My Best Friend's Birthday

Tarantino is the man! The movie is watchable (surprising for how old it is), obviously its lacking the polish (both script and video) of his later movies but who cares. This movie probably cost him the price of a six pack and it shows. Whats great about it, is that it shows this generations greatest director in his youth giving this whole "movie" thing a shot. In that respect this movie really succeeds. It's one of those things that you watch and then say "Hey I could do that... why arn't I doing that?". Really cool to know that this guy started with this... offbeat... film and then went on to direct the Pulpiest of Fiction (hands down, best film ever). The best part of this movie is not the script, directing or acting. The BEST part of this movie is that it has inspired me to get going on a film of my own.

Thanks QT No time like the present.

(32%) A curiosity piece that's for Tarantino fans only as about half of it is 100% missing forever, and what's left is largely a mixed bag. Quentin himself is about the best thing here and gives a good dose of effort and comic timing to his performance. The writing is somewhat decent at times; although like a lot of things here it's clearly the product of the inexperienced, and many will claim that it's nothing more than typical Tarantino movie name dropping, which really is only partly true. For a very low budget first attempt this isn't too bad, and it does at least show some future potential of what was yet to come.

Well I finally saw Quentin Tarantino's "film school", which is what's left of his 70 minutes long debut, never officially released (saw it on a bootleg DVD), film My Best Friend's Birthday (35 minutes). This worth watching stuff that is just for fans of Tarantino; for me QT delivers here, not quite because of his direction, not quite because of his cast but just because of his dialog and his participation as the main character, radio disc jokey rockabilly Clarence Pool (the birthday of the title is the one of Clarence's best friend). Basically Clarence Pool is the best thing of the 35 minutes, and Tarantino doesn't deliver a truly fantastic performance but his character has pretty much the best dialog, he is fun. The 35 minutes are very fragmented: we have first Clarence at work, we have stuff at the K-BILLY radio station and we have three other characters (two K-BILLY workers and the guest of Clarence's show). It's both very funny and not quite funny, for instance is hilarious when Clarence recalls certain reaction that he had when he was a 3 year old kid but is not quite all the stuff with the other two dudes, except when one gives cocaine to Clarence (and Clarence sniffs, not hesitating because of his guest)…it's poorly made but nevertheless fun! The other fragments mainly involves Clarence's best friend Mickey (played by Craig Hamann, who also wrote the film together with QT), the girl that supposedly will give Mickey a truly great birthday and that began doing her current job thanks to Nancy Allen in Brian De Palma's 1980 film Dressed to Kill (Misty is her name, played by Crystal Shaw) and Clarence's girl. Aside of a sort of funny fight with Misty's black pimp the scenes with Mickey are uninteresting just as the scenes involving Clarence's girl, even the very last fragment with Clarence and Misty is mostly not good (yet there are some cool lines and for QT fans may be interesting hearing from Clarence that he "has a food fetish"), well basically after the first fragment at the radio station the stuff I really liked comes from Tarantino's character: a really nice talk with a clerk about Elvis, Marlon Brando, Chaplin's swan song, The Beatles, Colonel Parker and stuff ("you see the same cake?", that was hilarious!). My Best Friend's Birthday is not a Tarantino thing that I would like to see a lot, basically once is good enough, funny bits, some memorable lines, let's re-watch True Romance

It is Mickey's birthday, and his girlfriend has just left him, so his friend Clarence has a surprise for him.

'My Best Friend's Birthday' is an unknown Tarantino movie for the mainstream audience. There is a legend circling that most of the footage got destroyed by the lab fire. The cinematographer Roger Avery, on the other hand, has said, that the filming was never completed, and the surviving 36 minutes are all the 36 minutes the young filmmakers managed to complete before running out of steam. I guess the legends around this movie will never stop.

What can I say about this incomplete movie? The first thing, perhaps, would be about the obvious talent of Quentin Tarantino (and some other people from the crew) that is obvious. Although the film seems like random scenes edited together, thus giving it fragmented and disjointed feel, the story is still quite clear. At least it is possible to understand where the filmmakers wanted to reach with the story. There is no point of nitpicking about continuity errors, wooden acting or lack of style, as this was Tarantino's self-made film school, and for most of the people involved it was their first film project (including the famous auteur himself). Yet, somehow, the amateurish look and low production values doesn't seem to diminish the artistic and entertainment value of the movie. Its lack of style is almost stylish and feels intentional in the way of 'no-wave' cinema experiments from that era. Even the ridiculously out of place and amateurishly choreographed fight scene between our main hero Mickey and a pimp (who looks like Jules Winfield's dad). There are some other near brilliant moments in the movie, and the dialogue is interesting in most parts (especially for those who love to hear Quentin Tarantino talk about Elvis). It is quite possible that 'My Best Friend's Birthday' is Tarantino's most personal film.

It is very hard to give this film classical numeral rating thanks to its incompleteness, but here I have to say, 'My Best Friend's Birthday' is a must-see film not only for Tarantino fans/completionists but also for the admirer's of 'no-wave' and indie movies of likes Amos Poe or Jim Jarmusch. Besides, it is always interesting to see where the acclaimed filmmakers are coming from.

Based upon seeing what little footage remains of this movie, I don't think that the full-length version would have been a great movie. What's seen here is a jumble of different scenes that each advance the story very little. Tarantino clearly didn't yet have a full grasp of more proper ways to plot and execute a story. Still, despite this (and the very primative production values and acting), the footage is a fascinating cinematic document of sorts. The movie is full of ideas (and dialogue) that Tarantino later polished up and reused in other movies (primarily TRUE ROMANCE.) So while this is mostly amateur hour as a *movie*, it is very entertaining as a cinematic notebook.