bbs.bunglefever.com

pull that schtick out your ass already!

i wanna see this movie
i'm gonna too
so

and i'll probably get some ass afterwards
double

Hey, I'm not the one with sticks up my ass.

The Rambam wrote:Hey, I'm not the one with sticks up my ass.

alright, i admit it.

i thoroughly enjoyed this movie

another winner by qt

alot of folks crying about this flick , he "rewrote history , bla bla wah wah" .

fuck that , i enjoyed the film . actually woulda been a more interesting reality than what really went down . best war movie i think in years , even if it was a buncha bullshit , it was awesome .

(lingus) wrote:i thoroughly enjoyed this movie

another winner by qt

I hate to break it to you, but that goofy-jawbone shit-for-fuck isn't reading this thread.

jay leno?

One of his best!

it was a whole lotta fun. somebody had to make a movie like that for crissakes.

I agree with The Rambam. Tarrantino is only different from the Wayne brothers in the IQ stakes otherwise the fucker doesn't pay homage, he doesn't reinvent, he doesn't steal, he regurgitates. He has ONE idea, snappy dialogue spoken in a voice which is paced, toned and delivered exactly the same by EVERY character. I mean MR Wolf IS Uma Thurman in Kill Bill is Samuel L Jackson in Kill Bill.

Kill Bill was only bearable up until 2/3 into the first part, after that his dialogue kills me and his direction and cinematography hurts so bad to know you've seen these cliches the first time around, less polished (with more charm for it), less framed with neon lights and self congratulatory pats on the back by the big chinned ugly cunt that Tarrantino has now become an unwatchable director. Grindhouse was unwatchable, suffering interminable dialogue repetetivitus.

Tarrantino rendered himself redundent and irrelevant three films in. His insistance on continuing has diluted the legacy of these film and I now find myself cringing each time I hear another of his characters (new or old) speak with his voice.

Tarrantino's hardcore fans are best grouped with those who indulge in Kevin Smith's work. Those who lack decent cinematic perception. Those who only watch the surface of the film. I think film lovers grew tired of these one trick ponies a long time ago.

I disagree with you. Sure he's a one trick pony, but he does this one trick really good. I like the dialogue he writes.
And you are wrong about Grindhouse. Its highly watchable.

But you are correct about Kevin Smith..

Eviltoastman wrote:I agree with The Rambam. Tarrantino is only different from the Wayne brothers in the IQ stakes otherwise the fucker doesn't pay homage, he doesn't reinvent, he doesn't steal, he regurgitates. He has ONE idea, snappy dialogue spoken in a voice which is paced, toned and delivered exactly the same by EVERY character. I mean MR Wolf IS Uma Thurman in Kill Bill is Samuel L Jackson in Kill Bill.

Kill Bill was only bearable up until 2/3 into the first part, after that his dialogue kills me and his direction and cinematography hurts so bad to know you've seen these cliches the first time around, less polished (with more charm for it), less framed with neon lights and self congratulatory pats on the back by the big chinned ugly cunt that Tarrantino has now become an unwatchable director. Grindhouse was unwatchable, suffering interminable dialogue repetetivitus.

Tarrantino rendered himself redundent and irrelevant three films in. His insistance on continuing has diluted the legacy of these film and I now find myself cringing each time I hear another of his characters (new or old) speak with his voice.

Tarrantino's hardcore fans are best grouped with those who indulge in Kevin Smith's work. Those who lack decent cinematic perception. Those who only watch the surface of the film. I think film lovers grew tired of these one trick ponies a long time ago.

a fine criticism, none of which begins to enter my mind when im watching something he's made, or 'under siege' or 'bloodsport' for that matter

Under Seige rawks.

Saw that in the theater, the one dude sitting next to the Admiral or whatever drove me up the wall with that spitcurl right in the middle of his bald fucking head, though.

Eviltoastman wrote:I agree with The Rambam. Tarrantino is only different from the Wayne brothers in the IQ stakes otherwise the fucker doesn't pay homage, he doesn't reinvent, he doesn't steal, he regurgitates. He has ONE idea, snappy dialogue spoken in a voice which is paced, toned and delivered exactly the same by EVERY character. I mean MR Wolf IS Uma Thurman in Kill Bill is Samuel L Jackson in Kill Bill.

Yes he uses parts of other films, but isn't it true to say that there are very few story types in the first place? i.e. Kill Bill and Pulp Fiction could have become love stories, with Uma's charactors ending up with their men (Travolta, Carradine) in a happy ending, but they don't. Kill Bill is a revenge story, through and through, it says exactly what it does on the tin. Pulp Fiction is a mish-mash of stories that may not be unique individually, weave a fascinating web together. I disagree that Mr Wolf is like the Bride though. Keitel's cameo is one of a Spiv, an experienced criminal, brought in to help the young gangsters when they fuck up, The Bride is a lost girl, riding on Bill's coat tails and becoming his prodige.

Delivery may be down to direction. Maybe QT's ego needs to hear actors say his words as he would. Hugo Weaving said that of his delivery, in the Wachowski's Matrix trilogy: he based Smith's inflections on theirs. Directors are prone to acting out stuff for actors to copy and QT does hop in front of the camera a lot.

Eviltoastman wrote:Kill Bill was only bearable up until 2/3 into the first part, after that his dialogue kills me and his direction and cinematography hurts so bad to know you've seen these cliches the first time around, less polished (with more charm for it), less framed with neon lights and self congratulatory pats on the back by the big chinned ugly cunt that Tarrantino has now become an unwatchable director. Grindhouse was unwatchable, suffering interminable dialogue repetetivitus.

It's one film divided into two, do you mean 2/3 into Kill Bill 1 (up until she goes to Tokyo, which would explain what you meant by neon lighting), or partly into part two (after the fight with Daryl Hannah)? If you mean the former, I would put that down to personal taste, as watching them back to back gives you the sense that this is a large battle/mission taking place in several disparate locations.

Either way, I enjoyed most of both movies, so there's no accounting for taste.

Eviltoastman wrote:Tarrantino rendered himself redundent and irrelevant three films in. His insistance on continuing has diluted the legacy of these film and I now find myself cringing each time I hear another of his characters (new or old) speak with his voice.

I agree with you totally here. There is such a thing as a Tarantino movie, just like a Michael Bay movie or a Guy Fucking Ritchie movie. And yes, that is his middle name. These fuckers need to diversify, or have someone strip them of their cliches.

Eviltoastman wrote:Tarrantino's hardcore fans are best grouped with those who indulge in Kevin Smith's work. Those who lack decent cinematic perception. Those who only watch the surface of the film. I think film lovers grew tired of these one trick ponies a long time ago.

That's a bit harsh. QT's style is to recycle (very noble in contemporary times, no? ) and tape together bits from other movies we haven't seen, like some oddball collector showing you his wares. The man is clearly an eccentric and a workhorse, there are no guarantees that the finished product will be of any worth though.

While Smith is guilty of using the same tricks, they are his own, QT is using a broad range of cinematic riffs and tracing those back can be fun for movie buggs. However, I stopped watching Kevin Smith's movies when I stopped hanging around with an immature NIN fan, who was obsessed with Clerks (good), Chasing Amy (bollocks) and Mallrats (shite) in 2002. Anything I have happened across since looks completely self-indulgent. Someone needs to get Smith to direct a script of someone else's with a different set of actors, before he starts thinking he's John fucking Hughes (not his real middle name), then we can see his worth as a filmmaker.

My opinion on QT's movies (not a complete list probably, just what I remember seeing):

Reservoir Dogs - great if not for the fact that it is a remake, now I know that it is, it gets a 3/5 "cult schlock ultraviolence" rating from me.

True Romance - a case of the supporting cast blowing the "stars" off the screen, some nice scenes, a disappointing whole, 2/5

Pulp Fiction - masterpiece. 5/5

Dusk 'til Dawn - straight to video dumbfest, watched once. 2/5

Natural Born Killers - remember what I said about someone else writing for Kevin Smith to direct? Here's what happens when a QT script goes to Oliver Stone. Largely pointless gun-fest with nothing likeable, no wonder he disowned it, he didn't get to shock us, Oliver Stone did, with just how bad this movie could be done. Another "watched once" 2/5

Jackie Brown - great acting, nice to see a female lead in a movie of this genre. Again, the guy and the girl don't hook up! Damn you Quentin. Apart from that, no surprises in the plot/story and more dead black people in Hollywood. 3/5

Kill Bill (1 and 2) - Oh god, you know this is a Tarantino movie for so many reasons - cast, monologues, breaking the fourth wall, references to the QT universe, weird editing, mad sountrack. Its one thread from Pulp Fiction colliding with (Bruce Lee's awful posthumous) Game of Death isn't it? Has its moments, but never deviates enough from its denouement to inspire or entertain fully. 3/5

Grindhouse (Deathproof) - an interesting concept, funny in what Americans would call "ironic fashion". I liked it. 4/5

Basterds? Might watch it next week, not excited.


Great discussion lads.

Mr John wrote:

Eviltoastman wrote:It's one film divided into two, do you mean 2/3 into Kill Bill 1 (up until she goes to Tokyo, which would explain what you meant by neon lighting), or partly into part two (after the fight with Daryl Hannah)?

not to be a jerk, but
he said what he meant.

It's very clear.

I'd like Tarrantino if he'd shut up. But he talk through all his characters in his films. He annoys the fuck out of me. I don't see characters anymore, I see a big chinned movie geek pretending to be a gangster/assassin/jewel thief - badly...etc.

And apparently you haven't seen war until you've seen it through his eyes.

Watched Paths of Glory again the other nigh. What a film.

Reading that text (and others) Im a little surpised by the amount of Tarantino knowledge all the Tarantino haters has got.
I hate the band Oasis. Yet I dont analyze all their songs, compare them to each other, find typical trademarks in their songs, check out unreleased meterial from before they became famous, read interviews with the band to learn what Noel did before he formed the band, and who his musical inspirations are, and then do research on the inspirations, etc etc...

Nah man, my time is precious. If I dont like something, I stay away from it.

some people like to try and understand why they don't like something

Update: Still haven't watched this piece of shit.

Thunder Bear wrote:Reading that text (and others) Im a little surpised by the amount of Tarantino knowledge all the Tarantino haters has got.
I hate the band Eyebrows. Yet I dont analyze all their songs, compare them to each other, find typical trademarks in their songs, check out unreleased meterial from before they became famous, read interviews with the band to learn what Noel did before he formed the band, and who his musical inspirations are, and then do research on the inspirations, etc etc...

Nah man, my time is precious. If I dont like something, I stay away from it.

There's always those times when you get sucked in unwillingly, out of human curiousity.

Everyone likes a car crash...