Quentin Tarantino used to have a reputation for working closely with actresses, for having muses, for writing good roles for actresses he adored. Muses included Uma Thurman, Pam Grier, Diane Kruger, Melanie Laurent, etc. Diane worked with Tarantino on Inglorious Basterds, in a role which got her a lot of respect and attention. Before that movie, Diane wasn’t really seen as a serious actress, and she was able to widen her career after that film’s success. It seemed like Diane and Quentin got along really well too, that she was his “new Uma.” So in the wake of the Uma Thurman revelations, people went back and tried to figure out if Tarantino behaved abusively towards Diane. They found some old interviews where she talked about how Tarantino insisted on “strangling” her on camera, just so it would look right. People were like “that’s f–ked up.” Tarantino tried to explain the Kruger thing in his Deadline interview, saying in part:
“When I did Inglourious Basterds, and I went to Diane, and I said, look, I’ve got to strangle you. If it’s just a guy with his hands on your neck, not putting any kind of pressure and you’re just doing this wiggling death rattle, it looks like a normal movie strangulation. It looks movie-ish. But you’re not going to get the blood vessels bulging, or the eyes filling it with tears, and you’re not going to get the sense of panic that happens when your air is cut off. What I would like to do, with your permission, is just…commit to choking you, with my hands, in a closeup. We do it for 30 seconds or so, and then I stop. If we need to do it a second time, we will. After that, that’s it. Are you down to committing to it so we can get a really good look? It’ll be twice, and only for this amount of time, and the stunt guy was monitoring the whole thing.”
“Diane said, yeah sure. She even said on film in an interview, ‘it was a strange request but by that point I trusted Quentin so much that, sure.’ We did our two times, and then like Uma with the spitting thing, Diane said, okay, if you need to do it once more, you can. That was an issue of me asking the actress, can we do this to get a realistic effect. And she agreed with it, she knew it would look good and she trusted me to do it. I would ask a guy the same thing. In fact, I would probably be more insistent with a guy.”
[From Deadline via People]
It still doesn’t sound 100% awesome, but he stressed that everything happened with her consent, so what do we know? In any case, Diane decided to chime in to say that her experience with Tarantino was totally fine. She posted this message on her Instagram:
In light of the recent allegations made by Uma Thurman against Harvey Weinstein and her terrifying work experience on “Kill Bill”, my name has been mentioned in numerous articles in regards to the choking scene in “Inglourious Basterds”. This is an important moment in time and my heart goes out to Uma and anyone who has ever been the victim of sexual assault and abuse. I stand with you.
For the record however, I would like to say that my work experience with Quentin Tarantino was pure joy. He treated me with utter respect and never abused his power or forced me to do anything I wasn’t comfortable with. With love, D xoxo
What Diane and Uma have said over and over is that they had good working relationships with Tarantino, that they trusted him and they would do whatever he needed. The problem for Uma was that the trust was broken when he convinced her to do something that left her injured. Diane’s thoughts would probably be a lot different if the choking had really hurt her, physically or emotionally. I don’t know. Whatever, man.
Also: Jezebel unearthed a 2003 interview Howard Stern did with Tarantino where he insisted that Roman Polanski didn’t really drug and rape a 13-year-old, that the child “wanted it” and it was only statutory rape. Ugh.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
*super!*
First of all, two things:
1) I heard the Howard Stern tape w/ Tarantino. I just..can’t. He’s cancelled. How in the world did he say that and it not get out and go wide? Has the world changed so drastically in terms of assault and child sexual assault that we even had a time a few years ago where comments like his were tolerated and/or just swept under the rug?!! Wtf?!! Did Stern sit on this? It makes no sense.
2) Another reason. I think Diane may have been innoculated is that she and Brad Pitt were friends and go way back to Troy, i don’t see Tarantino acting too out of hand and like the madman while he was on set. It took moving the sun and moon to get Brad to do it in the first place so he wouldn’t have put up with abusive bs.
1) because that was the story that Hollywood ran with in ‘03. Roman Polanski is incredibly well connected and he tried to pull a snow job. Tarantino is parroting the story that was going around at the time – keep in mind, ‘03 was also the same year that Polanski also won Best Director at the Oscars. At the time, his victim just wanted the whole damn thing to be done, and to have it go away, and he and his supporters used that to put out the narrative that it was consensual and she lied about her age. Tarantino is parroting what was taken as ‘fact’ at the time. It was only after people who actually remembered the case started stepping back up and saying “what the hell” that the tide started to turn. An excellent example of this is Emma Thompson, who when asked why she signed the petition honestly admitted that it was because Mike Leigh asked her and she wasn’t actually familiar with the details of Polanski’s crime (she was horrified).
And seriously, who would have thought that it would be Howard Stern that would be the one to speak up and say “that’s messed up”?
Ultimately what frustrates me isn’t people like Tarantino, who is an idiot (and DOES need to speak out and address how he was wrong). It’s thepeople who knowingly support Polanski even though they DO know the specifics of his crime. Like Mike Leigh. That petition that went around that people refer to gained traction specifically because people who wield a lot of influence were asking their friends, co-workers, and employees to sign it. What frustrates me is the people who have knowingly helped whitewash Polanski’s crime.
There is also a link with the ladies at Jezebel discussing this Polanski in 2008, where the basically said the same thing as Tarantino. I’ll try to find it.
Edit: here is the link.
https://jezebel.com/5015162/which-is-worse-roman-polanski-banging-a-13-year-old-or-hollywood-blindly-embracing-him-despite-it-all
“And seriously, who would have thought that it would be Howard Stern that would be the one to speak up and say ‘that’s messed up’?”
*raises hand*
Um, me?
People forget how socially connected Roman Polanski is with a generation of Hollywood, and the way that trickles down. They seem to have made the trade off that his tragic history (Holocaust survivor, husband to Sharon Tate) somehow counterbalanced the crime that he was found guilty of. The way we can start is by asking the people who work with him if they know exactly what he was found guilty of. I think it’s important that we hold people accountable, but I am struggling with the fact that we’re holding a Tarantino more accountable than the people who were knowingly and actively supporting this false narrative. There are definitely people that knew what his crime was, and helped participate in this white wash.
@Kitten: It’s more my surprise that even then both Howard and Robin remember the details of the crime. Polansky did a pretty good job of whitewashing that the public consciousness.
@ Bridget-that might be why I never forgot the details of Polanski’s crime: because I so vividly remember listening to this interview.
And I do vaguely recall the whitewashing, just not to the extent that you describe. Then again, I wasn’t following all of it too closely back then. But I remember this interview because I was so disgusted with Tarantino.
@Bridget
Exactly. When I first started reading gossip on here, actually, when I was 15/16…the story I heard was that Polanski had sex with an underage girl at a party. Which yes, is awful………but pales in comparison to what actually happened. And I never read anything about him going on trial, being found guilty, etc. I just sort of knew that he mainly lived abroad, I’d seen “The Pianist”, etc.
Nonsense.
Tarantino is NOT parroting Polanski’s PR in this interview.
He does not argue that she lied about her age, he does not deny that she was drugged. Tarantino knows the victim said it was non-consensual.
In the interview, Tarantino also reveals several personal beliefs, including:
a) It’s acceptable for adults to have sex with minors as young as 13
b) how he defines “real” rape: “when you use the word rape, you’re talking about violent, throwing them down—it’s like one of the most violent crimes in the world. You can’t throw the word rape around. It’s like throwing the word ‘racist’ around. It doesn’t apply to everything people use it for.”
c) which may be why he doesn’t see being drugged as a significant factor when considering consent.
d) when determining if a rape occurred, there’s different rules for “party girls” and good girls
It’s obvious from the interview that Tarantino IS informed about the case. He knows the victim’s side of the story and flat-out says that he finds Polanski’s version more likely.
It’s bizarre to me to blame his comments on him being manipulated by Polanski’s PR – like if he just had more information about the case, he’d totally change his mind!
Real talk – all of us hold personal beliefs about sex & rape and when we read about rape cases, we see them through the lens of those beliefs. Those pre-existing biases affect which side we come down on. That’s why two people can read the same facts and one will say “I think a rape occurred” and another will conclude, “That’s not really rape/she wanted it/she’s lying, etc.”
The truth is that Tarantino’s opinion of this case is entirely logical given his personal beliefs about rape & consent. Those beliefs are the real problem.
Let me just add – this interview was conducted when Tarantino was making movies for Weinstein’s studio & the Weinstein reign of terror was in full effect.
It’s interesting to hear what a high bar Tarantino has for what counts as “real” rape/sexual coercion.
Gee, I wonder if there’s any connection between those beliefs and the fact that he wasn’t particularly alarmed by Weinstein’s behavior, even though his own girlfriend personally told him about Weinstein aggressive tactics?
Or that Tarantino wrote off those aggressive tactics as just a “big crush”?
Nah!
“And seriously, who would have thought that it would be Howard Stern that would be the one to speak up and say “that’s messed up”?
It’s the same as Bill Maher being one of the few men in Hollywood disgusted (and calling out fellow men) when the sexual assaults of Harvey et. Al came out. It’s like someone broke the news about Santa Clause, he assumed all these powerful men where getting women by choice due to their money and power. Both Stern and Maher have their faults but a lot of their sexist jokes are just for show.
Did ANY of you actually read the link that Peeking In posted? From freaking Jezebel?
And YES HE IS ABSOLUTELY parrotting the Polanski PR. It’s obviously wrong. We have the benefit of knowing the facts about this. Again as I said above, Tarantino should absolutely be asked about it. But his viewpoint didn’t happen in a vacuum. Because again: this was right after Polanski won his directing Oscar.
By the way, the question was how this interview didn’t make a splash at the time. This was the party line at the time. It was the version that Polanski and his friends sold. We CLEARLY know that what he did is rape. We clearly know that it was bullsht that they were able to manipulate the narrative.
“Tarantino was manipulated by Polanski’s PR, he didn’t know the full/real story” is a pretty good PR spin for Tarantino but unfortunately it’s not supported by the interview.
Interestingly, Tarantino actually diverges from the dominant pro-Polanski narrative in how he views the victim’s mother when explaining why he thinks the victim is a liar.
It’s clear from the interview that Tarantino knows both sides of the case. It’s also clear that his personal beliefs about rape/consent/the sexuality of minors + the fact that Polanski is great artist that he respects lead him to side with Polanski.
That’s why Tarantino and the interviewer can agree that Polanski knowingly had sex with & gave drugs to a 13-yr-old girl but come to totally different conclusions about whether that’s okay.
Bridget – I don’t think anyone did, which is unfortunate, because Jezebel is supposed to be feminist (woohoo) and they were basically saying the same damn shameful thing as Tarantino. Meh.
This conversation is why context matters. The victim was going along with the Polanski PR push because she wanted it to go away finally. She wanted to move on, so the PR was able to gain traction.
Tarantino wasn’t on trial. He was just parroting the stupid stuff everyone else was at the time. I don’t think he deserves more responsibility for saying what was said and accepted generally. The sentiment seemed sketchy to me at the time but not as horrible as it does now that we know the whole story.
K he’s still trash though and has been for a while. Not sure why people are just realizing how awful he is
So is Diane. Josh Jackson was masking her. I’ve lost any respect for her. She’s trash imo.
I don’t like her at all.
This is still dangerous behavior. I mean, I’m sure there is even a proper way to choke somebody for the camera…if he did one thing wrong, he probably could’ve done a whole range of things, like crush her windpipe. Scary.
Choking is always dangerous. You will very likely not outright kill someone because you would have to choke for a couple of minutes and they would have passed out quickly. But you can damage the neck permanently, it can lead to brain damage and you can induce a stroke.
This. An ER friend has dealt with patients who had mini strokes from “playful” choking — even one young patient who had a stroke from the way her neck was bent, pressure-pinched, over a salon shampoo bowl.
Tarantino may have fun strangling women and may think he is a little genius, but he is unqualified to do this to anyone, to risk their health and long term wellbeing for a stupid movie scene for his ego. But, rocket scientists don’t form the population of Hollywood.
It’s dangerous period. That’s why I don’t understand people’s fetish with choking or being choked during sex.
And if he was truly worried, doctor on set and get a professional to do it. Hint, the professional is not Quentin, it’s either someone with martial arts training or a medical professional, hell, a pro wrestler would have more experience.
But it’s not actually about that. It’s about Quentin’s ego, thinking only he can produce something from these women. And seeing how he lives out his fetishes on the big screen, perhaps something a bit grosser, too.
This! Diane says he had consent, fine. What Uma is saying, though… is that if you don’t give consent, you might face some professional consequences… and that’s an abuse of power.
What Uma’s also saying, is that stunts can go wrong. And Quintin Tarantino is not qualified to do or decide (as he did with the sandy road, and the unsafe vehicle) which ones are an acceptable risk.
I feel like Diane’s comment missed these points entirely… further, her message reeks of immaturity. “Nothing went wrong, so what’s the problem?”
He doesn’t sound like he knows what he’s doing, and I think even BDSM people consider choking a hard no because there really is no right way to do it. What’s dangerous is it can kill you later due to a blood clot or a stroke.
Breath play is still pretty common from what I hear. They just call it that and not choking, I guess
Not even BDSM sites. In my……*research*………I’ve yet to come across one (that isn’t a private blog, etc) that hasn’t explicitly mentioned that speaking about choking/breathplay as a huge NO. As in you will get kicked out of the site.
Really Virgilia?
Oh, you mean not just choke lightly for a little roughness but real breathplay. Beyond role-playing and things like that.
I can’t stand QT, but maybe that was why he did it. I am pretty sure he is into the BDSM scene like some others in Hollywood. We can always ask Stevie Mnuchin if Domina Louise can explain how she does it if we want a first-hand explanation.
Or MelT but I think her expertise is more specific.
The fact that she can’t see anything wrong with that request or the power dynamic there that coerced her into saying yes, tells me all I need to know about Hollywood.
She said her self she felt it was an odd request, . If your gut is telling you that and you still say yes, you have to ask why.
+1
So why not let actors “act”? Its not supposed to be real in any way.
“it looks like a movie strangulation” Well guess what Mr Feetsucker, it IS a movie.
Exactly! You’re aren’t much of an actor if you have to actually be choked to look like you are choking. It’s a Hollywood movie, not a snuff film.
Ego. How many stories are there about stuff that “really happened” in Hollywood films? Who really got injured, who really had sex, all in the context of actors going above and beyond the call to produce something real? For years, all the stuff about (for instance) actual sex in Last Tango or Kubrick forcing Shelley Duvall to do a zillion takes until she wasn’t even acting anymore, it’s all been presented as artistes being so committed to their craft that they cease to be merely “faking” it, they just do it for real. How much is Daniel Day Lewis praised for “living” as his characters? It’s the highest achievement for an actor or a director, and somehow, it’s what they all seem to aspire to.
And then when it comes down to it, what you’ve got is Maria Schneider being assaulted onscreen and Shelley Duvall being tortured (or Jennifer Lawrence injuring her diaphragm screaming, or Ellen Burstyn injuring her spine on The Exorcist, or Marilyn Burns having her finger cut open in Texas Chainsaw…) and God knows what else. It’s abuse dressed up as artistic freedom and it’s left to the victims to deal with because they just weren’t tough enough. They weren’t truly artists. 🙄
And fair enough, Diane Kruger wasn’t forced, it was collaborative and agreed upon, but Uma’s story shows what happens when the actor is reluctant – bullying, anger, pressure. It’s not truly collaborative – not truly consent – if you’re not free to say no without repercussions.
Well said.
Excellent examples of how actors can be pushed too far to get the “right” reaction.
Nailed it, Londerland
I so agree with you. Well said. There are those also who say that this crqft of film makong is a job for them, unlike many other jobs. There are directors and actors who will stress that good films does not require for you to be tortured, but those stories are not as interesting as all those involving being on some edge.
This was my take, too. I thought, “So this guy is such a crappy director, and Kruger such a crappy actor, that they can’t make a movie choke look good? It has to be for real??”
What kind of sick, sadistic, ego-driven man thinks that his movie is important enough to actually put his hands on someone’s neck, and choke them?? Three times??? And what kind of sick, hungry ambitiously desperate actress allows this??
I’m sorry, I know that everyone says there is never any blame on the woman, but Kruger allowed this. He suggested it, and she went along with it. They are BOTH truly messed up, in every possible way.
I think she just doesn’t want the attention of all this, also I think Tarantino’s PR is trying to get him to ride this one out. Still his movies are gross and problematic, I don’t get how anyone can be okay with his violence against women and racism, just because he has an interesting “style” to his directing.
It says something about a creating, if all there creating is extremely violent movies about POC and women.
Someone is angling to revive her fading career with a role in the next Tarantino movie…
I don’t like Kruger, but what makes you think her career is fading? 2017 she took home the best actress award at Cannes Film Festival and her filming schedule is chock full.
You could be right… I said what I said because I looked at IMDB really quick and I saw that her recent roles include Kellyanne Conway in “The Kellyanne Conway Story.” But now that I’m looking at it again, I realize that that was some kind of spoof thing, not a real movie. My bad! Still, I haven’t seen her in anything recently.
I don’t know if her career is on a permanent fade, but it is in a low ebb right now. It could be part of the natural cycle of careers though.
But in the actual movie, do Quentin’s hands are on film, strangling Diane and Uma? Because if not and the same thing had to be recreated with an actor who did the same thing that Quentin did, I still find this highly problematic, because it does have the element of enjoyment of violence and some kind of satisfaction from it. In any case, looking at the history of abuse of his actors, his indiference towards sexual abuse and his deffence of Polanski, no one is going to convince me he is not a trash.
Can someone explain to me how this is the guy picked to expand on Gene Rodenberry’s vision?
DIdn’t she only act in one of his films? Could she be considered a muse then?
I might have given him the benefit of the doubt if not for his Polanski comments. There is no excuse for that level of asshattery. Disgusting.
Yes. This is very clear. Great article from the Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/feb/07/quentin-tarantino-hollywood-baclkash-uma-thurman-roman-polanski
It’s not only Tarantino but a whole culture. It is really hard for mt to find a series to watch that doesn’t involve women being killed or raped or both nowadays.
The last question of this article is really important: “We all want to ask the question, why are these people and why are these films the narrative of our culture? We are saying we want different kinds of narratives, and we want different kinds of stories.” (Melissa Silverstein)
I love the Jessica Chastain quote in that article:
The Oscar-nominated actor Jessica Chastain tweeted that films used violence against female characters as a plot device to make them stronger. “We don’t need abuse in order to be powerful … how many images of women in media do we celebrate that showcase abuse? When did this become normalized ‘entertainment’?”
@ Sparkly, Exactly!
I’m one of the few that still likes Tarantino. What I think the actresses are saying is that the Tarantino respected them enough to talk over these scenes with them. What I find more horrible is the fact that it implies there are male directors out there do not discuss these type of physical scenes with their actresses before execution.
Whether they discuss it with the actress first or not, it’s wrong. And it’s not respect. Because the underlying implication, which these actresses surely have ingrained in their minds because of the patriarchal and mysoginistic culture of Hollywood, is this: If you refuse to do this, there are 1,000 actresses waiting in line that will. You should be grateful for this job and do as I ask (demand). Or I will fire you and spread rumors that you are difficult to work with and you’ll never work again.
That’s not respect. It’s coercion.
Is she kidding? He choked her unconscious on the set of Inglourious Basterds!
So did Diane have to audition in flip flops like Busy Phillips?
I can’t help but remember how much cool girl okay with everything and general agreeableness is rewarded in women.
Ok he got her consent but it’s still weird that he prefers to be the one who personally brutalizes the actresses. I don’t know if I can watch a Tarantino film the same again, I liked his movies a lot when I was younger but this just seems like… he’s really getting off on doing this to these women under the guise of art.
That’s my issue too. It is sick that he wanted to be the one to hurt and degrade these women. He could have had a stunt man choke Diane and they could have used fake spit in Kill Bill. He obviously gets off on dominating these women and they are so desperate for fame they let him! Hollywood is a slimy cess pool.
His Polanski comments are disgusting and his is forever canceled for that.
While both actresses are saying they agreed to the things he did, I find it really suspicious that it’s happened multiple times and seems to be the same story. He gains their trust, and then just “has to” spit, choke, etc. In neither instance were those acts required – everyone viewing it knows it’s a film and doesn’t need to think Diane was really being strangled.
I feel like it’s a sick game – gain their trust, convince them to agree to abuse, and tell them it’s all for the art of the film. And has he done this with men too? Because so far it’s just 2 women.
ITA on all counts…and for that, I will never be able to watch another Tarantino film.
While his is a very well crafted “explanation” it smacks of a creep getting his rocks off under the guise of “it’s Art”. She was incredible in that film and I’m am 100% certain she could have convinced me she was being choked without actually having to be choked.
He’s a talented director, but I’m pretty sure he’s toast after Uma and the Polanski “she wanted” interview (yea Jezebel!!)
Along with HW, here’s another person who got so drunk with power that they indulged in their most depraved impulses and it’s come back to destroy them. Ha.Ha.
When I saw Inglorious Basterds, a number of scenes were icky to me, but the strangulation scene was the WORST. Diane writhing in a parody of sexual ecstasy on the floor, as her character was dying and they were filming up her legs and up her skirt. Tarantino is fucked up.
I HOPE you are right about Tarantino being toast. Agree about the well crafted explanation—it feels to me that he found a socially acceptable and legal way of living out and memorializing some dark and twisted fantasies.
His career isn’t over. He is not a predator or perpetrator. I don’t like him, but he doesn’t belong in the same categories as HW or a rapist. No one has accused him of brutalizing them. Even in this case. He shouldn’t lose his livelihood when the two actresses aren’t alleging abuse. Polanski’s defenders at the time is a very long list so are the Allen apologists. What is the point of pointing them out now when nothing can be done it about it?
What someone does after the past fall is more important than finding something from 15 years ago that someone said on Howard Stern. A whole bunch of people said some ridiculous stuff over the years. They can’t take it back, but they can change.
I just think it is a pointless path to travel down when things need to change focusing on improving the future.
His vision is so fill of violence and misogyny. I just don’t get why people find that interesting or entertaining. The guy is twisted and making a movie about Manson seems to be the perfect fit for his darkness. Yeah, I’ll pass.
Also I think his quoted remarks on Stern should be the lead here not the Kruger part.
It’s pervert manipulation 101. Be charming, get the woman to feel comfortable with you, then ask nicely about choking, or spitting, or driving too fast. Get her to feel she’s part of the decision-making.
Uma was probably at the same point Diane is now. She thinks he’s a great director doing things differently. But girl, someone strangling you for real is never okay or respectful, even if it’s for a movie scene. That’s just sick. Wake up!!!
The issue I’m worried about is why in the world does he choke/etc women in his movies?? Why is there often a scene like this? That, among other things, is f-king wrong.
If they wanted it so real, how on earth would she stop him if she didn’t want to continue? Once he is choking you for real, everything you do to say stop would be realistic as the person being choked in the film surely doesn’t just let it happen.
Also I hate when men hold women like that on the waist in photos. So so so high (boob adjacent). Or even when they just are getting a whole hand firmly up against her… so creepy
QT turns me off, but Diane Kruger has chosen to share her experience of this situation, and it sounds like she consented, had no emotional/physical trauma & really was OK with it.
But some of you are almost disregarding her statement & her feelings on this, because it doesn’t fit your narrative of “QT is cancelled!” How offensive to Diane Kruger.
Just as we need to listen & believe women when they say they’ve been abused, we need to listen & believe when they say they haven’t been. Stop infantilising women.
You can think QT is a creep/hack/whatever AND respect that Diane was comfortable with this situaion.
I don’t think Diane K is an infant. I think she is mentally ill, to allow that kind of abuse. For what?? Fame???
Yeah, sorry, in any conversation I might have with young women over this, I am NOT going to say, “Well, it’s her choice!! I won’t infantilize her by questioning her choice.”
Aw! Feminism!! Empowerment! To choose to be beaten/choked by a man!! For a film!! Art!! Such progress!!
It’s also a woman’s choice to stay with an abusive man until he kills her, but that doesn’t mean she is making an adult decision, a healthy decision. I do NOT respect that decision or think it shows good choice or mental wellness.
Let’s stop normalizing unhealthy behaviors in the name of Women Making Adult Choices.
be careful what you mean by “unhealthy” behaviours. that puritan creep must stop. once upon a time, homosexuality was unhealthy behaviour, interracial sex was unhealthy behaviour, the list goes on. there is a space for outrage and there is a space for respecting a fully functioning adult to make legal decisions, even ones we would never make.
That is my problem. Neither woman has said they had a problem.
Doubting their feelings and explanations is pure patriarchy in this situation. SHE doesn’t know what she is saying. SHE doesn’t know what she experienced. SOMETHING must be wrong with HER.
Makes no sense.
+1000. (Di: Your point in particular can’t be emphasized enough).
Careful, Diane, bringing a different perspective will draw the ire of the pitchfork and torch brigade.
If Diane Kruger had waited about 18-24 hours before posting that defense of Tarantino, she probably never would have posted it at all. I’d be willing to bet she did not know about the Howard Stern interview, being that she is not even from America. Now that she’s (most likely) heard it for herself, pretty sure she’s wishing she could hop back in time and hit delete.