|
Maxwell Lord posted:So am I literally the only one here who went to a screening where the 70mm didn't work? Park in Vancouver, they told us at the end of the movie it'd been the DCP the whole time because the projector broke (I think I saw it strobing at some point, before they must have switched, during the overture). I thought it didn't look amazing because of the material of the screen itself, and noticed some aliasing on the overture titles, but didn't fully realize. It's a shame that I probably won't see 70mm in my lifetime, but most people that waited did get free tickets. after bitching to the manager.
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
The bear scene in the Revenant is 100% consensual and very tasteful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
Movie used the deleted Ennio Morricone track from The Thing. If you owned this DVD  That was the title menu, and I can't tell you how many times I fell asleep and woke up to that cello tune.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
AH! I knew it! That's where I heard it from. The score was the only thing I really enjoyed to be honest. Great score.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
oswald ownenstein posted:i want to know if he actually gets raped by a bear in the revenant becaues i literally won't see it if it that happens it's a recurring theme in the film and sort of symbolizes Hugh Glass's emotional state while he's dragging himself through the woods all alone, though I gotta say I was blown away by the dream sequence towards the end where the bear shows up and asks him "You don't really come here for the hunting, do you?"
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
This might be my favorite Tarantino movie since Pulp Fiction. I thought the Roadshow thing was cool, I like that Tarantino has enough pull that he can do things like that. It reminded me of Grindhouse, even though Tarantino's half of that was his worst movie, the whole experience with the fake trailers and everything owned.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 01:22
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:it's a recurring theme in the film and sort of symbolizes Hugh Glass's emotional state while he's dragging himself through the woods all alone, though I gotta say I was blown away by the dream sequence towards the end where the bear shows up and asks him "You don't really come here for the hunting, do you?" Startin' to see pictures, ain't ya?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
null posted:This might be my favorite Tarantino movie since Pulp Fiction. Even Tarantino's worst is better than a lot of director's best. And I loved Grindhouse, even though neither individual movie stands on its own very well (though Death Proof does so better than Planet Terror); it was a huge disappointment that the film going public eschewed that movie, because I would have loved it if studios had incentive to fund that kind of modern interpretation of older cinematic experiences, specifically the single ticket double feature.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
This reminded me of Clue the Movie alot and I don't knwo why.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
centaurtainment posted:Even Tarantino's worst is better than a lot of director's best. And I loved Grindhouse, even though neither individual movie stands on its own very well (though Death Proof does so better than Planet Terror); it was a huge disappointment that the film going public eschewed that movie, because I would have loved it if studios had incentive to fund that kind of modern interpretation of older cinematic experiences, specifically the single ticket double feature. I liked Planet Terror a lot, I've re-watched it since and I think it stands on it's own aside from being short. I know people said that special effects and plot wise Death Proof better fit the aesthetic of actual grindhouse type movies. I saw Grindhouse twice in theaters because it was a unique experience, I agree that it's too bad it did poorly so it didn't encourage more directors trying that sort of thing. But that was a lot to expect I guess.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 03:09
|
|
|
axleblaze posted:The whole seen is shot in a much more dreamy, over the top and fantastical way than the rest of the film up to that point too. It is indicated just by the way it's cut together that it's not something that happened but rather the pictures being forced in the old man's head. Still, it is left up to the audience whether it actually happened. Whether or not there are 15 other gang members is something left up to the audience to decide, the movie is very clear about that being made up by Sam Jackson and even breaks the fourth wall to wink at you and let you know it is bullshit, in case you didn't get the 20 other hints and weren't paying attention.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
Abu Dave posted:This reminded me of Clue the Movie alot and I don't knwo why. Well for awhile it's got this very Agatha Christie whodunit vibe going on, which is probably why you got that vibe. Frankly, I thought the first half was some of Tarantino's tightest writing yet, but the second half it felt like he threw away a good mystery in favor of complete indulgence. Still fun, like it a lot. Seeing it again Wednesday with another group of friends. Calico Heart posted:I saw this movie waaaaaaay back in October I think. Advanced screening in LA where they didn't announce what the movie was but everyone sort of picked up on it. Tarantino came out and introduced the film, everyone went nuts, it was great. This is driving me mad. What movie did he say?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
I compared it to And Then There Were None as I was discussing it leaving the theater, no idea if that's what Tarantino said, but it is interesting other people thought of Clue and Agatha Christie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
Just saw this at 2:50PM in Boca Raton, there were lots of really confused senior citizens who thought they were going to see a straight western or something e: it was good
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 03:56
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:Frankly, I thought the first half was some of Tarantino's tightest writing yet, but the second half it felt like he threw away a good mystery in favor of complete indulgence. Still fun, like it a lot. Seeing it again Wednesday with another group of friends. I agree, but I'm grappling with what message the movie delivers with this setup. Pre-intermission scenes move everyone into place, establish tension, and set up a mystery. Then immediately post-intermission, Tarantino himself interjects to tell the audience what they're missing and Warren and Mannix solve the mystery with almost no missteps but there's still a third of the movie left. I guess my beef is with the flashback chapter. It spends a lot of time on gratuitous murders and doesn't do much to tell us more about the Domergue gang. In fact, it shows that they've no qualms murdering people so it undermines the poisoning scene. Why wouldn't Mobray just off Warren and Mannix during the chaos? It's also curious that their plan involves such an elaborate trap when they had no reason to assume Ruth would have anyone else with him besides a stagecoach driver. I'm willing to overlook this for movie magic but maybe they could've established a greater trepidation of facing off against Ruth. i am the bird fucked around with this message at 04:16 on Dec 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
Naet posted:I agree, but I'm grappling with what message the movie delivers with this setup. Pre-intermission scenes move everyone into place, establish tension, and set up a mystery. Then immediately post-intermission, Tarantino himself interjects to tell the audience what they're missing and Warren and Mannix solve the mystery with almost no missteps but there's still a third of the movie left. I think they had to make sure, first and foremost, that Ruth was dead, otherwise Daisy would be likely to get shot as soon as fighting broke out. Even then they wait until they're absolutely sure of taking out at least one of them. They're very conservative because they want her to get out alive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
Calico Heart posted:I saw this movie waaaaaaay back in October I think. Advanced screening in LA where they didn't announce what the movie was but everyone sort of picked up on it. Tarantino came out and introduced the film, everyone went nuts, it was great. So from a ways back...was the fill-in-the-blank Clue? I knew the plot reminded me of something and the idea of Tarantino basing the movie off Clue is amazing. I'm also tempted to screw with people and tell them the idea of the Hateful Eight as The Thing set in the West was a red herring, its actually a prequel to From Dusk Til Dawn 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
My theater's 70mm was busted, too in La Jolla. Very disappointing but I liked the movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 07:29
|
|
|
I think we can all agree that Tarantino needs to now make a buddy cop show starring Samuel L. Jackson and Walton Goggins.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 07:44
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:I heard rumors that where you went to see it (Lincoln in NYC, right?) was aware that 70mm wasn't working days ago, if it ever worked, and was still selling tickets. I saw the Sunday 2:45 show at Lincoln Square NYC. Everything worked perfectly so they must have worked out the kinks. Thought it was a great movie
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 07:47
|
|
|
Nimec posted:My theater's 70mm was busted, too in La Jolla. Very disappointing but I liked the movie. Where, at that Arclight at the Westfield mall?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 07:59
|
|
|
Yep. It broke this morning and they didn't tell us until 1 minute before the 7 pm showing. One person in my group left but the rest stayed. Got a booklet at least! It also had the extra scenes apparently even though it was digital.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 08:14
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:I'm in KC, the Town Center AMC multiplex (which is amusingly right next to AMC corporate headquarters.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 08:20
|
|
|
Sucks, dude. Glad I went yesterday, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 08:39
|
|
|
I very rarely come into CD but I was really curious what others thought of this because I thought it was Tarantino's best since Pulp Fiction. I enjoy but wasn't blown away by Inglorious Basterds but Hateful Eight took the best element of that movie, the suspense and drama in Waltz's scenes and turned them into 120 minutes of dramatic build up. The suspense Tarantino created just through dialogue and lingering shots on the characters was fantastic. I was literally on the edge of my seat and completely focused on this film in a way I haven't been in a while. I'm a big fan of theater and this felt like it was a play more than a movie at times. Acting was great, score was great, I want to see this again because there was so much nuance to take in I'm sure I missed a lot of little details. There was a bit of humor as well, and I see a lot of people complaining online about the racism but the dialogue is so good and its not entirely inappropriate considering the time period, I can give it a pass. I honestly expect he might have put more in just because of the same controversy regarding Django. Jennifer Jason Leigh was really good, even though her lines were relatively limited she did a lot of character work in her mannerisms and facials. The casual violence depicted towards her is only so "offensive" because violence towards women is a hot button topic, her role could have been recast as a guy and the violence would be unnoticed. I think that actually does a lot of good because I didn't find her gender to really be a topic of major import in the film. She's never sexualized or treated as anything less than a dangerous criminal. Nobody threatens her with rape and while likening the violence towards her to domestic abuse with the way it's portrayed, I think it really just underscores that she is unworthy of being respected as a human due to her treatment of others. To me it makes her character feel the same as I would about a man because the assaults to "put her in her place" are to remind her she's a criminal in chains and not to demean her as a female. I'm not a woman who's suffered abuse so I can't say it's 100%, not offensive but I definitely felt like her gender was more or less irrelevant; which I suppose is either your definition of equality or sexism. I don't think a star is born with Walton Goggins but hopefully this will get him some more roles because he's really good and incredibly entertaining, and he was seriously the life of the movie. Sam Jackson was good too, that guy can flip that noble/sadistic switch like nobody else and it's used to great effect in this film. See this movie, in 70mm if you can because some of the shots are just stunning. PaybackJack fucked around with this message at 09:26 on Dec 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 08:52
|
|
|
Nimec posted:My theater's 70mm was busted, too in La Jolla. Very disappointing but I liked the movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 09:41
|
|
|
it's shot on film anyway so even with the digital transfer, you're still getting a lot of the qualities of the film
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 11:52
|
|
|
PaybackJack posted:Jennifer Jason Leigh was really good, even though her lines were relatively limited she did a lot of character work in her mannerisms and facials. The casual violence depicted towards her is only so "offensive" because violence towards women is a hot button topic, her role could have been recast as a guy and the violence would be unnoticed. I think that actually does a lot of good because I didn't find her gender to really be a topic of major import in the film. She's never sexualized or treated as anything less than a dangerous criminal. Nobody threatens her with rape and while likening the violence towards her to domestic abuse with the way it's portrayed, I think it really just underscores that she is unworthy of being respected as a human due to her treatment of others. To me it makes her character feel the same as I would about a man because the assaults to "put her in her place" are to remind her she's a criminal in chains and not to demean her as a female. I don't know why and it's probably without precedent but thank christ, I was sort of worried some spoilers were alluding she gets raped and I really did not want to see that happen in this movie
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
I sure wish I liked this more than I did. It's the only Tarantino film besides Death Proof where I found the dialog scenes tedious. And here it was even more noticeable due to the sheer length of them. The first half could have been cut down to 40 minutes with no harm done. I left the theater feeling exhausted. But that's actually my most minor complaint. My real gripe with the movie is that it misses the mark of being the tense "no one is who they say they are" type nail-biter that it seems, at least in the first half, it wants to be. Tarantino is to be able to tell a tight, engrossing story (see the opening of Inglorious Basterds), but here it feels like he lost his way somewhere in the writing process. The first half, although slow, felt like it was building to something, carefully putting all the pieces in place for an intense and mysterious second half. But that payoff never comes. The movie stagnates just when it needs to kick into high gear. The overt Tarantino-ness gets in the way, and instead of getting tightly-constructed scenes that build tension and keep the audience guessing, we get stories of forced blowjobs and goofy expositional narration. Oh god that narration. Tarantino really knows how to destroy the tone of his own movie. The "when we last left our characters" thing simply didn't belong in this movie, and was one of the first times that Tarantino's overt self-indulgence made me roll my eyes. The "Tarantino Movie" is a weird thing. We go in expecting to hang on every superfluous bit of dialog and to laugh at every exploding head and use of the word "friend of the family". And we love it, because underneath the layer of "Tarantino" is a layer of true craftsmanship. And the two elements have typically gelled into one cohesive Tarantino whole. For instance, Pulp Fiction couldn't have been made by any other director - he IS that movie. But here it's like the two layers never adhere and his voice hinders rather than enhances the experience. With all that said, I didn't completely dislike it. It was beautifully shot and the music was the best of any of his movies. I enjoyed some of the acting and I laughed a time or two.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
Yeah, this is the second film of his in a row where his insistence on giving himself a role absolutely destroys the tone and mood he had worked so hard to establish. I had the exact same problem with Django where he did an amazing job creating this world, writing these characters, and sucking me in. Then in one fell swoop he ruins it all with a tremendously bad decision. In Django it ruined the film for me, here I was able to get past it. But after a half hour into the second half, and the "reveal" is made, it seemed like he had no idea how to end it. He had written his way into a corner and he wasn't clever enough to do anything but let it all burn down.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Movie was poo poo entire film was one long lead up to the next joke that featured XXX blank N- Word !!! which Quentin used multiple loving times for laughsthrough out the entire film. . It was a terrible waste of loving 70mm to shoot everything indoors. The acting was excellent but that was about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
Been a while since a movie had me hanging on every line of dialogue. The cabin is like a stage, and you feel like you're in there with them. I hope we get more films where going to see it feels like an event. Between this and Star Wars it's an exciting time to hit the cinema. My mom wanted to go with me to see this, but I had to insist that she sit this one out. Pulp Fiction was too much for her, Hateful Eight would've killed the poor woman.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
The projector was broken in South Atlanta, so they had to go digital. In the end it worked out, as we watched it on the biggest non-IMAX screen they had and the film still covered the entire screen (I was worried they'd try and pass off a regular sized movie on the bigger screen). I don't recall the last movie where I had to look away or close my eyes. And it wasn't even Samuel L. Jackson going for a walk in snowshoes scene. It was that drat flashback chapter. It sucks that the projectors keep breaking, but the regular 35mm ones could be temperamental back when I used to shovel popcorn. There was a reason projectionists got paid as much as they did. At least the backup plan worked.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
I saw it in Edina (Minneapolis) and there was no problem with the projection. Not much to add to the adulations, just to say that it was the cinema highlight of the year for me. I love his slow-burn buildup in the first half, never got the whinging about tedium w/r/t Death Proof and even this film, from here and outside during intermission. You won't give a poo poo about the action if you don't know who the characters are! Unfortunately one of my mates cackled at every misfortune visited upon Daisy. He's kind of a raging misogynist/overall misanthrope, whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Just saw it in 70mm in Providence, RI. There was a good amount of people in the crowd for an 11am showing.. It looked great on film and it was a fantastic movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:Yeah, this is the second film of his in a row where his insistence on giving himself a role absolutely destroys the tone and mood he had worked so hard to establish. I had the exact same problem with Django where he did an amazing job creating this world, writing these characters, and sucking me in. Then in one fell swoop he ruins it all with a tremendously bad decision. I don't even remember his role in Django. He's pretty forgettable in everything actually. Hollismason posted:Movie was poo poo entire film was one long lead up to the next joke that featured XXX blank N- Word !!! which Quentin used multiple loving times for laughsthrough out the entire film. . It was a terrible waste of loving 70mm to shoot everything indoors. The acting was excellent but that was about it. You probably should not pay to see another Tarantino movie, obviously not your thing. pwn posted:
Mr. High Horse let me introduce you to schadenfreude. I would love your analysis of why it's wrong to laugh at those parts (not really because that's a really stupid position).
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
You can laugh at whatever you want, but I just fail to see how it was funny because there's nothing that earns it. Oh, so she's gross. So what? Her spitting later in the scene warrented a whack, and what happened during that scene made it quite funny. But before? Ehhh, I'd say it wasn't funny in the slightest.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
I loved Tarantino's cameo. I don't think it ruined the tone at all, it actually enhanced the Agatha Christie-ness for me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:I don't even remember his role in Django. He's pretty forgettable in everything actually. Nah, the man sticks out like a sore thumb.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
Tarantino's cameo in Django will always be memorable because he blows himself up with dynamite and I nearly pissed myself in the theater. Also he never says the n-word in his Django cameo because he says "blackie" instead which I suspect is an intentional play on the viewer's expectations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 23:12
|
|