|
Paperback Writer posted:-What was up with that painting in Dalton’s driveway? Looked like a segment of a billboard/some other outdoor advertising for one of Rick's movies, Comanche Uprising - you can see the full version of the poster in this Architectural Digest article. Rick clearly likes to keep his own memorabilia around the house (There's a good line in that article from the film's production designer about how he's the kind of guy who only decorates with things studios gave him or that he took from sets,) but he couldn't fit that one indoors. JethroMcB fucked around with this message at 14:38 on Aug 1, 2019 |
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 14:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 13:21 |
|
|
Paperback Writer posted:-What did people make of the Gary scene? All that tension and he’s just fine and happy with his situation(other than being blind). Just seemed kind of strange that the Manson girl wasn’t lying at all. quote:-What was up with that painting in Dalton’s driveway? Comanche Uprising’s poster seems to be inspired by Navajo Joe https://twitter.com/studiotstella/status/1154854010152804352?s=21 Edit: it also appears most of the posters in OUATIH were done by the guy who did Octopussy and Escape From New York’s posters Steve Yun fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Aug 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 14:34
|
|
|
Paperback Writer posted:-What did people make of the Gary scene? All that tension and he’s just fine and happy with his situation(other than being blind). Just seemed kind of strange that the Manson girl wasn’t lying at all. I just thought it was an effective build up of suspense that resolved to what had actually been happening, as improbable as it seems. Paperback Writer posted:-What was up with that painting in Dalton’s driveway? I thought it was hilarious that he had taken a corner of a huge poster and hung it sideways there. Paperback Writer posted:-And lol at Cliff’s perfect fighting reactions when he’s tripping balls. "Are you real?" (delivered perfectly - and it had bonus subtextual meaning too!)
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 14:35
|
|
|
Grizzled Patriarch posted:This was before my time so I'm genuinely curious, why would the fanboyism end with a movie that is easily in the top 3 of anything he's done? If it was before your time you probably don’t know this, but reception to Jackie Brown was decidedly more muted than Tarantino’s first two movies when it came out. It turned a tidy profit, but domestically it grossed about 40 million compared to Pulp Fiction’s 100+ million, and critics generally liked it but were not over the moon for it. There’s a reason the gap between Jackie Brown and Kill Bill was the longest between films in Tarantino’s career. It’s a fairly common take now, but if you were to say Jackie Brown was Tarantino’s best movie fifteen years ago, you’d be accused of extreme contrarianism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
The Bramble posted:So did the dog improv the dick-bite and get a Scooby snack for his good acting instincts afterwards, or do you think the dog emasculating, in the biblical sense, the only male hippy before he gets killed might have had a point and a message behind it. Re: the dog - I’m not sure if it was instinct or planned - but certainly a desirable outcome for maximum audience enjoyment. So one way or another it had to happen. As far as anything Biblical with it... ehhhh. Thousands of scenes with dogs biting crotches in movies so I don’t know about that. Re: feminist lens - I can’t claim to truly understand what feminism’s de facto reaction to a scene like this should be. Equality in treatment, pay, status in the world, etc could also be equality in the way a woman gets dispatched in a movie. Don’t get me wrong - it made me feel terribly uncomfortable watching what happened to them (with no empathy for the dude) because of how I lived my life and was raised. But also the way I was raised of being a gentleman to women because they are special and deserving of better treatment- isn’t that against feminism? I don’t know, but I’m literally asking because you were polite enough to engage. As others have said, QT made some overt choices about consent/age verification (in the “sexy hitchhiker” scene that I’m sure plenty of men would fantasize about), taking the young actor (not actress) seriously, and not getting gratuitous at the Playboy mansion. But in the final scene these particular women were just about to stab 2 men and 1 woman. Would seeing them succeed have made them worthy of being attacked? And QT didn’t invent 2 women in the scenario - obviously IRL there were two female killers (and 2 female victims). I still think it’s about remembering the innocent that were slain with a bloodthirsty fantasy vengeance on the perpetrators. A close up of Hitler’s face being shredded by bullets was tough to watch... yet no empathy based on what the true history was. But to each their own and I’m glad we both enjoyed the movie. theBeaz fucked around with this message at 14:55 on Aug 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 14:50
|
|
|
speaking of the Playboy Mansion scene, I just got deep into the Mamas and the Papas like two weeks ago so it was definitely cool seeing Michelle Phillips and Mama Cass there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 15:03
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:If it was before your time you probably don’t know this, but reception to Jackie Brown was decidedly more muted than Tarantino’s first two movies when it came out. It turned a tidy profit, but domestically it grossed about 40 million compared to Pulp Fiction’s 100+ million, and critics generally liked it but were not over the moon for it. There’s a reason the gap between Jackie Brown and Kill Bill was the longest between films in Tarantino’s career. It’s a fairly common take now, but if you were to say Jackie Brown was Tarantino’s best movie fifteen years ago, you’d be accused of extreme contrarianism. For sure, but I think to say QT fanboyism ended there is a misnomer. It reignited with a vengeance after Kill Bill.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:For sure, but I think to say QT fanboyism ended there is a misnomer. It reignited with a vengeance after Kill Bill. Oh yeah I agree with that part, he’s still the Intro to Being a Film Dork class
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 15:54
|
|
|
theBeaz posted:Re: the dog - I’m not sure if it was instinct or planned - but certainly a desirable outcome for maximum audience enjoyment. So one way or another it had to happen. As far as anything Biblical with it... ehhhh. Thousands of scenes with dogs biting crotches in movies so I don’t know about that. When it comes to art criticism, I'm a strong believer in the death of the author and that directorial intent goes to the back of the bus as far determining the "meaning" of a work of art. That's why you've got, in my opinion, the equally valid interpretations of this movie in this thread of it being a beautiful love letter to 1969 Hollywood, and people like me who see it as QT's "tantrum against MeToo" as that twitter user so aptly put it. It's also why I want to apologize for sounding aggressive in my last post because there are a handful of people in this thread (not you) posting 3-sentence hot takes calling people stupid for getting what they got out of the movie as if they are the gatekeepers of Objective Truth. I was annoyed at that when I replied to you and, ironically, took a similar tone. The most interesting interpretation of this film, to me, is the feminist and political one. Hollywood making movies about itself excites me about as much as watching other people masturbate (and since this is the internet, I should be clear and explain that means "not at all") and for similar reasons. So I watched a movie with some phenomenal acting and sets, some great symbolism and clever innuendo, and then a climax where an older white guy who feels like the world is passing him by takes violent revenge on young women (and a man symbolically 'reduced' to being a woman) that he consistently identifies as identical to every other "dirty hippy" war protestor he despises throughout the runtime. I can't help but contrast it to the current political moment, where women, especially in Hollywood, are still clawing back their dignity inch by bloody inch, and the wealthy, powerful older generation treat their inheritors with cynical contempt. This is a movie, in my view, where the climax vindicates those kinds of misanthropes as embodied by Rick Dalton. It rubs me the wrong way. It's a sublime bromance flick that falls apart when it's higher order themes start to be examined. That said, I've only been thinking about this movie for 3 days now, and my mind remains open to being convinced otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 16:14
|
|
|
also... good lord downtown LA looked so beautiful and clean.Steve Yun posted:Its never explained but I’m guessing it’s a segment of a larger sign for Comanche Uprising that Rick kept because it had his face on it
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 16:51
|
|
|
All of the fake posters are great. I’m bummed we didn’t hear about this giallo during the Italy sequence
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 17:28
|
|
|
Blast Fantasto posted:All of the fake posters are great. I’m bummed we didn’t hear about this giallo during the Italy sequence Dario Fulci
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
I was getting pretty close to a panic attack during the denouement of the film, just remembering some of the details of the absolute visceral brutality and viciousness of the Manson Family murders . I saw the final scene as a sort of karmic retribution against the absolute horror that was the Tate murders.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
I wonder what Tarantino thinks of Rob Zombie's catalog: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEaZtfg-MZQ&t=42s
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 18:10
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:If it was before your time you probably don’t know this, but reception to Jackie Brown was decidedly more muted than Tarantino’s first two movies when it came out. It turned a tidy profit, but domestically it grossed about 40 million compared to Pulp Fiction’s 100+ million, and critics generally liked it but were not over the moon for it. There’s a reason the gap between Jackie Brown and Kill Bill was the longest between films in Tarantino’s career. It’s a fairly common take now, but if you were to say Jackie Brown was Tarantino’s best movie fifteen years ago, you’d be accused of extreme contrarianism. Huh, that's genuinely interesting. Now I gotta look up some contemporary reviews and see what the hell people were thinking. I guess tonally it's a little out of step with his first two but the pacing is crazy good and the dialogue is some of the best he's ever done.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 18:17
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:I wonder what Tarantino thinks of Rob Zombie's catalog: “I am the devil and I’m here to do the devil’s business” is a thing Tex Watson actually said during the home invasion in real life.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 18:27
|
|
|
Honestly, I kind of think that it's because it has a black woman lead. I can't really see any justifiable reason it wasn't as popular as Pulp Fiction, it's probably one of my favourite movies by him and it's crazy how little people know about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 18:28
|
|
|
Blast Fantasto posted:“I am the devil and I’m here to do the devil’s business” is a thing Tex Watson actually said during the home invasion in real life. I know that, Rob Zombie basically casts the Manson Family as the leads in most of his movies. Or at least House of 1000 Corpses, Devils Rejects, and the Halloween movies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
Ardent Communist posted:Honestly, I kind of think that it's because it has a black woman lead. I can't really see any justifiable reason it wasn't as popular as Pulp Fiction, it's probably one of my favourite movies by him and it's crazy how little people know about it. That could certainly be part of it, i always credited it to it being by far his least violent movie. It was also the first time he played around with a deliberately slow pace, the film where the characters feel most like real people and least like Tarantino characters (probably the Leonard influence creeping in), and the only time he directly adapted someone else's material. Grizzled Patriarch posted:Huh, that's genuinely interesting. Now I gotta look up some contemporary reviews and see what the hell people were thinking. I guess tonally it's a little out of step with his first two but the pacing is crazy good and the dialogue is some of the best he's ever done. Ebert definitely loved it at least, his review of it is really good. Uncle Boogeyman fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Aug 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 18:43
|
|
|
One problem I have with most of Tarantino's films is that the characters all speak with the same cadence, the dialog sounds like Quentin Tarantino speaking. Jackie Browne suffers from this the least, the characters in that movie actually feel like individual people, rather than iterations of the stock Tarantino role.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 18:48
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:I know that, Rob Zombie basically casts the Manson Family as the leads in most of his movies. Or at least House of 1000 Corpses, Devils Rejects, and the Halloween movies. It sounded just as corny in House of 1000 Corpses as it did coming out of Tex Watson's mouth. I remember doing the biggest eyeroll when hearing that line while seeing Zombie's movie in the theater. I really wanted to like it but it came off too hackneyed to enjoy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mattprigge/status/1156995243667066880
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 19:38
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Ebert definitely loved it at least, his review of it is really good. Yeah, it is great. Just looked it up. Too bad we can't get his opinion about this movie. https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/jackie-brown-1997
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 19:43
|
|
|
Blast Fantasto posted:All of the fake posters are great. I’m bummed we didn’t hear about this giallo during the Italy sequence I haven't seen this movie yet, but I want this poster framed and up against my ceiling asap.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 19:57
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:It sounded just as corny in House of 1000 Corpses as it did coming out of Tex Watson's mouth. I remember doing the biggest eyeroll when hearing that line while seeing Zombie's movie in the theater. I really wanted to like it but it came off too hackneyed to enjoy. I don't think it's a cool line, but I'm under the impression that Rob Zombie's characters think it's a cool line. I'm undecided on whether or not I think that Rob Zombie thinks it's a cool line. I do think that Rob Zombie presents a version of the Manson Family as the protagonists in his movies and does a lot of work to make the audience feel sympathy for them in the Devil's Rejects, even after the horrible things the characters have done. It's like Zombie is doing the reverse of Tarantino. Instead of getting catharsis from torturing the Rejects, the film portrays them as the victims while Sheriff Wydell is the monster. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7VmXBIPnqc
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
The funniest thing about "I am the devil and I'm here to do the devil's work," is that you're basically saying "I'm the devil. This is my day job."
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
Blast Fantasto posted:All of the fake posters are great. I’m bummed we didn’t hear about this giallo during the Italy sequence MacheteZombie posted:I haven't seen this movie yet, but I want this poster framed and up against my ceiling asap. I hate to break it to you guys but its just an ugly version of the New York Ripper poster Was it even made for the movie? it looks fan made and i don't think Tarantino would stoop to "Dario Fulci" as a gag
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 20:15
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I hate to break it to you guys but its just an ugly version of the New York Ripper poster I know it's the New York Ripper poster. I just like that they took it and stuck leo at the top for no reason other than "Dalton stars in this" e: smh trying to poster shame me
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 20:17
|
|
|
Since we're already on an alternate history streak with this movie anyway, the first thing we see Cliff drinking is a big bloody mary with an entire celery stalk in it. The same thing his late wife was drinking in the boat flashback. It could mean that he has a bit of a sardonic streak, or maybe that she was jealous and wouldn't let him have the same thing she liked or what have you, but he still keeps a photo of her in his trailer and with the exception of pulping the family he really does seem to keep his composure and positive attitude together. Maybe he really does miss her? Maybe, if we're already accepting that this movie is all wishful thinking anyway, this murder really was a terrible accident?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 20:21
|
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:The funniest thing about "I am the devil and I'm here to do the devil's work," is that you're basically saying "I'm the devil. This is my day job." I just got done watching the 1973 documentary "Manson" that featured interviews with members of the Family. Most of the poo poo they say doesn't make any sense and isn't nearly as clever as they think it is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 20:29
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I hate to break it to you guys but its just an ugly version of the New York Ripper poster It may be fan art. I found it on a site by searching for Rick Dalton posters and the rest were real from the movie. I agree that Tarantino would probably have just had it directed by Fulci.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
Dr. Red Ranger posted:Since we're already on an alternate history streak with this movie anyway, the first thing we see Cliff drinking is a big bloody mary with an entire celery stalk in it. The same thing his late wife was drinking in the boat flashback. It could mean that he has a bit of a sardonic streak, or maybe that she was jealous and wouldn't let him have the same thing she liked or what have you, but he still keeps a photo of her in his trailer and with the exception of pulping the family he really does seem to keep his composure and positive attitude together. Maybe he really does miss her? Maybe, if we're already accepting that this movie is all wishful thinking anyway, this murder really was a terrible accident? There’s also the third option: he was drunk as gently caress and even he doesn’t remember
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2019 00:36
|
|
|
My favorite little moment is when Bradd Pitt is remembering his fight with Bruce Lee and when we come back he just gives like an agreeable shrug. Almost saying yeah they were in the right for firing me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2019 01:15
|
|
|
The_Rob posted:My favorite little moment is when Bradd Pitt is remembering his fight with Bruce Lee and when we come back he just gives like an agreeable shrug. Almost saying yeah they were in the right for firing me. The whole framing device for that scene was interesting, the way they shot him getting all shirtless on the roof and then cutting to Tate playing music made me think they were going to set up some kind of interaction between them - it's like the textbook flirting neighbor set-up - and then it goes in a completely different direction. Also man it must be nice to have access to Hollywood roids, Pitt has the physique of somebody 20 years younger than he actually is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
Being paid to get into shape must be great.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
Anyone catch the Seymour hosted Fright Night bus stop ad? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvS9XAr0uZA
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2019 02:37
|
|
|
Grizzled Patriarch posted:The whole framing device for that scene was interesting, the way they shot him getting all shirtless on the roof and then cutting to Tate playing music made me think they were going to set up some kind of interaction between them - it's like the textbook flirting neighbor set-up - and then it goes in a completely different direction. Also man it must be nice to have access to Hollywood roids, Pitt has the physique of somebody 20 years younger than he actually is. Oh man when he took his shirt off I heard several women around me get very interested in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2019 02:41
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:Being paid to get into shape must be great. According to Rob McElhenny it still sucks rear end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2019 04:06
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cF76gm9PdOs I can’t tell if this is performance art where Tarantino talks like a guy who can’t tell fantasy and reality apart or if it’s raw actual bonafide Tarantino being Tarantino
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2019 04:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 13:21 |
|
|
theBeaz posted:Re: feminist lens - I can’t claim to truly understand what feminism’s de facto reaction to a scene like this should be. Equality in treatment, pay, status in the world, etc could also be equality in the way a woman gets dispatched in a movie. Don’t get me wrong - it made me feel terribly uncomfortable watching what happened to them (with no empathy for the dude) because of how I lived my life and was raised. But also the way I was raised of being a gentleman to women because they are special and deserving of better treatment- isn’t that against feminism? I don’t know, but I’m literally asking because you were polite enough to engage. I'm a cis white dude, so take my read with a grain of salt, but I think there's a couple different ways to read a film through a feminist lens. One is the way you described, attention to equity, parity, women-can-be-just-as-Whatever-as-men. That's kind of the MCU version of feminism, "Check out all these bad-rear end ladies fighting just as good as the men." Tangentially, another feminist lens is whether woman are allowed to be messy and complex like men are. Compare Rick (loving) Dalton to Sharon Tate's depiction in the film. Rick Dalton has a rich inner life full of pride, insecurities, fears, struggles, and shames. Sharon Tate has a comparatively shallow interiority: we know she's proud of her work in the Wrecking Crew and proud that others in the audience are laughing at her comedy. The film is about Rick, Sharon is simply a thematic element to reinforce Rick's story. (that doesn't make it a BAD movie, it's just a reading). Feminism can also be the study of hierarchy and power imbalances. This overlaps a lot with a Marxist reading at times (class struggle, etc) but beyond money and class, many feminist readings pay attention to who has power, who can do things without consent, and whether power structures are upheld or critiqued. So yes, we see three people who were going to butcher a pregnant woman get butchered themselves and yes it was fun and funny even to me, someone with criticisms of this film. I'm not shedding a tear for three murderers who get their comeuppance. However, a feminist reading of the film might note that this is a movie about aging men feeling the world slipping away from them and regaining a sense of strength through violence (which happens to be at least climactically against a woman). In the text of the film, our aging hero's climax wasn't in perfecting his art on the set of that western, it was in doing violence to protect angelic Sharon Tate. So, I don't think it's fair to pretend this is a bunch of Tumblrinas on Twitter trying to "outwoke" each other (you didn't say that, someone else did), I think it's a legitimate way to engage with the film: why did a guy who was close friends with the mastermind behind a pedophile ring running as an open secret in Hollywood choose to make a breezy fairy tale about the magic of this place right after a series of sexual abuse allegations rocked the core of the town? I'm not saying this makes it a bad movie and that QT is #cancelled, it's just (for me) a more interesting way to talk about the film than noting references to classic Hollywood films or QT meta-references or whatever. And I don't think you're a bad person if you don't find that interesting either, by the way. And for what its worth, for all my critiques or complaints about the film, I've been thinking about it all week, so ya gotta give it that. That Dang Dad fucked around with this message at 14:12 on Aug 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2019 14:07
|
|
