Robert Thurman allows two possible explanations for Tarantino's violent displays: show the "foolishness" of violence, or glority it. There are more, and better, explanations. Not all of them are "motives," in the sense that Tarantino is proactively conscious of his actions.

How about these? Tarantino is bereft of ideas of depth (ergo, when in doubt, show blood), he now believes it when people tell him he's a god, he dreams of being an animator, he fears honest male/female chemistry, etc.

As far as Tarantino's obsession with Thurman's daughter, that's inexplicable, in my view. No one was more disappointed than I that such a silly girl managed to punch her way out of that coffin in "Kill Bill." (Like so many of his peers, Tarantino ignores the talent-rich, criminally underutilized pool of middle-aged [or older] actresses, any one of whom could stroll peacefully through a couple scenes in one of his shallow MTV videos on steroids and rip the entire project to shreds without so much as lifting a weapon or even saying a word.)

Tarantino is a hack who sells people violent pornography and embarrasses them into thinking its art.

Better question: Why does a parent have to "reconcile" his own beliefs with his grown child's career choices? And why is this asked of a Buddhist as a Buddhist, and not, say, of every Christian parent whose grown child is in any way involved with violence or state authority? Answer: Because it's a silly question. Even the Amish invite their children to choose their own belief system.

You can say Tarantino makes bad movies (I disagree), but if so, they are made badly with gusto and affection, and therefore he is not a hack.

Also, I'll note that Thurmon is in her mid-thirties and Pam Grier was no spring chicken when she made Jackie Brown.

I noticed that non-answer too.  But Rhubs is right.  It was a stupid question, intended more to work Dr. Thurman's famous daughter into the interview than to gain any insight into Quentin Tarrantino. I mean,  what did you want the guy to say?  "Yeah, my beloved daughter has assisted in the production and promotion of a lot of unmitigated garbage?"  

Sometimes an escapist male violence flick is just an escapist male violence flick. My God, this is the kind of thinking that people use to claim that Grand Theft Auto made them kill a hooker.

Sure, it's a silly question.

But anyone who's read this particular section of the NY Times magazine knows that it's not intended to provide a serious interview but rather an entertaining snapshot.   And this particular answer and justification of Tarrantino's violence on film  surely deserves an eye roll.

Obviously Professor Thurman, the father of Uma, is not much of a film critic but I think we can agree - he was not featured in the magazine for the purpose offering views of Buddhist scholarship.  

Speaking of GTA, so sayeth "The Onion":

www.theonion.com/.../liberty_city_police_face