Quentin Tarantino And Roger Ebert's Feud, Explained

• Movies

Quentin Tarantino shouldn't have any kind of beef with the esteemed late film critic Roger Ebert. After all, Ebert was a giant fan of Tarantino's work, frequently giving his movies great reviews. Seriously, "Pulp Fiction," "Jackie Brown," both "Kill Bill" films, "Inglourious Basterds," and "Django Unchained" all received the highest possible praise from Ebert, who appreciated Tarantino's talents for refashioning grindhouse cinematic language and 1970s pastiche into high art. Tarantino wrote dialogue like no other filmmaker, as evidenced by all the Tarantino wannabes that sprung up in the wake of his popularity. Ebert noticed and loved it. 

The only Tarantino-directed films that Ebert wasn't fond of were "Death Proof" (itself presented as the second half of a giant two-in-one movie titled "Grindhouse") and, weirdly, his debut feature "Reservoir Dogs." Ebert gave two-and-a-half stars to each of them, calling "Grindhouse" a bizarro recreation for an audience that no longer existed ("Grindhouse" was a box office flop, incidentally) and writing that "Reservoir Dogs" had story problems. "The movie feels like it's going to be terrific," Ebert argued, "but Tarantino's script doesn't have much curiosity about these guys." 

Ebert may have felt that Tarantino was a great director, but he also (and many might agree) felt that he wasn't a very good actor. The filmmaker has appeared in many movies and usually plays characters that talk and behave exactly like Quentin Tarantino does in interviews. Ebert was especially harsh in his 1995 review of the film "Destiny Turns on the Radio," in which Tarantino starred, and dismissed his performance in the 1996 movie "Somebody to Love" as well.

Tarantino eventually clapped back in a 2003 Playboy Magazine interview, saying he resented that Ebert told him to basically stay in his lane. Directors sometimes make great actors and vice versa. Why shouldn't Tarantino act?

Roger Ebert criticized Tarantino's acting abilities

Roger Ebert was very specific about Quentin Tarantino's acting talents in his "Destiny Turns on the Radio" review. In the film, Tarantino plays a bizarro deity of some kind unleashed from a swimming pool. He's a supporting player in a story involving the fates of characters played by Nancy Travis, Dylan McDermott, and James LeGros, among others. (It's not very good.)

Ebert swiftly laid into Tarantino, writing:

"The first of many disappointments comes early in 'Destiny Turns On the Radio,' when Quentin Tarantino appears on the screen. [...] The disappointment is that Tarantino is not playing 'himself.' [...] Instead of waving his arms and talking brilliantly a mile a minute, Tarantino mumbles an approximation of a Southwestern accent and puts his charisma on hold. And I'm thinking: In that case, why be in the movie? Tarantino isn't an actor. He's a director, a good one."

Ebert added that Tarantino should just stay away from acting unless he's doing another filmmaker a favor or riffing on his public persona (see: his appearance in "The Muppets' Wizard of Oz"). Ebert continued, writing "If he wants to do cameos in the movies of friends, fine; but as an actor playing anyone other than himself he has a limited future. As the Flavor of the Year he must get a lot of job offers [...] but he should be taking care of business." As for "Somebody to Love," Ebert wrote that, for Tarantino, it was "another stop in his inexhaustible world tour of other directors' movies."

In other words, Ebert had indeed told Tarantino to "stay in his lane." And this was 16 years before Tarantino unleashed that awful Aussie accent for his "Django Unchained" cameo. Tarantino seemingly never forgot this, and he addressed it years later.

Tarantino said he confronted Ebert about his acting

Quentin Tarantino's 2003 interview with Playboy Magazine has been handily transcribed by the Scraps From the Loft website. Therein, he fancied himself becoming a great character actor, provided he had more time and opportunities to develop his skills. He noted, though, that opportunities to act were slim because, well, no one wanted it. At first, he merely alluded to what Roger Ebert wrote: 

"[People] didn't realize how serious I was about [acting], and film critics didn't want it. One critic told me exactly as much. I was this great white hope, a young auteur, and they didn't want me to divide my focus. They wanted me sitting in a room, coming up with the next thing they can watch. 'Why aren't you saving cinema from itself?'" 

And who was that "one critic?" Probably Ebert, given what he wrote about "Destiny Turns on the Radio." Tarantino even recalled a brief mention that Ebert had made of "Somebody to Love." The filmmaker only has a brief scene in that movie as a bartender. He kind of plays himself, a nothing character. Commenting on Ebert's criticism of his work in that film, Tarantino explained:

"I actually confronted Roger Ebert after he named this movie I did years ago, 'Somebody to Love,' as some kind of booby prize on his show. [...] I'm in it for two seconds. Buscemi directs 'Trees Lounge' and gets the door prize for directing and stretching his talents. The booby prize went to me for daring to act in a movie. Why is it okay for him to stretch his talent and not me?" 

Maybe there would be no issue if Tarantino acted as well as Steve Buscemi directed.