The phrase guilty pleasure suggests that enjoying certain films calls for an apology. Tarantino's preferences make it possible to discuss that idea: he can defend a poorly received work, point out its flaws, and find in it an experience that other viewers do not share.
The Lone Ranger: enthusiasm and objections in the same opinion
The Lone Ranger appeared in a provisional Tarantino selection in 2013. In an interview with Les Inrockuptibles, translated by The Playlist on 10 October that year, he explained that he appreciated its opening and, especially, the train sequence. At the same time, he criticised the middle section and the treatment of the massacre of Native Americans.
The example is useful because it prevents his defence being presented as blind enthusiasm. A film can offer an extraordinary moment and contain decisions that unsettle the same viewer. Assessment does not have to be reduced to a single label. Recognising a well-executed scene does not mean having to excuse all the problems of the whole film.
The railway sequence makes it possible to think about a very specific pleasure of adventure cinema: bodies and vehicles that must be coordinated within a moving space. The audience follows positions, anticipates collisions and enjoys solutions that seem impossible until the image makes them clear. That kind of invention can be interesting even to someone who has reservations about the story.
The objection to the treatment of Native Americans introduces another level of judgement. The effectiveness of a scene does not remove the possibility of questioning what it turns into entertainment, and from what perspective it does so. Tarantino's remark shows that formal admiration and criticism of representation can coexist.
For that reason, it is imprecise to sum up his position as a love of objectively bad cinema. The word objectively erases precisely the space for debate. There may be identifiable mistakes or unconvincing decisions, but the experience of a film is not exhausted by a collective rating or by its box-office takings.
Kick-Ass 2 and attention to a particular proposal
In the same 2013 exchange, Tarantino praised Jeff Wadlow's approach as writer and director of Kick-Ass 2. The inclusion of the title among his preferences did not amount to recommending every superhero film without reservation. He was referring to a particular work, with its own tone and its own decisions.
Kick-Ass 2 works with the clash between a fantasy of heroic identity and a reality that introduces physical and emotional consequences. Its tonal shifts may be attractive to one viewer and unpleasant to another. Critical discussion begins precisely when one tries to explain that effect, rather than merely noting that part of the audience rejected it.
Defending a genre film does not require pretending that it occupies the same place as any other work. One may appreciate an energy, a performance choice or a way of combining registers. The argument becomes more useful when it names those elements rather than presenting disagreement as an automatic proof of cinephile superiority.
The date also matters. A provisional 2013 selection reflects a moment of viewing and the films available up to then. It is not necessarily the definitive balance for the year, nor a list that Tarantino kept unchanged. The context prevents a passing enthusiasm from becoming an eternal statement.
Anything Else and the freedom not to agree
Anything Else appeared on Tarantino's list published by L.A. Weekly in August 2009. The choice allows us to discuss a preference that often surprises, but it does not prove that the film is a guilty pleasure for him. Guilt is a label added by whoever thinks that taste needs explaining.
Woody Allen's 2003 comedy allows us to observe relationships marked by insecurity, dependence and unreliable advice. Its effect depends largely on how much the viewer enjoys staying with characters who talk about their problems without resolving them easily. That pleasure can exist even if the protagonists' behaviour is irritating.
The difference between sympathy and enjoyment matters for many of Tarantino's preferences. A character does not need to be someone we would want to live with in order to sustain an interesting scene. The precision of a voice, an uncomfortable situation or a contradiction can make an unpleasant presence productive.
The repetition of advice that is never followed, for example, can build comedy out of failure. The scene is interesting because it allows us to recognise a behaviour, even if it offers neither an admirable example nor a solution that the audience should imitate.
These choices do not turn the director into an automatic defender of any despised film. Contrarian taste can be as mechanical as always following consensus. What makes a recommendation interesting is the specific relationship with the work and the ability to explain what is found in it.
The Lone Ranger, Kick-Ass 2 and Anything Else offer different experiences, brought together here by the disagreement they can provoke. Looking at them does not require adopting Tarantino's judgement in advance. Their value as recommendations lies in opening up a possibility of attention: pausing over a scene, listening to a tone or checking whether a flaw really prevents any enjoyment at all.
See the selection of Tarantino's recommended films.