The difference between someone like Herzog and Tarantino is that Herzog himself is a fascinating chracter. In something like grizzly Man, Herzog keeps objectivity as a director, but as a narrator and a character, he becomes one of the many people who comment on Treadwell as a person.
Tarantino, on the other hand, is a much more interesting filmmaker then character. I like the world of film he conveys, and the way he portrays events, what he puts on screen and how, etc. This is what interests me personally, and what gets us having such an interesting discussion. But I don't listen to much of the interviews Tarantino has because his chracter doesn't interest me as much. He's not as compelling a person as say someone like Herzog.
I agree QT is a boring character (although I love hearing his talk about films). I have made this point before but whenever he steps on screen his films fall from genius to terrible with an atomic thud!
I like Jimmy in Pulp.
Sorry Clovis, but you misinterpreted my comment completely. When I said I didn't like Tarantino character, I didn't mean when he acted in his films. I mean the persona he has. Tarantino's persona is one who enjoys putting violence up close and personal, who adores film, who like smart dialouge. And I think all those things help his film, but I can see people not enjoying his persona and so not enjoying some of his earlier films, especially Kill Bill vol. 1(noting I havent seen vol 2 and death proof). However, something like Reservoir Dogs has less of his chracter and IB has the least so far. It's still there, and I'm glad it is, but it doesn't take over the film.
And I really like Kill bill vol. 1, but I think it gets hindered by Tarantino's chracter being too imposed, although thats not too much of a criticism. And Pulp Fiction doesnt have it as much in full force, but its there and not in a hindering way. My problems with PF are completely different to that (although its a film I still really like.)