Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

What DVD / Video did you watch last night? (pt2)

Status
Not open for further replies.
^^^cemented my belief that Tar antino hasn't made a good film since Jackie Brown did that.

you're both seriously wrong - on the basis of the first three chapters anyway. It's superbly made, and hilarious, the best spaghetti western for decades.
 
you're both seriously wrong - on the basis of the first three chapters anyway. It's superbly made, and hilarious, the best spaghetti western for decades.

No - see, what made it worse was that I could see what he was trying to do. And it was painful. And offensive. I nearly plucked out my eyes.
 
I loved Inglorious Basterds and I'm not that big a fan of most of Tarantino's other films, apart from Jackie Brown. The fact that this is a period film and in three different languages means that for once most of the characters didn't sound like they were talking with Tarantino's voice. I find a lot of self important prestige films that deal with the Holocaust directly (Sophie's Choice) or indirectly (The Reader) tremendously offensive. They often strike me as cynically engineered to grab awards and they ponderously exploit the Holocaust for cheap melodrama. Inglorious Basterds on the other was a joyfully irreverent take on WWII films (not on WWII itself). It's a wish fulfillment revenge fantasy, but it is only offensive if you mistake it as a film about history than a film that parodies and plays with genre conventions. In that way it's similar to The Life of Brian.
 
Bollocks was it. I'm a total stranger to the genre Tarantino was riffing on in JB (blaxploitation?) but I found it really cool. And it introduced me to 'across a 110th street' so therefor cannot be faulted.
 
Bollocks was it. I'm a total stranger to the genre Tarantino was riffing on in JB (blaxploitation?) but I found it really cool. And it introduced me to 'across a 110th street' so therefor cannot be faulted.

JB was based on a book by Elmore Leonard anyway, so had good genes right from the start
 
Bollocks was it. I'm a total stranger to the genre Tarantino was riffing on in JB (blaxploitation?) but I found it really cool. And it introduced me to 'across a 110th street' so therefor cannot be faulted.

Great song but a shit film. Just boring.

Not as boring as Death Proof, which I still haven't finished watching (and that was the shorter theatrical version, fuck knows what the long one is like).
 
Great song but a shit film. Just boring.

poor QT, I bet he knew he should have put more cartoons with unfeasibly large eyes in really.

Anyways, I shall go home and watch the last hour of IB to make my final judgement on that, I do suspect it will have been improved by being watched in two sessions like this.
 
Most films according to Atomic Supplex fall within the "boring" or "shit" spectrum, so I'm delighted that he's added "bland" to his critical repertoire. :)
 
Jackie Brown is Tarantino's best film IMO.

A lot slower pace, more grown up, a strong story and cast.

I had to watch it three times to appreciate it really - initially I thought 'boring' then I switched off my Tarantion tinted specs and saw the film in a completely new light.

I don't think IB will stand the test of time - It has some great stuff in it, and it's a lot of fun, but by the last 1/2hr I was desparing a bit and thinking just fucking end! I can't see myself watching it again.
 
I loved Inglorious Basterds and I'm not that big a fan of most of Tarantino's other films, apart from Jackie Brown. The fact that this is a period film and in three different languages means that for once most of the characters didn't sound like they were talking with Tarantino's voice. I find a lot of self important prestige films that deal with the Holocaust directly (Sophie's Choice) or indirectly (The Reader) tremendously offensive. They often strike me as cynically engineered to grab awards and they ponderously exploit the Holocaust for cheap melodrama. Inglorious Basterds on the other was a joyfully irreverent take on WWII films (not on WWII itself). It's a wish fulfillment revenge fantasy, but it is only offensive if you mistake it as a film about history than a film that parodies and plays with genre conventions. In that way it's similar to The Life of Brian.

I agree, although it would be difficult to take it for a film about history, given how the thing ends. :)
 
Just watched Sherlock Stock and Two Smoking Kung Fu Victorian Detectives.....it was average.



...and it robs a whole line from Angel Heart!


ok....it's Sophocles....but seeing as it was said in reference to the occult I reckon it was lifted from Angel Heart.
 
Can you pick one of those moronic children's films I have praised so highly out please? There must be so many for this to have somehow stuck in your mind.

I'm trying to remember a movie you do actually like, just quickly checked your lasty fifty posts on here and there doesn't seem to have been one!

my point is simply that you seem to want a movie to be wholly great for it to think it good at all.and i can be happy with films that aren't perfect, as long as the other bits are doing something interesting or original or funny. in fact most of the best movies aren't perfect, cos they're trying to do so much, but that vision is far more enthralling than making sure everything ties up 'correctly' (whatever that might mean).

With Inglorious I undoubtedly enjoyed it more cos of having my expectations lowered beforehand, and from watching it in two parts. It would probably have been okay in the cinema in one, but not on our telly. Too heavy a meal, each bit of it was good but all in one was just too much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom