen098]

Nolan and Scorcesse are exceptions. Spielberg and other directors are getting affected by that effect of aging. PTA and Wes Anderson seem to be closing in on that effect with their last ones.

[@dominiqueodom3099]

I personally wish Quentin Tarantino was willing to help put his name towards helping out Samuel L Jackson's Afro Samurai Live action Film adaptation,especially considering how much Sam Jackson has helped out Tarantino's career over the years and i stand by the opinion that Travolta getting am Oscar nomination over Jackson for Pulp Fiction is bullshit.

[@horse4you]

As a lifelong movie lover I would beg Hollywood to do as many movies with Harvey Keitel as possible. One of the finest actors alive.

[@mascan7905]

Tarantino has spoken in the past about directors like Brian De Palma, who seemingly make one movie that they pour their heart and soul into, and it doesn't work, and everything they make after that is subpar, as though all their passion for movies is gone. It seems like he's trying to avoid that path for himself.

[@benmcphee4401]

I hope QT see's this video. The only thing I'd add to what you've said is that there's no other writer or director with his point of view, so it's not a gap that can be closed by someone else. I don't think he's giving himself enough credit for just how far ahead of the rest of the pack he is with his vision and film knowledge. He won't ever make bad movies. The world needs more Tarantino films, and he's got at least 20 more years to make another 5 masterpieces. He has too much to say, and he's the only person who can say it, so I hope he doesn't leave any stories on the table.

[@debeb5148]

Nah, I think he just wants to end the slide show and tuck it away in a box. He is done, he feels done, he probably had all that he needed to say even. It is what it is, when an artist is done, they're done.

[@NoahIsThaGOAT]

he will be writing books and plays so he's not done writing stories, he's just done directing

[@chrisjfox8715]

I get where Tarantino's coming from, but I feel like where he has the potential to undermine his own plan is by insisting on a particular number of films. I feel like it'd be more poductive is he'd simply get increasingly selective about what he chooses to direct next, whether that means he stopped at 8 or doesn't stop until 12. Leave them wanting more sure, but announcing the finality of it and why just calls more attention to whether the filmography lives up to the legacy you claim to be preserving. If - IF - his 10th turns out to be mediocre then all eyes are going to be how he fizzled out.

[@clarapilier]

Whatever Tarantino chooses is his decision. Ultimately, if he is an artist, a true artist, he will continue working, Daniel Day-Lewis comes out of retirement every time a good script comes around. Tarantino doesn't have to direct, per se, but he'll find a way to channel his creativity. If it turns out he is just a cinephile, I guess we won't hear from him again.

[@pedrorocha9722]

Does the world need Tenet or Prometheus? Ridley's is now doing his best work? Is he nuts? Woody's last, I don't know, 15 films, does the world need them? And no, we didn't need another (worst) West Side Story. And yes, the least we can say for Scorcese is that he tries, he puts in the effort, he always tries to make cinema, not movies. And I'm glad Coppola has the hunger again. As for Mr T.... He'll be remembered for his first 2 films. He could have stopped after Pulp Fiction, really. So what is he saying? He made great films after that? Or just great entertainment?

[@92YYZ]

I absolutely agree with tarantino about directors becoming exaggerated versions of themselves. It’s already happened with him, his films are nowhere near as good as when Sally Menke was editing his films. It’s happening to Nolan becoming self indulgent. The only one I can think of who didn’t is Kurosawa, he was on another level

[@riverman6462]

Agree with Nolan. I believe Oppenheimer will be seriously self indulgent with heavy narrative focus on his own (Nolan's) greatness. Its stylised in such a way that it feels Nolan is at an age where he thinks his name alone will sell films. And on top of that, it makes me feel like chris nolan doesnt have anything original to put out anyway, which is why he's making a literal biopic-the worst kinda films imo

[@elijahalbiston]

I think the best way to avoid becoming an "exaggerated version of yourself" is to do what Scorsese has done. He's always coming up with original projects that are so different from what he usually does. The Irishman was his last gangster film and different from the rest. Silence. Wolf of Wall Street. Gangs of New York. The Departed. He's always spicing things up even as he enters his last days.

[@GameplayandTalk]

I'd really prefer Quentin to go the Scorsese route. However, I guess he's free to do what he feels he needs to. I bet with a break, he'll eventually get the urge to make more films later on in life. Plus, imagine all the buzz about him "coming out of retirement" 15 years from now. Heh. It works out either way, right?

[@Malkovith2]

I like Tarantino's sentiment. I understand him.

[@barneymetcalfe8896]

I think people should keep their creative spirit for as long as they feel it can live. I don't think you can plan when it will die. It's all about in the moment. And if your creative spirit dies when you do, hey, there's nothing wrong with that.

[@birdmoney]

Exactly. I make music on my laptop. Some days, I feel creative, other days... nothing. The stuff that inspires me happens in my everyday life. If my career was making music, I don't think I'd be as inspired because music is my escape from reality. I believe it's the same with directors. They have a dream of getting big... and then they get there. Where do you go from there? Is it only downhill from there? What more could you achieve

[@jacksonbrumfield1061]

Family Plot was awful because it was clear that Hitchcock just couldn’t adapt with what kind of films were being made when that came out. In the decade of The Godfather, Network, and Taxi Driver, Hitchcock was making a movie straight from the 50s.

[@rxlph8569]

Quentin is just more self aware than other directors who are still in it for the wrong reasons, plus I think he’s run out of new quippy dialogue or doesn’t have enough of it to call it a film

[@berk6506]

"1 bad movie devalues 3 good ones" QT. I agree with him. He is representing the perfection.

[@slotsartstudio2785]

I think he wants to do it to focus on other type of creative endeavors (albuet similar ones) such as writing novels and TV scripts, etc.

[@channingbloom7125]

Depends on the individual

[@dirt_dert_durt]

Should you wear a blue shirt today or a red one? There is no "should". It's up to the individual

[@benjamingentile1660]

Didn’t he call his movie Death Proof a “left handed movie” in a Hollywood Reporter roundtable? He knows he doesn’t have a perfect filmography, so why is he worried about tarnishing a perfect filmography?

[@nicklaskos6779]

I think he likes to pretend it didn't happen

[@filmreviewer117]

Directors at the end are people and some of them may feel like after a certain their done and want to do something else. While others like Ridley and Scorsese want to spend their time making nothing but films as they have nothing to do and love their craft. If Tarantino does only make one film I can't blame him in the end its his life and only he can decide how to live it.

[@mellowingman]

wonderful video

[@philippzakrzewski8180]

I might be in the minority here, but I would really appreciate to see the work of a 60- or 70-something newcomer on the big screen. Somehow at that age we're always talking about veterans like Scorsese or Ridley Scott. And as much as I admire their body of work, diminishing returns seem inevitable - not so much because of their age, but because they got stuck in their own bubble - essentially the cottage industry they've created around themselves. I'm in no way saying that they should stop making films. Ridley is bang on the money when he says that his skill level far surpasses any newbie filmmaker and I do watch almost every film he directs. But these guys do lack a certain freshness. In the agist media business, it would be great to hear a couple of older "new voices" as well - but I guess we're lightyears away from that.

[@lesterverde]

As a huge fan of Family Plot, it always saddens me when it's used as an example of a director going out on a sour note rather than an example of a director rallying one last time. And in Hitchcock's case, there are less-than-great films scattered throughout his filmography (and reasonable movie fans can disagree about which those are anyway) so it's not like had he retired after, say, Psycho or The Birds, he would have a spotless record of nothing but classics.

[@20marvelman]

It just seems contrived, to have a self limit. If you love movies and the work, you’ll keep doing it

[@pslanez]

The types of movie Tarantino makes have a limit because they tend to be fun mash-ups of other genre movies and have a distinctive Tarantino style. I agree if he makes another 10 they won't have the same originality and will quickly go down hill. Scorsese on the other hand makes social commentary and character study movies, of which there is an unlimited potential of stories and movies to be made.

[@carlossouza5151]

I love your channel… I’m following for some years. This is my first comment. It’s because of Mona Lisa. Using it to make a point about when someone should end a work for art is ironic: Da Vinci NEVER finished Mona Lisa :) He actually was famous for never finishing his jobs

[@PanteraRossa]

I think it clearly delineates two distinct frames of mind when creating anything: do you do it in order to get approval and validation from others, or do you do it for the inherent value and enjoyment YOU get out of it? That's the question everyone in a highly competitive, low success rate industry must ask themselves or they'll never survive.

[@maxotto9877]

if we are talking about modern directors who sell on name alone: mother fucking denis villeneuve

[@sc-ju9nc]

No

[@artirony410]

3:52 I'd disagree on Hitchcock. Most of his late work is pretty bad but I think Frenzy really stands out and its a top 10 film from him IMO

[@imfa-cinema257]

Filmmakers always fall into their worst sensibilities as they reach older age. Just like Scientists & Researchers, there is an age when you are able to make your best works.

[@jacktorrance3522]

Honestly, Tarantino is a great director but he's been so up his own arse for years now about this whole "doing 10 movies and I'm done" thing that it's tiresome. I think that there is no limit to how many movies a director can make or how old they should be when they call it quits as some can barely manage one or two great films while others manage more than 10 easily. I'm clearly in the minority when it comes to worshipping Tarantino but I really feel like each movie he does is not as good as the one that came before so at this point I just want to say "Get on with it and retire then already!"

[@devil_pls]

I completely with your take on his plan. I also think that rather than looking at it from a quality of over quantity point of view he could try to see it the way you described it which is trying to just see how it turns along the way instead of limiting yourself. Who knows maybe if he does decide way later in his life when he's like 74 he all of sudden does want to make a 11th movie and that then becomes his most amazing and celebrated one. You know know how these things will turn out beforehand. But I also do respect his opinion that he wants to play it safe. Funny thing about that is that I never would have guessed that Tarantino is the one who would play it safe. Out of all directors out there lol

[@sebbvell3426]

A great artist never stops.

[@daredevil6145]

He knows when to stop

[@hansolowe19]

They are artists. It is not up to us to decide when they stop creating. I say this as someone who had close contact with many artists (sculptors) young and old and dead before their time - for a decade. We can have opinions, to be sure. I understand why some creatives hang it up before they go, and retire.

[@tomghiley]

I like Tarantino a lot, and I mostly agree with his theory in that filmmakers get worse, but where he is wrong, is he is become what he seeks not to be. Once upon a time in Hollywood, I’ve watched it probably 50-60 times, very enjoyable, very easy watching movie, but it’s not great, it’s good, but it’s not great, I’ve watched it more times than Scorsese’s the Irishman, but the Irishman is hands down a way better film, I’ve probably only watched it 20-30 times, but there’s no comparison between the 2. You’ve got a director in Scorsese who shoots for the moon every time, and never makes a bad movie, and Tarantino, who stopped shooting for the moon after Death Proof, because it wasn’t as good as all of his previous ones, but in all honesty, I admired the effort of Death Proof, more than anything he’s done since

[@elemaire86]

I think Tarantino's "reason" is a bit of good tag line that partially encompasses his reason but also is self-contained enough to not go into the messy debate of his actual reason. I think his reason literally comes down to the fact that he doesn't like where cinema is heading but at the same time, he recognizes that the medium and the audience's appetite is constantly changing so he's no more "right" about the current climate then the legends that came before him that may have scoffed at his style when he and Paul Thomas Anderson were starting. I think it's knowing he doesn't like the change but at the same time knowing he has no right to shut it down that frustrates him. He's a very vocal person, particularly when it comes to film and he's unapologetic with his opinions. Knowing he would struggle to remain silent while the industry changes doesn't work for him. Giving in (which isn't always a bad thing) is something he feels that would make him a hypocrite as opposed to seeing it as growth also doesn't work. And allowing him to continue to be as vocal as he would like regarding the changing industry while public interest eventually dwindles would probably tarnish his image and reputation further than it would have otherwise. "You either die the hero or live long enough to become the villain". I think it's that fear that has motivated his decision making and I think he knows himself well enough to know that either of the 3 options I laid out wouldn't favor him in the long run even when stacked against the joy of him continuing to do what he loves. If anything, those frustrations have probably also contributed to a growing discontent doing what he once loved. His love has transitioned into writing which is really where he shines. He's also looking into making TV which is his way of conceding without conceding. He gets to embrace streaming and TV without conflating it to the benefits doing the same with filmmaking. That also plays into other parts of his influences as he's just as much a TV lover of the 70s as he is a film lover. So, his answer just puts a nice neat bow on what I believe are his real reasons. He knows he won't survive this new era unscathed if he holds steady and remain vocal regarding his discontent at the changes. He knows he wouldn't be able to stomach what would be perceive to be hypocritic behavior and knows he would be miserable continuing to work in opposition to the changes and remaining silent. It's just not him and he DOES like to control the narrative. With that being said, I thoroughly enjoyed your video and analysis.

[@birdmoney]

I enjoyed YOUR analysis. Really delves into the psychology of the man. It's not just one reason. Tarantino wants to: - Protect his ego - Protect the audience from terrible films - Do something that not many directors do We all have a time limit. We have a certain amount of time to do the things we love. I think he feels more in control of his life by setting that time limit himself. He doesn't know when he's gonna die, so he just wants to be a movie director until he's 60. What better way to take control of your life? Everything must come to an end. We can choose to end things ourselves, or we can wait in complete uncertainty...

[@qwaeofficial]

What an excellent and thorough commentary!

[@yorkshirej2219]

Khruangbin playing in the intro. Liked

[@eagleswings5693]

Spot on

[@Rockstar-bq5fm]

Well all I can say is the disrespect once great directors like Martin Scorsese, Ridley Scott and Steven Speilberg are now receiving by current critics and crowds I can understand his feelings. Drop you’re 10 and leave then wanting, you have more respect, cred and money than you ever need

[@faizansheikh6010]

The match cut at 9:20 is pure genius (I hope it was accidental because that makes it even better 😂)

[@darknessincarnate138]

If they want to, they can End of discussion

[@shannoncurry2037]

I don't buy Martin Scorsese's "I'm just understanding what filmmaking can do" approach when he's pretty much made the same film over and over again!!!!!! 😂

[@MrSmith1984]

Looking at recent history, I believe only Sergio Leone & Stanley Kubrick ended their film careers on a high. Then again, this was largely due to the premature deaths of both individuals ahd the fact they spent a lot time making each film.

[@mikenike4266]

I don’t see this as the biggest problem If Tarantino continues to write, make plays, or even television shows

[@maidenaholic]

Some should retire.. like ridley Scott.. he made a complete balls of the alien franchise.

[@bdotthedon]

I’m with Marty 100%

[@paulallenk4830]

Sidney Lumet was 83 in 2007 when he made "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead". A great film that if you didn't know you'd think was made by a 25 year old auteur. He died a few years later. Work until you wanna stop. Tarantino may want to get a job at Nordstroms in the women's shoe department in which case I understand his decision to leave filmmaking.

[@rohanajith8668]

A correction at 4:02 , Kaleidoscope was a film that Hitchcock never got to make

[@JustanObservation]

www.imdb.com/title/tt6914094/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk

[@jonm.5023]

I think Tarantino is doing what Soderbergh did. Steven Soderbergh was supposed to retire from film (working only in television). But he really meant he was taking a break from film. Tarantino has said he'd be interested in making a miniseries. He'll probably work a decade or so in television before making his "comeback" film. I imagine it'll be treated like "a big event."

[@dylan9040]

Ridley doing the best work hes done in his life? Does he not realize his only masterpieces are Blade Runner and Alien?

[@justinelliott5799]

On a podcast with Tom Segura Quentin talked about having already partially written season one of a TV series so maybe moving to another medium might be more intriguing to him. I know I would definitely be down to watch a QT series!! WIN WIN 👍

[@MAFion]

No director is more full of himself than QT. It's narcissistic and vain to focus on his legacy first than to devote himself to the artistic quest like Kurosawa or Bergman or Lumet or Nichols, etc. And it really might be that he didn't have much to say in the first place.

[@mikeisthelunawolf]

I can understand Tarantino and I actually agree with him! His mojo was called Sally Menke and since her departure, his movies are gradually getting more and more self indulgent and weaker. Django had 30 minutes more than it needed, Hateful exactly the same and he just derrailed in Once Upon a Time.... That one is half a Tarantino movie with a fictional documentary that nobody needed and 3 hours of movie that just feel like a parody of Inglourious Basterds. It's like Wes Anderson. French Dispatch already looked like a parody of Grand Budapest, Isle of Dogs a parody of Fantastic Mr. Fox... This new one of the aliens looks like a desert parody of Life Aquatic. I think this can easily happen to such directors with a very strong aesthetic. And the other ones you talk about in this video are directors that work with and around the story and have different aesthetics.

[@M3plusYOU]

Hal > Trumbo

[@JustanObservation]

If only we got to see Hal’s masterpiece

[@krombopulos_michael]

I get the idea of not wanting to put out any real clunkers but tbh, I think with a lot of directors mentioned that was due to them sort of just churning out films at a high rate into their later years. Considering how much time and thought Tarantino puts into each film he makes and is clearly not under pressure to make them faster, I don't think he's really at risk of just becoming a hack or losing relevance.

[@dixonhill1108]

Don't underestimate the physical and mental demands of film making. Guys are under enormous mental pressure, and they don't get much opportunity to sleep when doing a major production. Do you really want to waste the few healthy years you have left, just to have a box office bomb?

[@bradhorowitz2765]

Depends. Who is the filmmaker? Is the ego pushing the writer to keep making more? Regrets? Does the age prevent a writer from changing? Does he feel content? Sometimes the filmmaker, thanks to limited skill set, should retire. In the case of George Lucas, he really should not have made more films. This isnt to say he shouldn’t be allowed to, but his newer films have forever hurt his reputation and shows how a guy who took all the credit for a franchise and was already a mediocre director combined with no directing since Star Wars, really needed help. Francis ford Coppola reached his end when Coppola for various reasons made more unsatisfactory films. He retired, fwd up with Hollywood, and preventing more bad/mediocre films being created by him. He now does Indie films which is what he WANTED to do for years-no fanfare, no media publicity. So good for him, and I heard he is taking his time making his next project. I hope it gets released. On the other hand, refusing to quit can remind people what good/interesting cinema is. Martin scorcese got flake for critiquing superhero movies and he is technically right. There is no risk, no real big difference between the various superheroes, the same effects, the same tropes. It’s honestly not that different from the dystopian sci-fi, western movies that dominated cinema for years before fizzling out. He decided that, films like the Irishman NEEDED to be made not only because he wanted to make it but because he wanted to show what a film can be. Let’s be honest, in a Hollywood system where something like once upon a time in America really can’t be made, we have a problem.