***''Amid the chaos of that day, when all I could hear was the thunder of gunshots, and all I could smell was the violence in the air, I look back and am amazed that my thoughts were so clear and true, that three words went through my mind endlessly, repeating themselves like a broken record: you’re so cool, you’re so cool, you’re so cool. And sometimes Clarence asks me what I would have done if he had died, if that bullet had been two inches more to the left. To this, I always smile, as if I’m not going to satisfy him with a response. But I always do. I tell him of how I would want to die, but that the anguish and the want of death would fade like the stars at dawn, and that things would be much as they are now. Perhaps. Except maybe I wouldn’t have named our son Elvis.''***

The writing from this particular picture has the ability to intrigue me time after time. Characters, all with their own original flavors, speaking words that spark excitement like biblical passages did when I was just some kid in primary school. It might be hilarious of me to open this article with the above quote, as it’s one of the few bits that isn't written by Quentin Tarantino himself. No – his ending didn’t approve of so much optimism, naturally;)

Actually, let’s continue with a look at the opening scene. One that Tarantino wrote to open the play, and director Tony Scott implemented to start off his cinematic experience as well. Clarence Worley sits at a bar, while he’s talking to a girl with much passion. The words flowing out of his mouth are like the wholesome combination of a vault safe. We, as the audience, don’t know what we’re watching, however, our minds are pulled to the screen like a magnetic force. Is it because we can immediately identify with Clarence? After all, he seems like a regular guy that’s trying to seduce a girl he’d just met. Or is it because he’s truly passionate about the subject of his dialogue? This certainly is one technique often used by Tarantino. The ability to give the character a certain extend of charisma from minute one. It’s not the character that’s adapting to the story, but the story that’s adapting to the character in question. He’s the true master in creating a screen filled without indifference.

Source [image.](https://lwlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/true-romance-patricia-arquette-1108x0-c-default.jpg)

Tarantino has said himself that True Romance is his most autobiographical piece. He is obsessed with Elvis. Before his first directing job: My Best Friend’s Birthday, and when he was still working at the local Video Store, he tried to start off his acting career. One of the few acting jobs he conquered in this unsuccessful pursuit was that of Elvis Presley in a small TV-show. This wasn’t coincidence, as Clarence puts it in the opening scene of True Romance: ‘’I'd watch that hillbilly and I'd want to be him so bad.’’

The opening scene has written TARANTINO all over it. Not only in the way that his dialogue affects the rhythm of our heartbeat, but also the topic of words – the babbling that turns his characters in personalities of the eternity. Clarence is an Elvis fan boy that works in a comic book store, sounds familiar? Along the road the lady seems to lose interest in the oblivious Clarence, while he blindly continues, he states: ‘’I always said if I ever had to fuck a guy... I mean had too cause my life depended on it... I'd fuck Elvis’’

What a way to open a movie!:)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TB73Ko12yiQ&t=7s

Imagine a movie opening with this brilliance and not being mesmerized immediately.. Exactly like the previous ten times I’ve seen True Romance, from this moment on (the very first scene of the movie) I was like:

Other than the ending, and the structure of the picture, Tony Scott used every single bit of the genius writer. However, the original intention of the story was to work in three separate acts..

Act one: The characters know more than the audience. Tarantino taps into the pleasure we receive from not knowing. He wanted to evoke curiosity, and let us experience each scene in its own right. After watching True Romance you can easily conclude that every scene is like its own little movie, so to speak. The audience is entertained by the individual scenes, rather than being triggered to contemplate about the possible outcome of the summation of the scenes. I think this is a really interesting point of view to storytelling, as most often the first goal of a scene is to simply support the end product. While in Tarantino’s mind, each character, and each scene, is its own thing. Each frame has the power to potentially change the course of the story. By doing so he creates a certain unpredictability, and an almost Buddha like experience that pivots on the present moment, as the future comes soon enough;)

For the ones that have seen True Romance, you know that this isn’t the case for the movie. One of the few things that Tony Scott changed after buying the rights to Quentin’s screenplay, is the structure. We don’t know less than the characters, as we begin at the very beginning. Even though all the scenes are basically copied/pasted from the screenplay, you get a totally different experience. I won’t say that it would’ve been better in its original format, as we'll never know. And if it wasn't for Tony Scott, we wouldn't have the perfect piece of cinema that is True Romance!

Act two: The second part of the movie was supposed to be the catch-up phase. Clarence and Alabama arrive in Los Angeles and tell his friend about what happened to them. This is the moment when the audience gets to know more than all the individual characters. We're shown the whole story. It's quite cool how Tarantino meant it to be. He's dealing with extremes. During the first act we basically know nothing. And during the second act we know enough to feel like the Chinese government. Usually the narrative of movies deviates just a tiny bit from this equator: We Know a Bit More Than The Characters, or We Know a Bit less Than The Characters. How Tony Scott structured it is exactly according to the traditional narrative.. Dealing with extremes is obviously more common among independent art films, that's why I think it's very understandable that Tony structured it the way he did. Nevertheless, for some reason the movie was a total box-office disaster..

Act three: The final act of the movie is exactly how it was meant to be. Well, only one slight difference: in the original ending that Tarantino wrote, Clarence dies. Alabama escapes the motel while she conveys that she didn't care about Clarence to begin with. That she simply used him to break free from her (very odd) pimp: Drexl. I must say that I like the Tony Scott ending much better. The terrific monologue that I quoted at the top of this article is an example of why I think this is..

Meet *Drexl..* - [Incredible Artwork by our own Seth Stanley!](https://coil.com/p/SethStanley/Movie-Deaths-Volume-1-A-O/SEZz0r9ps)

Now I want to talk about this one scene during the first half of the movie. With its duration of 10 minutes it's quite the long scene. Clarence's father (played by legendary Dennis Hopper) is visited by the message boy of the drugs lord that Clarence (accidentally) stole from.

It's this brilliant piece of cinema that is the combination of many ingredients. For one, great acting! Dennis Hopper and Christopher Walken portray these characters with a mature edge.. However, the strength of the scene comes back to the writing. The dialogue to be more precise.

Source [image.](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/vUlTddxrPygqF5xmhDrBsFVhl9fwJR-j8IMLLLocNJKR4qI4QHNqDrTgWAiEpkkNeRHDr3nIkTJ9cxU7eeRAtiMmjs2d-KYtVuoNYqRRxhFq9P8dn_vGHx1QZJqt9fiDclgM5_2C8_rvkDkdc1QcECw-kwDf-h2l2EB29-U)

At a certain point Clifford Worley realizes that he's going to die..

*''Can I have one of those Chesterfields now?''* - The precise moment when this happens. I really love how Quentin uses these little marks to communicate with the audience. Tony Scott added the soundtrack as well, but this wasn't necessary in my opinion.

Clifford decides to tell the Sicilian mobsters a tale. A history lesson, so to speak. It's basically about how the Sicilian ancestors were dark skinned. I guess it's quite racist, but have to admit it's pretty entertaining;) And coming from Quentin's brain, I guess we can assume that its sole purpose is to entertain.. Nothing more. Well, to Dennis Hopper's character it's obviously with the intend to provoke the mobsters to kill him quickly. A well orchestrated scene..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3yon2GyoiM&t=103s

For Coil subscribers there's a picture of the pre-famous Brad Pitt playing a stoner roommate.

Continue reading with a Coil membership.