2015 Off Topic Thread

[SPX]

Consider this our first disagreement and if I knew how to neg, I would neg the shit out of you.

Click the little star looking thing and the bottom left of his post and then neg the fuck out of him. Because yeah, Tarantino is awesome. I love almost all of his movies. One of my favorite writers and directors of all time.

BTW, welcome to the OT thread. Feel free to talk about ANYTHING in here.

[Ludo]

1. Pulp Fiction
2. Reservoir Dogs
3. Inglourious Basterds (SURPRISE SURPRISE UNDERRATED MOVIE)

The man is just brilliant.

There really is no "wrong" answer when those three are at the top to be honest. They're all magnificent. Kill Bill could easily occupy one of those spots also.

[SPX]

Agreed. Tarantino has always excelled at separating himself from many other directors with his dialogue, and his use of sequencing in film. Using Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill as the best examples of a timeline that isn't sequential, but it still makes perfect sense(though, Pulp Fiction is the better example, as Kill Bill does culminate in the death of the "villain" and a happy ending for the hero/protagonist).

Gotta say my favorite Tarantino joint is Reservoir Dogs.

1. Pulp Fiction
2. Reservoir Dogs
3. Inglourious Basterds (SURPRISE SURPRISE UNDERRATED MOVIE)

The man is just brilliant.

On this we must disagree. Reservoir Dogs is the only QT movie that I just don't like and never feel the desire to rewatch.

My list:

1. Pulp Fiction
2. Kill Bill (I consider them a single film)
3. Inglourious Basterds
4. Jackie Brown
5. Django
6. Death Proof
7. Reservoir Dogs

[Ludo]

On this we must disagree. Reservoir Dogs is the only QT movie that I just don't like and never feel the desire to rewatch.

My list:

1. Pulp Fiction
2. Kill Bill (I consider them a single film)
3. Inglourious Basterds
4. Jackie Brown
5. Django
6. Death Proof
7. Reservoir Dogs

I can see RD not making the top 3 in favor of Kill Bill, but last? Come on, man. In no universe, parallel or not, does Reservoir Dogs belong lower than Death Proof. Death Proof barely had a cohesive plot. And while I did thoroughly enjoy Django, I just don't see it stacking up to the more "classic Tarantino" style films.

My list probably looks something like:

1. Reservoir Dogs
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Kill Bill
4. Inglorious Basterds
5. Django
6. Jackie Brown
7. Death Proof

[Éire]

On this we must disagree. Reservoir Dogs is the only QT movie that I just don't like and never feel the desire to rewatch.

My list:

1. Pulp Fiction
2. Kill Bill (I consider them a single film)
3. Inglourious Basterds
4. Jackie Brown
5. Django
6. Death Proof
7. Reservoir Dogs

HUH? What do you possibly not like about it, lol?

1. Pulp Fiction
2. Reservoir Dogs
3. Inglourious Basterds
4. Django Unchained
5. Kill Bill Vol. 2
6. Kill Bill Vol. 1
7. Jackie Brown
8. Death Proof

I guess I see what you're saying cause I didn't much like Jackie Brown but HOW THE FUCK ARE YOU GONNA RATE RESERVOIR DOGS UNDER DEATH PROOF?

EDIT: My newly found neg trigger finger is itching.

[SPX]

I can see RD not making the top 3 in favor of Kill Bill, but last? Come on, man. In no universe, parallel or not, does Reservoir Dogs belong lower than Death Proof. Death Proof barely had a cohesive plot. And while I did thoroughly enjoy Django, I just don't see it stacking up to the more "classic Tarantino" style films.

My list probably looks something like:

1. Reservoir Dogs
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Kill Bill
4. Inglorious Basterds
5. Django
6. Jackie Brown
7. Death Proof

I'll at least grant you that Reservoir Dogs is probably a BETTER film than Death Proof. And I can't even really tell you why I don't like it. All I can say is that it just gives me a bad feeling for some reason.

But really, I'm not a big fan of Death Proof either and also not a HUGE fan of Django.

As far as I'm concerned, Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill, Basterds and Jackie Brown make up his core catalog for me and those are the films of his that I really like to revisit.

[SPX]

I guess I see what you're saying cause I didn't much like Jackie Brown but. . .

JackieBrown is a curious one because it's the only QT film based on an existing property. And Quentin has even talked himself about how it's the one film of his that doesn't really feel like "his" film. But I have always enjoyed it. I've seen it many times.

HOW THE FUCK ARE YOU GONNA RATE RESERVOIR DOGS UNDER DEATH PROOF?

See my reply to Ludo.

EDIT: My newly found neg trigger finger is itching.

BOL! Uh oh.

[Ludo]

I'll at least grant you that Reservoir Dogs is probably a BETTER film than Death Proof. And I can't even really tell you why I don't like it. All I can say is that it just gives me a bad feeling for some reason.

But really, I'm not a big fan of Death Proof either and also not a HUGE fan of Django.

As far as I'm concerned, Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill, Basterds and Jackie Brown make up his core catalog for me and those are the films of his that I really like to revisit.

Maybe give it another shot and try to forget that you've seen it before? It's truly a fantastic film, chock full of great acting and phenomenal dialogue, and a great cast for it's time. Harvey Keitel is a grossly underrated actor. I get that it's all about personal preference, it just seems like something went wrong for you while you were watching it, because I've never heard of anyone not liking Reservoir Dogs. I've heard people say they didn't like it as much as "insert QT movie X here", but I've never heard anyone say they flat out didn't like Reservoir Dogs.

[SPX]

Maybe give it another shot and try to forget that you've seen it before? It's truly a fantastic film, chock full of great acting and phenomenal dialogue, and a great cast for it's time. Harvey Keitel is a grossly underrated actor. I get that it's all about personal preference, it just seems like something went wrong for you while you were watching it, because I've never heard of anyone not liking Reservoir Dogs. I've heard people say they didn't like it as much as "insert QT movie X here", but I've never heard anyone say they flat out didn't like Reservoir Dogs.

I've seen it several times, but maybe I'll give it another shot because it's been several years since the last time. Like I said before, I don't think it's a BAD movie. It's just a movie that I don't enjoy watching. There's a difference there.

For a first-time director, it's a phenomenal achievement.

[SPX]

Biblical shit flies just fine with me. I enjoyed "The Bible" mini series that History channel did. First off, how can you defend a film in which almost every fucking character was blonde haired, blue eyed, with a british accent, and european features?

I'm sorry, but my suspended disbelief only goes so far when they fuck up the easy shit. Steel fucking swords, that weren't even the right shape in some or all of the battle scenes, when they weren't even out of the Bronze age yet. Again, this is easy shit. Casting the Scot from Alien Vs Predator as an Egyptian when he has an accent thicker than Sean Connery's is the worst casting decision since they casted Connery as an Egyptian named Juan Sanchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez.

Spike recently had a mini series, Tut, which was worlds better than Ramses. And it didn't need a made up monkey shit storyline to be better, either.

First, I'm surprised you liked The Bible. From what I know of you, it doesn't seem like your style. But I also liked it. And I also want to see Tut, so that one's on the list.

As for Exodus, it seems that most of your complaints are technical: The people aren't dark enough for you, the accents aren't right, the swords are made of steel (this one honestly didn't even begin to occur to me), etc. I didn't concern myself too much with all that. I thought it was an interesting story that was well-told and the movie also had some of the most beautiful visuals I had seen the whole year.

8/10

[Ludo]

JackieBrown is a curious one because it's the only QT film based on an existing property. And Quentin has even talked himself about how it's the one film of his that doesn't really feel like "his" film. But I have always enjoyed it. I've seen it many times.

Honestly Jackie Brown is one of his weaker works, but that kind of gets made up for by having a stellar cast(think the Oceans 11 remake, but not nearly as bad to begin with). Not that it's a bad film, just that it needed to be redeemed in a way is what drops it on my list. None of the other films above it on my list needed to redeem themselves fundamentally. They were all sound at the core, except for Jackie Brown. But it gets a pass over Death Proof because it at least had that. Death Proof was basically Tarantino's mulligan. Spoiler alert inbound:

























He got to do a passion project with a shitty cast of B-grade actresses and a faded star, that, more or less, takes place in a parallel universe where stuntmen just roams around trying to kill women in a plastic case he built into the passenger seat of his hot rod. It was too unbelievable to be taken seriously. Not that much of QT's work is necessarily and wholly "believable", but you know what I mean. It's in the same realm as Superman being way more plausible than Batman. Just too much perfect storm action going on to believe in it.

[Ludo]

First, I'm surprised you liked The Bible. From what I know of you, it doesn't seem like your style. But I also liked it. And I also want to see Tut, so that one's on the list.

As for Exodus, it seems that most of your complaints are technical: The people aren't dark enough for you, the accents aren't right, the swords are made of steel (this one honestly didn't even begin to occur to me), etc. I didn't concern myself too much with all that. I thought it was an interesting story that was well-told and the movie also had some of the most beautiful visuals I had seen the whole year.

8/10

I don't usually demand a full on 100% technically accurate depiction of things. Don't get me wrong. I like a little ironic spoofing in there sometimes. It's just that the little shit was so glaringly wrong right off the bat, and the final product in the grand scheme of things, really didn't impress me at all. It felt like another excuse to show the public how far special effects have come along when you throw $150,000,000 into one production.

To be fair, Noah was much, much worse.

Tut was awesome. They used actual kopesh swords, the people had the right features, everything looked much more historically accurate. And the story didn't need a whole lot of doctoring for dramatic effect. If you liked Ramses, Tut will blow you away, I think.

[SPX]

Honestly Jackie Brown is one of his weaker works, but that kind of gets made up for by having a stellar cast(think the Oceans 11 remake, but not nearly as bad to begin with). Not that it's a bad film, just that it needed to be redeemed in a way is what drops it on my list. None of the other films above it on my list needed to redeem themselves fundamentally. They were all sound at the core, except for Jackie Brown.

I don't think it has the same flair that his other films do. It's a simpler, more grounded piece of fiction. But I don't really understand why you'd think it needed to be redeemed or that it wasn't sound at its core. I think it's fundamentally solid.

As an aside, I don't smoke weed anymore, but there was a short period of time where I was smoking weed every night and I watched Jackie Brown probably 15 times while blazed. It's a good blazed movie.

But it gets a pass over Death Proof because it at least had that. Death Proof was basically Tarantino's mulligan.

Well, like I said, I don't think Death Proof is a great movie. It's just okay. I rarely feel the need to rewatch it, though I probably should soon, because it's been quite a while since I last checked it out and it's growing hazy in my memory.

[SPX]

I don't usually demand a full on 100% technically accurate depiction of things. Don't get me wrong. I like a little ironic spoofing in there sometimes. It's just that the little shit was so glaringly wrong right off the bat, and the final product in the grand scheme of things, really didn't impress me at all. It felt like another excuse to show the public how far special effects have come along when you throw $150,000,000 into one production.

Did you not at least think Joel Edgerton was great?

To be fair, Noah was much, much worse.

Noah was an insane movie. Literally insane. The story is just fucking crazy. You know what kind of movie you're watching when the rocket launcher comes out. All bets are off at that point.

It's the kind of movie I'm glad I saw once, but I really suspect I will never watch it again.

Tut was awesome. They used actual kopesh swords, the people had the right features, everything looked much more historically accurate. And the story didn't need a whole lot of doctoring for dramatic effect. If you liked Ramses, Tut will blow you away, I think.

But is Ben Kingsley really any more authentic than any other Brit?

[Ludo]

I don't think it has the same flair that his other films do. It's a simpler, more grounded piece of fiction. But I don't really understand why you'd think it needed to be redeemed or that it wasn't sound at its core. I think it's fundamentally solid.

As an aside, I don't smoke weed anymore, but there was a short period of time where I was smoking weed every night and I watched Jackie Brown probably 15 times while blazed. It's a good blazed movie.




Well, like I said, I don't think Death Proof is a great movie. It's just okay. I rarely feel the need to rewatch it, though I probably should soon, because it's been quite a while since I last checked it out and it's growing hazy in my memory.

Never been a huge fan of smoking pot. Haven't done it with any kind of frequency since I was like 13-14. I just didn't feel like Jackie Brown had the same kind of quality that we had been given up to that point, and after that point, by and large, from Tarantio.