movies

[cardinalkarp]

natural born killers was oliver stone i thought

He directed it....I believe Tarantino wrote it\

edit: Lipp beat me to it

[ghostrunner]

True Romance is my favorite movie Tarantino wrote. It's odd because I wasn't ever a big Tony Scott fan and thought of him the way I think of Michael Bay. He directed Last Boy Scout before that, which was a Shane Black script and had some great moments. Otherwise his movies were always pretty and empty. He and Tarantino were a good combination though. Tarantino's self-directed movies feel nihilistic, and despite the Patricia Arquette/Gandolfini scene, True Romance feels like it gives a [expletive] about something. I won't say that's fair, because people think the Coen's are nihilistic or cold and I think that's nuts. But it's how I feel when I watch QT movies. Kill Bill felt like a complete waste of time. 2/3 of Pulp Fiction is rewatchable. I like Basterds a lot, and have yet to see Jackie Brown. I suspect I'd like that a lot.

[The Third Man]

Based on nothing but that post, you would love Jackie Brown.

[33anda3rd]

You like the guy or don't. I'm surprised anybody who does wouldn't be down with this.

I like the guy. Or at least I like his movies. But I don't like this one.

SPOILERS, OK?

There's nothing interesting about Jackson re-telling some story (that might be made up) about making Dern's kid give him a BJ before Jackson killed him. It's just macho bravado. There's nothing fun about watching Kurt Russel use JJ Leigh as a punching bag. There's nothing fun about watching Magic Mike and his posse wipe out a bunch of people.

Maybe I'm getting old and crotchety or something but there's nothing fun about bravado and machismo with no point. And I don't see the point to this movie. What is it, that America is violent and has never treated blacks and women well? Well, duh, but this movie has nothing unique or interesting or critical to say about it. It's just violence. I watched Kingsman the other night, fun movie, but the scene in the church that's this mass blood-letting, given all the mass blood-lettings in the world, left me cold and a little turned off. Hateful 8 left me the same.

This film also has none of the 2-person relationship scenes that are Tarantino's hallmarks. Travolta and Uma in Jack Rabbit Slim's. Laurent and Waltz across the lunch table. Pam Grier and whats-his-name in Jackie Brown. This is just a bunch of guys swinging their dicks around.

[Maclowery]

Jackie Brown is 100% my favorite Tarantino anything. Pulp Fiction only a step back. I hope his next film goes back to being fun and quirky, and not so self-jacking-off.

[Popeye_Card]

I've never cared for the famous Tarantino dialogue. Sure, it is witty and whatnot, but it feels so forced with only a few actors being able to pull it off without seeming completely fake. Contrasted against the Coens, whose witty dialogue fits perfect no matter who delivers the line.

I'm firmly in a gray area with Tarantino overall. I don't hate his movies, but I'm not an overly big fan either. Case in point, I've not yet seen Inglorious Basterds other than a few short bits while flipping channels. I'm not actively avoiding it, but I'm not actively adding it to my Netflix queue either.

[cardinalkarp]

I've never cared for the famous Tarantino dialogue. Sure, it is witty and whatnot, but it feels so forced with only a few actors being able to pull it off without seeming completely fake. Contrasted against the Coens, whose witty dialogue fits perfect no matter who delivers the line.

I'm firmly in a gray area with Tarantino overall. I don't hate his movies, but I'm not an overly big fan either. Case in point, I've not yet seen Inglorious Basterds other than a few short bits while flipping channels. I'm not actively avoiding it, but I'm not actively adding it to my Netflix queue either.

yeah, I'm the same....I haven't seen that either; In fact, like I said, haven't watched any of his movies beginning w/ Kill Bill. I did watch Django (sp) Unchained and thought it was just ok.

[The Third Man]

Definitely see IB, Pop. It has the tightest plot of any his films, the least digressive dialogue, and for a million reasons and one I think it's his best film. I'd be happy to elaborate if you're wondering.

Maybe I'm getting old and crotchety or something but there's nothing fun about bravado and machismo with no point. And I don't see the point to this movie. What is it, that America is violent and has never treated blacks and women well? Well, duh, but this movie has nothing unique or interesting or critical to say about it.

I don't think that's the thesis, insomuch as it can be said to have one. I think the commentary is that Americans try to propagate a myth of progress while sanding over ugly realities until history is a polished narrative.

[SHOW]

Warren and Mannix are no less cruel bastards than the rest of the Hateful Eight bunch, they just happen to be - in these highly specific circumstances - the lesser of two evils, and the victors. Hence why the film ends with the dummy Lincoln letter. And when Warren says that the one thing they do have control over is the manner of Domergue's death, what's implicit there is that they also have control over their own self-styled narrative of justice.

Violence, well, agree to disagree there. I can't fault you for that. But I don't, generally speaking, find Tarantino's violence nihilistic or purposeless. The Hateful Eight is probably his most nihilistic film, certainly, but I still find it critical of the uglier aspects of human nature.

[33anda3rd]

I find it overwhelmingly false and very convenient plot-wise that

[SHOW]

1. The black union officer who basically shot a guy in cold blood earlier in the movie because he was a rebel general who did awful things to black people during the war, and
2. The rebel fighter who kept fighting black people after the Civil War and who did nothing but refer to #1 above as "that n----r" during the course of the movie,
somehow end up all cuddly at the end, bonded over...what? Hanging a woman? Because #2 almost got poisoned earlier by her posse he forgets that he hates black people and is basically taking orders from one? And Jackson, who according to the film's legend has been killing white men who have come after the bounty on him since the end of the war, and who we've seen be a cold-blooded killer, is suddenly fine with this rebel guy? Why? Because they need each other so they forget racial divide and past evils? No way. Not the way these two characters were built from the beginning of the film.

If the point is ugly history, he can make the point of ugly history gracefully. Form does not have to match content in that regard. We've seen him be graceful in Jackie Brown--arguably the last time he was graceful as a filmmaker other than a few moments in Basterds and Kill Bill. Since then he's pretty much reveled in shock and violence and upping the violence quotient in genre exercises. There can be grace in the lie of the Lincoln Letter. One could make a 90-minute character study based on a black ex-union officer who claims to have such a thing, the exposure of it, and the fallout. More Ibsen than Wild Bunch. We don't need to sit through 180 minutes of bravado and violence and racism and misogyny to get that there are problems with violence and race and misogyny in the world.

[thrill]

I think the point of the nihilistic violence in Hateful 8 is an indictment of his audience, rather than an attempt at some larger historical point about racism or misogyny. Violence is just as ugly and bloody when committed by Aldo Raine, Django or King Schultz but most people couldn't get enough of it like it was a funny gag rather than abhorrent violent fantasy. It was a funny gag, but the point is that charismatic people with a "good" reason to commit violence are just as violent as morally ambiguous or bad people committing violence and we should question what it says about us that we don't see it as remotely the same. You're supposed to feel uncomfortable watching his movies.

QT is just rubbing our nose in what we lapped up happily and forcing people to ask questions about what it says about them and why they enjoyed it while also providing a masterful, compelling cinematic experience.

I also couldn't be more thrilled that he let Walton Goggins eat. That dude is a perfect Tarantino dialog delivery machine.
So basically,

There's nothing interesting about Jackson re-telling some story (that might be made up) about making Dern's kid give him a BJ before Jackson killed him. It's just macho bravado. There's nothing fun about watching Kurt Russel use JJ Leigh as a punching bag. There's nothing fun about watching Magic Mike and his posse wipe out a bunch of people.

It's not abnormal to be thrilled by what you interpret as righteous violence and discomfited by senseless violence, but maybe you should wonder why that's true.

As in:

Terrorist = Your Rights Go Out The Window. These guys have no rights right now. At the minimum they should all spend a very long time in federal prison. A tough one. With lots of rape.

What did the hangaman say? The only difference between justice and frontier justice is the hangman? I think it's pretty obvious QT is asking people like you (and me) to question our relationship with violence.