Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Where can I find the Hateful 8?

ebonics said:
Others have pointed out the profound "staginess" of The Hateful Eight; and I do think that's quite deliberate. This is a film that draws enormous amounts of attention to the manner and mode of its creation. It's purposefully self-aware and yes, I do think QT often does get in his own way, at times. .
Click to expand...
Yep, I think exactly this. I don't mind the staginess at all, but yes, he gets in his own way. I think that's a very nice way to put it.
 
Rutita1 said:
You gonna call my ears precious too?
Click to expand...
Yes, if your objections are on similar grounds as OTs.

I can't multi quote on my phone but you're right other films set in that period don't use it, perhaps they should. Not all the time I grant but yes more should use it otherwise it's just sanitising history and I'm really not in favour of that. Tarnatino is, AFAIK, the first to use the word so much in a film set in that era which is why he gets so much stick I imagine.
 
Mel brooks got loads of grief for blazing saddles didn't he? Although probably not as much as if he'd have released it in this age because the internet wasn't around then.
 
ska invita said:
Okay we're on 8 hateful pages now!



My memory of Blazing Saddles is that it sends up racism brilliantly... i wonder if its aged badly?
Click to expand...
It does send it up brilliantly but it probably has aged badly, reasons why that is would make an interesting thread in itself I think.

I'm not say QT's main aim is to send up racism in django or hateful 8, or even an aim at all but it certainly looks absurd to me and makes the perpetrators of it look stupid.
 
On the original topic of the hateful 8. I think the stage look if the set is intentional. I must admit I didn't notice it much when I watched the film, i noticed just how fantastically detailed it was though. What I did notice was how the scenery looked going past outside when they were in the wagon. It had that comically fake look about it.

The 60 mil budget is puzzling though. I saw a brief clip about the cameras and how the lenses had to be refurbished or something so unless that was eye wateringly expensive I can't think why it cost that much.
 
belboid had it right when he said verimissilitude is the faithful appearence of reality (paraphrasing) but I'd also add its hard to do that in a pastiche because by its nature it is knowing, and expectant on the audience to have some knowing. Its not being played with a face so unstraight its satire but it isn't a straight face. Thus the overuse of a certain racist word, the slapping about of a woman. Somehow its like the nature of his storytelling hasn't earned the right. If that makes any sense at all.


caveat: I have no idea what he's pastiching here but then I am no film buff. I'm sure all the critics clocked this shot or that theme.
 
Doctor Carrot said:
On the original topic of the hateful 8. I think the stage look if the set is intentional. I must admit I didn't notice it much when I watched the film, i noticed just how fantastically detailed it was though. What I did notice was how the scenery looked going past outside when they were in the wagon. It had that comically fake look about it.

The 60 mil budget is puzzling though. I saw a brief clip about the cameras and how the lenses had to be refurbished or something so unless that was eye wateringly expensive I can't think why it cost that much.
Click to expand...
look through all the people involved in making it: The Hateful Eight (2015) - Full Cast & Crew - IMDb
think about the hire of the cameras, construction of sets, costumes etc etc etc
Making of 'Hateful Eight': How Tarantino Braved Sub-Zero Weather and a Stolen Screener
 
DotCommunist said:
nicely done if so because the enemy was us all the time. Also brings in themes of passing and fear of the Other which The Thing is riven with. Totally went over my head though.
Click to expand...
Over my head too. Don't think that matters. A film can make references to other films but still needs to stand on its own. Reservoir Dogs is the biggest Tarantino example of that - nicks whole scenes virtually from John Woo films.

I don't mind. Some great films are total rip-offs - A fistful of dollars, eg.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
Over my head too. Don't think that matters. A film can make references to other films but still needs to stand on its own. Reservoir Dogs is the biggest Tarantino example of that - nicks whole scenes virtually from John Woo films.

I don't mind. Some great films are total rip-offs - A fistful of dollars, eg.
Click to expand...
star wars...
 
Doctor Carrot said:
... The 60 mil budget is puzzling though. I saw a brief clip about the cameras and how the lenses had to be refurbished or something so unless that was eye wateringly expensive I can't think why it cost that much.
Click to expand...
While I don't know much about film making, 60 million dollars (I assume) does seem a lot when there were so few locations and sets involved. There were some special effects what with heads being blown off etc but not that many. Would be interesting to know what other films cost though to be able to compare.
 
It is the equipment hire that is the most expensive part of movie making, apparently. There are exceptions for some stars, but QT often gets them at very basic rates. The cameras will have been v v expensive.
 
On the subject of referencing other films... Carrie was there for most of it.

When we came out of the cinema I commented on how it seemed like a piece of theatre but I do think that kind of script would have felt very different presented on stage live to an audience. There would have been more drama for example, it would have seemed more desperately horrific and less slapstick. There is an honesty about theatre that would have helped this make it's 'points' I think.

Pantomine/exaggerated reality/ Satire/ Adult cartoon, QT trying to be an edgy B Movie maker, whatever it is, bar a few scenes and the soundtrack... it doesn't work for me as a film.
 
Last edited:
The main female character was treated as an oddity/freak, repeatedly covered/dripping in blood. From getting punched about to the more 'complete' drenchings as people started getting shot to bits all over her face in the Haberdashery.
 
Last edited:
Rutita1 said:
When we came out of the cinema I commented on how it seemed like a piece of theatre but I do think that kind of script would have felt very different presented on stage live to an audience. There would have been more drama for an example, it would have seemed more desperately horrific and less slapstick. There is an honesty about theatre that would have helped this make it 'points' I think..
Click to expand...
I was thinking about how you'd stage it in the theatre as I was watching. I agree that it misses some beats somehow. I haven't been able to pinpoint exactly where or how, but given the action, it felt strangely flat. The end should have felt satisfying, but didn't. Stagey films can work - I mentioned Rope earlier, which definitely works.

I think part of the problem for me was in the very basics of the plot. I was with the others about the Hangman. Just kill them and take in the corpse. But then there'd be no movie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

frogwoman
Books everyone thinks are great but you hated (and vice versa)
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
206
Views
5K
Yuwipi Woman
Yuwipi Woman
Fez909
Hard to find film & TV
Replies
11
Views
584
DaveCinzano
DaveCinzano
BristolEcho
YouTube finds
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
cloudyday
cloudyday
K
Where to watch classic Brit cult tv?
Replies
12
Views
513
Karl Masks
K
tim
Does anyone remember a TV series from the late 60s where a man goes for walks with his talking house and dustbin.
Replies
10
Views
603
bellaozzydog
bellaozzydog
Back
Top Bottom