or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › What Movies Are You Watching Lately
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What Movies Are You Watching Lately - Page 363

post #5431 of 9423
I loved IB (though the third act was a bit too rushed), but Django was pretty bad and this was one of the few films I was hyped to see.
post #5432 of 9423
Am I the only one who thinks that Jackie Brown is the pinnacle of QT's filmography?
post #5433 of 9423
Yes.
post #5434 of 9423
And yes.

I thought it was his worst film. Though I didnt see that B movie he made.
post #5435 of 9423
Pinnacle means worst today?
post #5436 of 9423
Jackie Brown features truly outstanding performances from Pam Grier and Robert Forster, it has a fantastic soundtrack, and it is actually funny, unlike most of QTs other movies. Plus, someone puts a bullet in Bridget Fonda. What more do you want for your entertainment buck?
post #5437 of 9423
I think all of his movies are funny. He just has a darker sense of humor.
post #5438 of 9423
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post

Stunning. Agreement between the Birdman and myself, although he sounds like he's had a few gin and tonics.
He's a mega student of film, regularly pays homage to moments and techniques from films past. He's groundbreaking in his use of so many things and the writing is generally superb. He's also managed to resurrect actors who deserved it. His understanding of film is way beyond the comprehension of a small elite especially Why.
The only neg on him is the stupid over the top use of violence in his movies. This I agree with, its rote at this point. I recall a critic saying that Pulp Fiction would put an end to gangster films, while it has not per se, it has certainly weakened their hold and forced them to diversify.
Why is quite wrong about his assessment, other than Jackie Brown he's done some great work.

If you think QT's other movies are over-the-top violent, then don't see Django. It is far more violent than any of the others.

That said, I don't think his films are overly violent. Look at Paul Verhoeven or Sam Pekinpah or David Cronenberg who get way more sadistic and violent than QT. I also think QT will go down as one of the greats in the end. The more recent homage films might be pet projects for him, and certainly aren't as original as Pulp Fiction was when it came out, but compared to most of the swill that mainstream Hollywood is producing these days they are still very above average films.
post #5439 of 9423
Quote:
Originally Posted by imatlas View Post

Am I the only one who thinks that Jackie Brown is the pinnacle of QT's filmography?

def not my fave, but i liked it.

the grind house movie, death proof, was the worst imo.
post #5440 of 9423
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH View Post

I think all of his movies are funny. He just has a darker sense of humor.

this
post #5441 of 9423
Quote:
Originally Posted by imatlas View Post

Am I the only one who thinks that Jackie Brown is the pinnacle of QT's filmography?

No, I think it was his only decent movie (if it could be called 'his') and it would've been better without his interjections of random sex and violence that add absolutely nothing to the plot or style of the movie. In fact, they're completely at odds with it.

And +1 to what Pennglock said about Tarantino's 'dialogue'. It's just nonsensical banter -- the musings of a know-nothing -- a stream of consciousness of an unconscious writer. If it weren't coming from someone's mouth on screen it wouldn't ever be mistaken for actual dialogue. But his kind of nonsense is now regarded as some kind of standard for writing by audiences that have never read or heard anything better and can't distinguish the good from the bad anyway. It stands out as different from the usual Hollywood scripts and simply for that such people regard it as superior.
post #5442 of 9423

Upside down sucked big time. 2/10

post #5443 of 9423
Quote:
Originally Posted by why View Post

No, I think it was his only decent movie (if it could be called 'his') and it would've been better without his interjections of random sex and violence that add absolutely nothing to the plot or style of the movie. In fact, they're completely at odds with it.
And +1 to what Pennglock said about Tarantino's 'dialogue'. It's just nonsensical banter -- the musings of a know-nothing -- a stream of consciousness of an unconscious writer. If it weren't coming from someone's mouth on screen it wouldn't ever be mistaken for actual dialogue. But his kind of nonsense is now regarded as some kind of standard for writing by audiences that have never read or heard anything better and can't distinguish the good from the bad anyway. It stands out as different from the usual Hollywood scripts and simply for that such people regard it as superior.

If QT didn't make big grossing, big budget films he'd probably be regarded a bit differently. I think he is grouped in with the big budget clown car super hero films and its undeserved. I do wish he'd try a film without any violence. Lets see his range.

BTW, I hear there is a Kill Bill Vol. 3 in the works.

QT wrote True Romance, there seems to be pretty wide acclaim for that script.
post #5444 of 9423
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post


BTW, I hear there is a Kill Bill Vol. 3 in the works.
.

He has recently said it is unlikely to happen.
post #5445 of 9423
just got back from jack reacher. what a good movie. the action sequences were pretty good and the Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
car chase
had a touch of realism to it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › What Movies Are You Watching Lately