Communication Professor Reacts to Quentin Tarantino's Viral Interview 

Top 5 Communication Skills for Professionals: www.alexanderlyon.com/free-resources

Honestly, seeing Tarantino shut down interviewers like this when they ask questions that cross a line for him gave me the ability to give myself more permission to keep up boundaries. He's not perfect or professional, sure, but I needed that brutality to imagine myself pushing back at all.

Tarantino knows his boundaries and stands firm. He refuses to take the speaker's bait and calls him out.

This was a great example of owning the narrative. Nice work pulling this into a work setting. Great nuggets of insight.

I loved the RADICAL HONESTY of the meta -communication angle! I love Tarantino's movies and his style of interviewing.

How you brought it all together at the end and reminded the "commoners" to take the lesson from Tarantino without the exact execution...was very important and well-articulated.

Really love your videos! Just found you on RU-vid recently and have enjoyed your channel so much! Learning a lot of applicable improvements for day-to-day and professionally. Thanks for what you’re doing! God bless you too!

It's uncanny how every time I watch one of your vids it immediately helps me deal with some tricky conversation. Thanks Coach! Great interview breakdown.

I love how Tarantino doesn't take any bullshit. He makes his art, like it or not, & doesn't apologize for it.

Really love your analysis of these pieces! Having a professional like yourself break down intense conversations is very illuminating as a casual viewer can get caught up in the emotion of it all

I love this idea of examining real life taped videos that show us real moments of conflict between two (in a tense interaction). And then learning what went wrong. I hope There’s a few more like those around. If so, Please do them! 🙏

This is great, when I was a teen I would sit and listen to talk interviews, to learn how to listen and receive communication, and doing so helped with good communication 🙏🏻

Calling out the situation (Meta communication) really changed the dynamic and was the exclamation point of the sentence.

Awesome video - loved how you broke down the interview which I loved before watching this video.

I absolutely love your style!!! Truthful/honest, humble, insightful, and wise.... you could be a fantastic TV arbitrator! Society as a whole, can learn so much from you.

Very interesting analysis. From my perspective, this interviewer should have built his line of questioning featuring his agenda into questions related to the movie, dealing with violence-related issues through the movie characters' actions and motivations and role model aspects. Instead, he went about it putting Tarantino front and center instead of using his movie as a go-between. (by the way, Tarantino loves being front and center for as long as he's praised for his talent and cinema knowledge - which by the way, he can be praised about since he's quite a unique asset in today's movie industry!) Anyway, thanks for the video. Interesting tips for sure!

I hate subversive manipulative people like this interviewer so much. Its really hard to deal with people like this, because you think you're just having a conversation with another fellow human being when in reality they are secretly trying to exert control over you and make you look bad in a super creepy way. Its extremely dishonorable.

This is an amazing channel, so happy your videos landed in my feed :)

What is even the point of this example? The way I see it the power relationship between Gurumurthy and Tarantino is completely asymmetrical, and Gurumurthy has no choice but to accept Tarantino's framing of the conversation. He doesn't have the power to walk out of the interview and leave, whereas Tarantino does. ... And now that I have seen the complete video, you admit as much yourself. Ultimately we just end up experiencing this vicariously through Tarantino and learning little from the experience of Gurumurthy.

Fascinating! Thank you for sharing!

Brilliant. I like Tarantino more now than when he was younger. His instincts are excellent, knowing he doesn’t need to explain or justify himself. His last film once upon a time in Hollywood, is mature genius.

Fantastic video! Educational and helpful.

This is a really good video to watch and learn about different styles of communication and how to be assertive. I really appreciate this!

It's so arrogant of US movie stars who think that Hollywood is so important, that an interview is purely supposed to be a commercial for their benefit only. Even when interviewed by a news ancor journalist, on a news show, on a state owned public broadcasting channel.

Your videos are incredible. Thank you

I really enjoy watching your level of professional analysis and comments in this the first youtube video I´ve seen by you.I´ll watch more for sure. As a senior consultant psychiatrist (Ret:) I would like to recommend your viewers additional reading of communication theory by Paul Watzlawick, (whom I´m sure are well known by you) . "Light reading" - "The Situation Is Hopeless, But Not Serious: The Pursuit of Unhappiness, 1983". Mid level - "Change: Principles of Problem Formation and Problem Resolution (with John Weakland and Richard Fisch), 1974". Heavy reading - "Pragmatics of Human Communication, 1967". P.S. I´m also a fan of Tarantino and his movies, have watched them all and are not a bit violent myself. D.S.

Great review - really enjoyed the real world application at the end ❤

@12:17 That's an apt description if I've ever heard one. Thanks for the chuckle.

Good videos! Thank you!

Very interesting video. Also about the Meta communication. Thanks for sharing. About the interview: at least Quentin and Guru-Murthy wrapped it up at the end on a polite note.

What most impressed me, for both Tarantino and Guru-Murthy, is their ability to not let their emotions- anger- take over. It is so challenging to allow emotions to happen, and to have them enhance your message and be evident. In my experience emotions cause everything tp deteriorate. But not for these guys!

I keep correcting people assertively when they make false claims about me or other things and most of them get really angry really quickly. They get aggressive and although i pretend to keep my cool, as a single woman i keep getting more and more PTSD, and feel less and less safe to speak up in any situation :(

As a corporate comms professional my two cents' worth: Murthy lacks the skill to ask a more nuanced question that could prompt an intelligent conversation about violence in film. Eg "There are moments of cathartic violence in the film. As a director, what skills are needed to make scenes like this so effective?" Secondly, Tarantino is right re boundaries and rejecting the framing but comes off looking like as much of a jerk as the interviewer. It's not necessary to get this combative to maintain a boundary. Jordan Peterson demonstrates this beautifully in his viral interview with Cathy Newman.

To be honest, I like the questions (not the attitudes or the framed implications). One might also say that Quentin did not have a good answer at that moment, and chosen the "lame" approach of shutting down whatever he didn't want (for whatever reason) to talk about at that moment. But nothing wrong with the questions, I would also like to know why tarantino seems so attracted to violence (cathartic or not).

I love the way Tarantino handled this. This interviewer keeps coming up against the same problem with people he interviews. He's a bully and very rude and people have actually walked out on him.

A big takeaway from this that people should be aware of: as soon as more than two people are in on or are privy to a conversation, the conversation no longer is about two people having an earnest discussion, it becomes a showboating event

It didn’t make the rounds at the time like this interview did, but if I’m remembering right, like a week before this Tarantino had a very similar interview to this on the NPR show Fresh Air with Terry Gross. Remember hearing that one while going to pick up some pizza. I’d assume Krishnan Guru-Murthy and his people were well aware of that NPR interview going into this. There may have been one other interview between the Gross and Guru-Murthy interviews (or even before the Gross one) that didn’t get as heated as those two.

I don’t know that ‘not biting’ doesn’t actually make him look just as suspicious as ignoring the question.

We don't have to answer questions just because someone asks them. That's the point. Tarantino said he's answered the question many times before and they can be googled.

-It's trashed by more people -It's not, that's a lie -No-no-no, I'm not saying that's it's trashed by more people, I'm just asking... He has a very short memory span...

Such a good interview

Thank you for this content! I learn so much every time 😁

Thanks for being my newest find!

Omg that was so funny. Just seen you analyse it and finding it funny really cracked me up 🤣🤣🤣

I love your channel❤❤❤❤❤

Agreed that Gurumurthy may have been a little too intrusive but Tarantino was downright rude and seemed afraid of delving into uncomfortable areas which he showed by aggressive behavior. That's my take on the scene...I am not buying that he was firm on boundaries. No

OUTSTANDING ANALYSIS BY ALEXANDER LYON. I hope the journalist learns a lesson or two from this interview and by listening to your analysis . I have seen more than one instance in other interviews by the same journalist - a desire to go for controversy or Tabloid journalism to agitate the star being interviewed. This approach will keep back firing on the journalist for sure.

Really insightful analysis. Many thanks Alex for the usual great delivery!

youre helping very much about how to claim my boundaries, i was a person who was very permisive , now i can say "no" for some people who wants to step me on, thanks very much.

Great illustration on framing and.boundaries

Learned a lot from this, since so much discourse is basically people trying to dictate the terms with premises that aren't necessarily true.

Good on Taratino! He is obviously skilled at dealing with interviewing & takes charge of the situation! Refuses to be putty in the interviewer's hands!

The only thing I don't like about Tarantino, his name is on that flight log.

I'm failing to see where the interviewer did anything wrong - the discussion on violence in film is a common one that's been going on a long time and indeed, Tarantino's films have a lot of it (some would say a gratuitious amount). Django is by it's nature a controversial movie, and by dictating the terms of questioning to be less oppositional just seems like he wanted a "puff-piece." Not saying being questioned criticially is fun, but it should be expected. Of course he is in his rights to walk away from any interview if he so chooses, but it just seems self- serving. He wants to direct the film, and direct the response to the film in the eyes and minds of others, instead of submitting it for critique and response.

Be firm, stand for your beliefs and use your middle finger whenever needed

I enjoy your videos and I always find your observations to be thorough and on point, not because I already knew, but because what you say rings true. However, my concern is that it may not be practical to try to implement this knowledge in real life confrontations. We are all creatures of habit and certain tactics may not jibe naturally with our unique personalities without feeling forced or contrived. I liked that you addressed that to some degree in saying that Quinton’s tactics are specific to him and that you don’t recommend attempting to adopt them. Even though my gut is telling me that this is fascinating and valuable info, I’m discerning that it might be best to just internalize it, and if it naturally integrates and influences my communication skills then great! But it’s probably best that I don’t make a conscious effort to employ them in an actual situation. If you can expound upon this or have any advice, I would appreciate it. Thank you.

I try to use meta communication when me and my wife get in fights. Didn’t know that’s what it was called until this video. I was just trying to expose intentions on both sides and fight about the actual problem instead of whatever tangent we get on

I wonder if Tarantino really has the higher status / upper hand in this discussion, because that frame the Interviewer is trying to put on the conversation seems to represent quite well the view of the political mainstream. And the political mainstream is extremely powerful these days. In terms of invested money, media coverage, social media spin, political activism, academic discourse and political decision making...

Love this guy. Great replies. People need to take lessons!!!! Thank you. The Interviewer reminds me of a Psychiatrist I came across. I shut him down. Amen

Can you share your top 5 -10 books on communication? I'd love to dive deeper for personal study.

Guru-M has a history with many actors, directors, etc of asking poking and prodding to "people want to know" and asking questions that continually aggravate his interviewees. Im surprised he is still employed. Robert Downey Jr walked out of one his attacks lol. Great vid-

Conversation, like any other interaction, requires consent on the part of both parties and can be stopped by either party at any time. To not respect someone else's boundaries by forcing an unwanted interaction is an act of violence. So while Tarantino might enjoy portraying violence, Guru-Murthy actually acts on it. One of these two men is acting violently. It's not Tarantino. He's blowing his conversational rape whistle.

I never noticed it before, but look at the slight twitch just above the right side (our left) of Tarantino's upper lip the moment after he says it's not trashed by more people. It's quick and subtle, almost imperceptible. It think he held back a sneer.

I think Tarantino was more patient than i would have been. I probably would have said "let's go on now to the next question if you have one, otherwise thank you for having me today".

Very interesting video.

I remember that "interview"...the dude just kept pushing and pushing, it was mot the first time he did it with someone.

He's exactly right: those who actually watch his films know where he's coming from. Artists say everything they need to in their work. Also, smooth-brained journos have always focused on his films' stylized violence and deliberately ignored the fact that most of them deal with redemption.

Anyone can get away with an "animated" style, I do it all the time. There's nothing wrong with being blunt, honest, and yourself. If others don't like it, they can kick rocks. Yes you may have to go back to work tomorrow and that might be uneasy... for others at work since they were the ones to cross boundaries.

While I agree with almost everyone who has an opinion on this (the interview was pushing his boundaries, and annoying) it’s clear that Tarantino wasn’t perfect either. I agree with the last part of this reaction video, that we can’t get away with that kind of animated/aggressive framing like Tarantino did. Instead of “politely reframing” the conversation, I think Quentin was quite triggered by the questions and this was his strategy to avoid dealing with the critiques of the violence in his movies. I don’t love how violent they are sometimes, but the writing and screenplay is always simply incredible. I would’ve liked to hear his answer to those questions and instead I got a dramatic, rude dismissal that did very little to save face or even professionalism. It kind of felt like a tense scene in one of his movies.

I think what you missed is the effectivness of stalling as a tactic while you formulate a more well thought out argument. Quentin didn't lead with what I think was ultimately the nail in the coffin of the interviewer's questioning - that he had already explained his position ad naseaum and wasn't going to do it again just for his entertainment. He lead with basically just saying he didn't want to talk about it, and then after a couple more light back and forths explained himself. When he was first asked the question, he knew he wasn't going to answer it, but didn't yet have his crisp articulation of why not nailed down in his head so stalled a bit before delivering it. I'm not in his head so can't prove that, but seems pretty obvious to me that if he would have just lead with "I've already explained myself on this topic, there's nothing else to talk about" instead of that being his secondary point after the interviewer kept pressing. Probably could have shut it down even faster

I love Tarantino but I don't see Tarantino as the winner. Guru Murthy wins it for me by staying calm. It's an interesting question about why there is no link between screen violence an actual violence . Tarantino shuts him up by being unreasonable . I don't think Guru Murthy pushed it too far . The Director doesn't get to talk only about what he wants to. He might as well just do a commercial to camera taking no questions if that was the case.

I've seen this interview in full and found it so amusing. Quentin wins, hands down. He's a tougher cookie than the interviewer and I'm sure he's seen it all in terms of challenging people coming at him. He now lives with his Israeli wife in Israel. I wonder if that was to get away from paparazzi, the public that follow him around and film him while he's going about his day (who he equally gets agitated with and challenges, just like this), idiotic interviewers, etc.

I’d love to see your reaction to some other Krishnan Guru-Murthy interviews! Specifically Robert Downey Jr. and Richard Ayoade!

I didn’t realize that there were professors of conversation. While I’m happy to not have a conversation expert putting me in my place, perhaps one could listen to my husband and I bicker about whatever it is, and then our follow-up debate over what was actually said, and give a fair analysis. I can only imagine that I would leave said analysis with a big piece of humble pie

The interviewer is pushy, he asks hypothetical questions and expects an answer Tarantino can't realistically answer. How does he know what other people think about violence in movies.

Tarantino is genius in selling his movie, and not being kowtowed by the interviewer.

Most communications, especially the ones in a professional field are stage shows and we are called to play our role. We have to follow certain social conventions and it gets to a point where we know its all BS and the other part of the conversation knows its BS but we keep this facade up in order to be able to have a working relationship (or even allowed to have a working relationship). What Tarantino did was literally breaking the forth wall, or if you like breaking the spell that binds us into this play along behavior. He dropped every pretense and called the situation as it really is, not allowing the interviewer any space to maneuver and save face in the context of the aforementioned social convention. We have to note that the interviewer went there expecting that Tarantino would HAVE TO follow the accepted social conventions, and he abused that by inserting insulting insinuations under the pretenses of an inquiry ''for the public''. The problem was that Tarantino refused to be confined in those confining lines drawn in the sand and decided to play in the whole beach so to speak. As it was mentioned that is something that can be done only from a position of power and strength. Guru-Murthy came asking for an interview with Tarantino. He totally abused the hospitality of a promotional event but still he was the one who asked to be there. Tarantino could dismiss him and call in the next guy. Now imagine a young Tarantino starting his career and get invited for an interview by Guru-Murthy. Unless he was willing to throw a Klaus Kinski tantrum he would have to stay there and endure the abuse as best as he could in the confinement of the expected social norms. Breaking the forth wall of social norms and being 100% honest in your opinion is something that many people wont like and many people in higher position than you will take it as an affront and questioning of their power. Imagine going through an interview for a job. You are expected to sit there all the HRM hogwash about the company ''being like a family'' and that ''they value their partners (a euphemism to say ''work horses'')'' while at the same time they are trying to low ball you financially. Now imagine plainly saying that you already have a REAL family and a life and that in order to maintain and support those you are willing to sell your skills to the highest bidder, that you are there to do a job and do it well and you would appreciate if you could have a straight talk without the BS and glossing over the fact that you are to be exploited to a degree. Cause thats how it is and you cant do otherwise. I dont think you would get the job. In fact you would be hated for calling out that little stage play.

This was.a really interesting post. I enjoyed your explanations.

Powerful, silence is agreeance. This is important. I have experienced this a lot, I've been silent instead of asserting my position.

Would love to see you analyze a couple Vivek Ramaswamy interviews. Especially the David Pakman or one of the CNN interviews.

'it's not about our ratings' caught out and destroyed at this point

Can't help imagening this little incident as a scene in his metamovie about moviemaking. Would be hilarious with this conversation with this same exchange but with the interviewer more hostile and doubling down when Tarantino cuts him off ("so you're selling your movie, well I'm not buying it ahole") and where the argument finally leads to a physical fight with Tarantino kicking the interviewers behind. "you want violence? here are some violence for ya" This exchange really reminded me of his movies.

Well, without your explanation, I would probably look at this conversation completely differently. But I admire Tarantino's attitude, and how he was able to get out of what the interviewer wanted from him. But I think he was also a little angry and nervous, because he was again explaining things to me that he had already explained many times. However, he managed it quite calmly. I admire him for that, because the interviewer pushed him for quite a while, and he kept coming back to clarify. I honestly don't know if I could stand it. I would be afraid to go back and away from the topic for such a long time, whether it would cause a conflict. And I don't like them very much. But I admire Quentin.

Impressive work by Tarantino!

The interviewer, Krishnan Guru-Murthy, pulls crap like this all the time and his reputation is now well known amongst the Hollywood community of actors. His agenda has often been to hijack a fluff piece designed to primarily promote a movie and turn it into a much deeper conversation that goes way beyond the appropriate boundaries. There is another interview he did with Robert Downey Jr that was cut short because he tried to pry into the actors personal life with his father and past issues with substance abuse and Downey Jr just wasn't having it either. I love how Tarantino handled the whole thing.

I love Quentin. I love his movies. Reservoir Dogs has played several times this week as well as Kill Bill. What I took from the last part of this exchange is no means no. (Imagine if this was an exchange regarding a male to female heterosexual romantic relationship and the woman said no). Quentin said I have a right of refusal. I have the right to my integrity and high standards I set for myself and my films. He's an artist who enjoys, loves, critiques, and breathes film and cinema. The interviewer should have known that. And yes, I am slightly biased here because I have enjoyed his films and get a better understanding of what he's trying to accomplish to the audience. Django Unchained is a black comedy drama spaghetti western about a traveling man rescuing his bride from an evil man. The premise sounds like a western but it's in the premise of Pulp Fiction mixed with Jackie Brown and a lot of historical references The setting happens to be during slavery. And yes people are still talking about! Thanks so much for sharing this.

The worst part is that the guy insisted on his questioning, despite clearly being told no. What a ridiculous line of questioning.

You really can't hate Tarantino. He's a unique film maker and a person, a veteran of the industry and a genius. Looking over his movie roster on Wikipedia, he has not done one bad movie. Every verbal confrontation about him on RU-vid is just another star on his shoulder. I really love the one where Jamie talks about filming Django and Tarantino has to pull him aside to correct him. Classic Tarantino. And Jamie being a professional, never takes it personally. He knows that Tarantino is good at what he does, and he has a vision for the movie. He is intense at times and not everyone will jell with him, but if you can get past that, I reckon he's a stand-up guy.

Tarantino is quoted to say, "I learnt all my best dialogue and profanity in prison." 👍😂

So Tarantino declares baldly that he is there to sell his movie. That's it, pure and simple. The interlocuter is there to host an interesting conversation, and tease out controversy. Their premises for being together in the same room are not the same. But there's also a leverage issue. Tarantino, a famous director, doesn't need Guru-Murthy, whereas Guru-Murthy DOES need Tarantino. So Tarantino can act like a aggressive jerk, which, incidentally he is anyway. And Guru-Murthy is left flailing around ineffectively. I guess you can call this communication of a kind. But with no benefit whatsoever to the viewer.

"A book is a mirror. If a monkey looks at it, it is not the image of an apostle that appears." Georg Christoph Lichtenberg I want to say that for a film it's the same.

Quentin makes an excellent point about the cathartic violent scenes in his film, the people that are brutally murdered are always despicable and disgusting, slavers, pimps, assassins, rapists, nazis all get their due at the hands of the protagonist. That's much different than glorifying violence against helpless or innocent people, which I don't recall happening in any of his films unless it was to express the despicable nature of the villain like Candie when he sent the dogs on that slave. It's called good storytelling.

For the link about violence in real life and movies i would have answered : in the middle age there was a lot more violence and movies did not exist at that time

Sometimes I have meta farts, where I go out into 3rd person to understand what is happened.

This interview proved that there is a direct relation between violet movies and real violence. If the interviewer would have continued for a bit more, things could have been different 😂. IMO, the actor could have been polite and assertive at the same time. It's a skill to not let someone control your mind and anger.

The fact that he says NO that bad and in so many times shows that he thinks he's violence could influence sick people to do similar things to harm others, is so obvious and I don't understand why everyone in the comments is saying good job Tarantino, great answers, I don't like he's films, they are really UNNECESSARY to violent

When he says: "Make no mistake this is a commercial for the movie" it's also done in a way of saying: "You are trying to frame my movie with negative light and I don't trust you". Which it 100% seems to be what is happening, like a headline hunting. It's also not only time there have been issues with this interviewer (I'm very positive it was him who got RDJ to walk out for keeping on asking about his past addiction which for sure was anyway on the list of not to ask from him, he refused to answer and yet again this guy kept on pushing). Like ok you can have some plan which you think is slick and all but it doesn't really work when you just keep on repeating the same thing in differend words after it not working the third time. Like move on. It might make things viral, but it quite quickly makes anyone associated to film-making refusing to be interviewed by you.

4:57 Tarantino got upset and refused possibly because he has no defensible answer and knows somewhere in his psyche that he might have guilt about what he pumps into society. As an egomaniac he doesn't care about explaining himself and is just worried about the "commercial". Hardly admirable as this uploader is suggesting and modeling.

Krishnan Guru-Murthy, gutter level journalism at its worst.

Are you sure his name is Guru Murphy?