In his much-talked about interview with Lane Brown over at Vulture, Quentin Tarantino mentioned (among many other things) liking, but not loving, David Robert Mitchell’s sleeper indie horror flick It Follows. In case you’re unaware of where we stand on the topic, we’re fans… big fans. And we don’t take too kindly to this kind of sass talking.
Tarantino firstly lays out several of his complaints, stating:
[Mitchell]could have kept his mythology straight. He broke his mythology left, right, and center. We see how the bad guys are: They’re never casual. They’re never just hanging around. They’ve always got that one look, and they always just progressively move toward you. Yet in the movie theater, the guy thinks he sees the woman in the yellow dress, and the girl goes, “What woman?” Then he realizes that it’s the follower. So he doesn’t realize it’s the follower upon just looking at her? She’s just standing in the doorway of the theater, smiling at him, and he doesn’t immediately notice her? You would think that he, of anybody, would know how to spot those things as soon as possible. We spotted them among the extras.
This is a semi-fair point. But who’s to say if you’d be able to spot these things on sight. It isn’t as if he was unaware of the thing’s presence, it just took him a few moments to realize it. Or maybe Tarantino’s right. Let’s move on.
Another issue Tarantino brings up is the problem of how “It” evolves into a different type of beast as the movie progresses:
The movie keeps on doing things like that, not holding on to the rules that it sets up. Like, okay, you can shoot the bad guys in the head, but that just works for ten seconds? Well, that doesn’t make any fucking sense. What’s up with that? And then, all of a sudden, the things are aggressive and they’re picking up appliances and throwing them at people? Now they’re strategizing? That’s never been part of it before. I don’t buy that the thing is getting clever when they lower him into the pool. They’re not clever.
Okay, well who’s to say that these things can’t strategize? Seriously, it’s never really put in a position where it would have to do so until the pool scene.
Lastly, Tarantino doesn’t understand why Jay wouldn’t sleep with Paul, explaining:
Also, there’s the gorgeously handsome geeky boy — and everyone’s supposed to be ignoring that he’s gorgeous, because that’s what you do in movies — that kid obviously has no problem having sex with her and putting the thing on his trail. He’s completely down with that idea. So wouldn’t it have been a good idea for her to fuck that guy before she went into the pool, so then at least two people could see the thing? It’s not like she’d have been tricking him into it. It’s what I would’ve done.
Well, this seems to assume that Jay doesn’t actually care for Paul. When she decided to sleep with Greg earlier in the film instead of him, Paul should have taken that as a compliment. After all, if you’re going to pass on a deadly entity to another person, you probably want to give it to the person you care least about. She doesn’t ultimately sleep with Paul, but that’s just a testament to her being beaten down by reality.
Quentin, you’re the man and you’ve made an endless amount of cinematic masterpieces, but you shut your mouth when it comes to this movie. Ya hear?! Or not, do whatever you want to do. It’s a free country.
Do you agree with Tarantino’s critiques? Let us know in the comment section below.