Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Pics of Kurt Russell's Badass Car from Tarantino's Grindhouse Flick, 'DEATH PROOF'!!!

First... thing in the morning by BrandLoyalist	Sep 4th, 2006 05:20:03 AM
Thanks for the new background image. I may be more jealous of the chili than the sighting!
I'm so on the fence about this flick I can feel... by zikade zarathos	Sep 4th, 2006 05:20:29 AM
the spikes in my ass. Seriously, this could be great, but who knows.
so far... by OneintenMan	Sep 4th, 2006 05:27:14 AM
so what?
TINO! TINO! TINO! by Shermdawg	Sep 4th, 2006 05:29:49 AM
There I said it. You Transformer talkbackers can now go back to the Megatron thread.
Looking forward to... by Boba Fat	Sep 4th, 2006 05:30:10 AM
both films. The big studios have droped the ball too many times this year and meddled with good ideas. You know what you're going to get with the grindhouse flicks, not to say there won't be any surprises, but the majors need to take some geek friendly risks and stop counting the beans.
I am developing an allergy to you Regina by Lost Prophet	Sep 4th, 2006 05:35:13 AM
you complete and utter cunt. You shit on EVERYTHING. I like tarantino films, and couldn't care less if they all contain homages to other movies. Also, if you don't recognise that Kurt Russell's Carpenter roles are iconic then you really don't have any business venturing an opinion. Having seen what you posted in the Irwin obit, it has become clear that you are nothing but a vile, poisonous, odious, attention seeking little worm.
Directed by the executive producer of Killshot! by DerLanghaarige	Sep 4th, 2006 05:43:06 AM

I really can't wait for this by mattyholmes	Sep 4th, 2006 05:44:56 AM
Kurt Russell as horror serial killer? WOW! Love the car too. www.obsessedwithfilm.com
Anytime I see... by OriginalThinker	Sep 4th, 2006 05:49:59 AM
a completely negative rant that just shits all over whatever news is up I know it is Regina Taylor. You are one pissed off chick.
I want to date Regina Taylor. by Royce Clemens	Sep 4th, 2006 06:08:48 AM
She sounds so peachy keen that I would let her wear my High School Letter jacket (and it's in band, by the way). After appletinis at Tavern on the Green and the Holocaust auction at Sotheby's we would club homeless children about the head and shoulders with cudgels made of puppy bones... You know... For fun. My dear, dear Regina. You will make some lucky guy a very bankrupt and suicidal ex-husband one day.
If Quentin manages to make a movie as good as... by bitchy stella	Sep 4th, 2006 06:13:44 AM
Kill Bill,I'll be truly happy.And how cool is Kurt Russell.He was so sexy in the little seen "Captain Ron" and he's one of the best actors when it comes to cool action heroes.My favourite film of his is "Tango and Cash",an underrated classic.
I have no interest. by One Voice	Sep 4th, 2006 06:31:33 AM
Despite the underrated legend that is Kurt Russell in this movie.
Kurt Russell by antonphd	Sep 4th, 2006 06:37:31 AM
Dear God in Heaven thank you that Kurt Russell hasn't pussied out over the years like some other iconic american male actors. At least we can always count on Kurt to deliver. Plus, he gave the best advice on how not to cheat on your wife I've ever heard over the years. When you see a hot chick that isn't your wife, go and focus that feeling on your wife instead the other chick. Or something like that. Anyway, thanks all around Kurt.
there is a god by Lost Prophet	Sep 4th, 2006 06:50:13 AM
thank you for cancelling Regina. Thank you!
But what about Rose McGowan? by I Dunno	Sep 4th, 2006 06:58:43 AM
Isn't she in this thing too? I need more Rose info.
by killing joker	Sep 4th, 2006 07:25:07 AM
Rose is in the other one, Planet Terror. Empire said this film was like 3 1/2 hours long apparently. WTF!!!
Does this take place in the "world" of PULP FICTION? by McGsStepson	Sep 4th, 2006 08:08:48 AM
Remember that interview back a few years ago where Quentin outlined all of the different worlds that his films exist in, with the world of "Jackie Brown" being the only one that is set in a realistic, if not necessarily our, world? I remember him say that "Pulp" was stylized and that it was the same world, I think, as "Kill Bill" etc.... And I think "Reservoir" was a different world. Anywa, just thinking about the different "worlds" of Tarantino when I see this photo.
JIZ 109...seems appropriate by nomihs	Sep 4th, 2006 08:22:53 AM
The license plate is JIZ 109. The car looks like it is just that. I am unimpressed and I am thinking that this Aint cool news. Moving on...
MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE! by blackwood	Sep 4th, 2006 08:27:17 AM
That car transforms into Rose McGowan.
McGsStepson by partyman	Sep 4th, 2006 08:33:45 AM
You obvious havn't watched Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs much, they are very obviously set in the same "Universe"
i think kurt russel should fight zombies by kidjingo	Sep 4th, 2006 08:34:41 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =Azo8heDmNoQ
KICK IT JAZZINGLY! by WolfmanNards	Sep 4th, 2006 08:35:13 AM
I am reading the novel "batman captured by the engines" by Joe R. Lansdale, and its meant to be one of those old car-xploitation type-stories with a little bit of Batman here and there. Its pretty good becauser y'know, Joe R. Lansdale. Every act begins with with "Clutch and shift gear to..." act 1, 2, 3 etc.
Partyman by McGsStepson	Sep 4th, 2006 08:39:19 AM
I think the word is "obviously." And yeah I thought so but I thought that he said that there were slight differences in each "universe" in the interview per se. I've watched both of them a ton of times and know that Mr. Blonde is Vega's brother or relative or whatever. I don't fixate on it but I have watched both film mulitple times and Tarantino had very specific guidelines for these universes. And I believe there were three. It was a pretty interesting interview and I cannot find it at the moment.
Cool Transformers Pix!!! by brycemonkey	Sep 4th, 2006 08:42:08 AM
Oh, wrong thread :-P I'm interested in this but can't read anything about it on this site due to the skewed commentary. According to AICN everything in Austinfrom the food; beer; cars; chilli; movies; QT and RR are the best anywhere in the known universe. Fact. DO NOT DEBATE ME ON THIS!!! I'm glad that all the things mentioned above are close to their hearts, but I like my movie news slightly more objective (just a smidge).
McGs, I remember that Interview by LilOgre	Sep 4th, 2006 08:43:28 AM
And yeah he definitely had a few different worlds or whatever. I think Reservoir and Pulp were the same with Jackie Brown and Inglorious taking place in the same world. Kill Bill was I think somehow a little different. At the time he had not written Death Proof but I'm guessing it is the world of Kill Bill.
Rodriguez reccomended? by Lone Fox	Sep 4th, 2006 08:50:28 AM
He's always going on about how to make good chili on his DVD's. And in Austin no less
McGsStepson by RenoNevada2000	Sep 4th, 2006 08:51:08 AM
If I recall correctly, PULP FICTION and RES DOGS were the same (I think he called it the REAL REAL) universe and KILL BILL (with its Red Apple cigarettes product placement) is set in the MOVIE MOVIE universe along with FOX FORCE FIVE. Although characters from the MOVIE MOVIE universe can cross between movies set there, they can't interact with people in the REAL REAL universe, except Harvey Keitel's Wolf, who can travel between the MOVIE MOVIE and the REAL REAL universes cuz he's that cool. My thought is that GRINDHOUSE is set in the MOVIE MOVIE universe.
I was on both sets. by 3 Bag Enema	Sep 4th, 2006 08:54:07 AM
I was standing in a parking space when the car drove up and shooed me out. It's matte black. Then, a few days later, I was on my way home from jail(my having been in jail not being related to the film) I stumbled into the Texas Chili Parlour looking for a payphone to call a cab. There were trailers parked outside, and when I went into the restaurant, it was completely empty and had wires all over the floor. Someone asked me what the fuck I was doing there. I told her. She shooed me out. Okay, so maybe it's not a cool story. But I got to see Tarantino and the car, so fuck you. Oh, and the Texas Chili Parlour is a shit restaurant. These people open an industrial-sized can of Dinty Moore chili and charge idiots for bowls of it all day. Austin is a great town, but the restaurants are horrible. Never believe Harry when he recommends a restaurant. Just because he's fat doesn't mean he's a gourmet. He's from Texas, and doesn't know better. It reminds me of this scene in Ennis' Preacher where the titular character is in New York eating a slice of pizza and he says, "My god. This is the best pizza I've ever had." And a local says, "Of course it is. You're from Texas."
Hey McGs, I found that interview. by LilOgre	Sep 4th, 2006 08:57:07 AM
Good call man. It isn't really an interview so much as Harry rehashing what Tarantino told him which makes it even funnier. It was one of my faves too. In it he distinctly outlines four Tarantino universes. There is the Elmore Leonard Universe (Jackie Brown). QT Universe #1 aka Realer than Real (True Romance, Reservoir, Pulp). QT Universe #2 aka Movie Movie Universe (KILL BILL, FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, sp to NATURAL BORN KILLERS. I would assume DEATHPROOF will be the MOVIE MOVIE or QT #2. So yeah there are three and I think your impulse to think that this DEATHPROOF was not set in the PULP or JACKIE BROWN universes was right. Here is the link: http://tinyurl.com/o37z7
Thanks Reno... and LilOgre by McGsStepson	Sep 4th, 2006 08:59:05 AM
Good memory guys. Thanks.
Reno - guess I was a little slow on the trigger. by LilOgre	Sep 4th, 2006 09:00:45 AM
Way to remember that one. I wonder if he will ever do an Elmore Leonard universe movie or what universe inglorious bastards is set in?
TOO SOON. by Cotton McKnight	Sep 4th, 2006 09:14:25 AM

Looks like the Jackass-Mobile. by Nice Marmot	Sep 4th, 2006 09:54:13 AM
I'm waiting for Steve-O to slam into it in a shopping cart and with an armadillo shoved up his ass.
Skulls On The Hoods Of Cool 70s Cars! by LaserPants	Sep 4th, 2006 10:07:17 AM
Anything with a skull on it looks cool; 'specially if its a vintage 70s muscle car! VRROOOM! (Really looking forward to this movie. I bet its gonna be a blast!)
GET ME PICS FROM THE DRIVER MOVIE AND I"LL BE HAPPY by jackinitraw	Sep 4th, 2006 10:25:59 AM
We all know who the talent in that team was and still is and it ain't qt.
All of Tarantino's movies are in the same universe. by I Dunno	Sep 4th, 2006 10:32:19 AM
The universe that rips off entire styles, settings, lines of dialogue and scenes from other, more obscure movies and calls them "homages". I keed Tarantino, I love his work. Mostly.
that article has too many hyphens by chickychow	Sep 4th, 2006 10:41:55 AM
other than that it provided no interest.
It's not a cool car... by ninpobugei	Sep 4th, 2006 10:47:01 AM
...it's an old "Muscle Car", which reminds me of hicks running around in an overly loud, poorly handling p.o.s. pumping out clouds of blue exhaust and Stairway to Heaven...that's just outdated, not "cool". Try a Corvette or Porsche for "cool".
QT Rips Off His Ideas?! by LaserPants	Sep 4th, 2006 10:50:15 AM
You don't say! WOW! I don't think anyone has ever made that observation before. [Yes, we're all well aware he rips off his ideas; he's a collage artist, at best; a really gifted collage artist who'se able to pull all of these genre "riffs" (samples?) together and make them his own. He's sort of like a remix artist or DJ, but with film. Kinda. I don't think he's a genius, but he's good at what he does.]
GUEROS!!!! by Dmann	Sep 4th, 2006 10:56:23 AM
a big group of us eat there after we nap on sundays post bnat!!! YAY QT for adding our BNAT weekend ritual to DEATH PROOF! Thanks Quentin!
Lay off the sausage Harry... by MrBoinfoint	Sep 4th, 2006 10:57:41 AM
Health Experts Warn of Obesity Pandemic By ROHAN SULLIVAN, Associated Press Writer Sun Sep 3, 10:28 PM SYDNEY, Australia - An obesity pandemic threatens to overwhelm health systems around the globe with illnesses such as diabetes and heart disease, experts at an international conference warned Sunday. "This insidious, creeping pandemic of obesity is now engulfing the entire world," Paul Zimmet, chairman of the meeting of more than 2,500 experts and health officials, said in a speech opening the weeklong International Congress on Obesity. "It's as big a threat as global warming and bird flu." The World Health Organization says more than 1 billion adults are overweight and 300 million of them are obese, putting them at much higher risk of diabetes, heart problems, high blood pressure, stroke and some forms of cancer. Zimmet, a diabetes expert at Australia's Monash University, said there are now more overweight people in the world than the undernourished, who number about 600 million. People in wealthy countries lead in overeating and not doing enough physical activity, but those in the poorer nations of Asia, Africa and Latin America are quickly learning bad habits, experts said. Thailand's Public Health Ministry, for instance, announced Sunday that nearly one in three Thais over age 35 is at risk of obesity-related diseases. "We are not dealing with a scientific or medical problem. We're dealing with an enormous economic problem that, it is already accepted, is going to overwhelm every medical system in the world," said Dr. Philip James, the British chairman of the International Obesity Task Force. The task force is a section of the International Association for the Study of Obesity, a professional organization of scientists and health workers in some 50 countries that deal with the issue. James said the cost of treating obesity-related health problems was immeasurable on a global scale, but the group estimated it at billions of dollars a year in countries such as Australia, Britain and the United States. Among the most worrying problems are skyrocketing rates of obesity among children, which make them much more prone to chronic diseases as they grow older and could shave years off their lives, experts said. The children in this generation may be the first in history to die before their parents because of health problems related to weight, Kate Steinbeck, an expert in children's health at Sydney's Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, said in a statement. Experts at the conference said governments should impose bans on junk food advertising aimed directly at children, although they acknowledged such restrictions were unlikely to come about soon because the food industry would lobby hard against them. "There is going to be a political bun fight over this for some time, but of course we shouldn't advertise junk food to children that makes them fat," said Dr. Boyd Swinburn, a member of the International Obesity Task Force. Dr. Claude Bouchard, president of the International Association for the Study of Obesity, an umbrella group for medical organizations dealing with weight-related and children's health issues, said the group supported advertising bans as official policy. But the policy position is unlikely to have any immediate effect on influencing governments to introduce such bans, said Bouchard, head of the Pennington Research Center at Louisiana State University at Baton Rouge.
Steve Irwin RIP by leolo	Sep 4th, 2006 10:59:55 AM
So sad about it
by PeopleKillRobots	Sep 4th, 2006 11:33:19 AM
That's NOT Jazz! Jazz is a Porsche!!! FUCK MICHAEL BAY! He ruins everything he gets his hands on!
Chili parlor, eh? by 433	Sep 4th, 2006 12:06:31 PM
How could I have come to BNAT for six years and not hear about this?
3 Bag Enema: by mrfan	Sep 4th, 2006 12:29:16 PM
What were you doing in jail?
A Nova? A NOVA? HAHAHAHAH by No-Op	Sep 4th, 2006 12:43:04 PM
Badass a Nova is NOT. Cheesey underbuilt and light, you could certainly make them go fast if you put big enough iron in them, and didn't care about turning or anything... HAHAHAHA
Speaking Of The Obesity Pandemic, I've Found The CURE! by LaserPants	Sep 4th, 2006 12:45:24 PM
Eat less, exercise more. No stomach stapling, no pills, just COMMON F**KING SENSE. Also, it might be a good idea to consider laying off the junkfood and or fastfood. problem solved! no more "pandemic"! No more self-inflicted "disease" of obesity! Yay!
Harry by OhDaesu	Sep 4th, 2006 01:28:54 PM
Harry = expert on every restaurant in Texas. Stop eating.
Wanna see something funny as hell? by Cruel_Kingdom	Sep 4th, 2006 01:35:00 PM
This has nothing to do with Tarantino and Kurt Russell, but I just watched this like five minutes ago and chuckled until I almost pissed myself. If you can spare three minutes, you MUST check this shit out: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZCi aaXKQMVw Also I can't wait for Grindhouse. This sucker's gonna rock.
WHAT IF........ by connor187	Sep 4th, 2006 01:35:22 PM
One of these double bill movies turns out to be much better than the other and the public find out. Then decide not to want to go and see that one but the other. What if the shit one is first on the bill, would you still have to buy the ticket and sit through the one that you dont want to, so you can see your desired choice?...personly I am the sort to make my own mind up but there are people who take reviews a little bit to seriously.
Good question connor... by mattyholmes	Sep 4th, 2006 01:39:22 PM
I think Tarantino's will be the second movie because thats what everybody will be waiting for. It would be funny though if people walked out after seeing Rodriguez's film. www.obsessedwithfilm.com
The "Harry's an expert on food" comment by Cruel_Kingdom	Sep 4th, 2006 01:40:17 PM
was bullshit. Yes, we get it, the brother's big. Now move on and get some new material. If you wanna pick on Harry, please find something a little less easy and maybe a bit more creative, eh?
that skull logo... by dubsy	Sep 4th, 2006 02:23:12 PM
looks ripped off from the band death by stereo's logo.
Tarantino's Worlds... by DanielKurland	Sep 4th, 2006 02:24:11 PM
Sorry if someone all ready outlined all of this.... All of them, except Jackie Brown take place in the same universe. In Reservoir Dogs, when Mr. Blonde is flipping through the radio to get to "Stuck in the Middle With You", he passes a Jack Rabbit Slim's commercial. This same audio clip is used with Sheriff Earl McGraw in Kill Bill. Furthermore, Earl McGraw appears in From Dusk 'Till Dawn, and apparently is in Grindhouse as well. The original script for True Romance has Christian Slater's character dying, and Alabama pursuing a life of crime. Again, in Reservoir Dogs, there is dialogue that references Mr. White working with Alabama. In Pulp Fiction, Tarantino's character is married to a black nurse named Bonnie, and in the original Kill Bill script, the Bride, after being incredibly hurt, seeks refuge in a treehouse where, a black nurse, named none other than Bonnie, helps her get better. In Pulp Fiction, Red Apple cigarettes are seen, and they appear again in Kill Bill and Four Rooms. This pretty much connects EVERY piece of cinema that Tarantino has a real involvement in. There is even more connections, if you look at the real names of the characters in Reservoir Dogs, but I feel I've done a sufficient job. As you'll see, Jackie Brown contains none of these, and that's because it takes place in Elmore Leonard's universe, and not Tarantino's.
This movie is glorifying a serial killer character by One Voice	Sep 4th, 2006 02:26:47 PM
Kurt Russell's character is there not to horrify you, but to entertain you. Like some crooked messiah. That disturbs me.
Forgot about Natural Bron Killers... by DanielKurland	Sep 4th, 2006 02:27:49 PM
In Tarantino's original script, there are also connections back to Resrvoir Dogs, which I can't recall. But notably, one character, is named El Driver, who was later slightly changed and re-appeared in Kill Bill obviously. And yeah, there's the whole Mr. Blonde, and Vincent Vega are brothers thing too.
3 bag enema by Bulldoggie	Sep 4th, 2006 02:28:40 PM
I worked as a busboy/dishwasher/cook at the Texas Chili Parlour from 1990-1991. I am now the executive chef of a Mobil four/four diamond hotel outside the U.S. I can assure you there has never been a can of Dinty Moore served there. What is featured is "real" Texas Chili. No beans or ground beef (that crap is from Ohio). The Texas version features slowly braised beef in tomatoes, garlic and spices. Add a few gallons of Shiner Bock and let it simmer over a low flame for a day or two. We used to qoute lines from the Texas Chainsaw Massacare 2 all the time when I worked there, great times. BTW- I've spent a few nights in the same jail, I got pinched @ a 10 keg party on campus for holding a doobie, you?
"'Real' Texas Chili" by 3 Bag Enema	Sep 4th, 2006 02:44:56 PM
If anyone ever offers you cuisine described as "real," "authentic," and "Texan" or "Texas," politely refuse. If you have to eat food from Texas, you want it as inauthentic as possible.
Too bad this script is TERRIBLE by Messiahman	Sep 4th, 2006 03:18:38 PM
Seriously, it's one of the worst scripts written by a "professional" that I've ever read. It's 130 pages and only contains six scene changes. Other than that, it's filled with TONS of hipper than thou dialogue and only TWO car crash scenes, and Stuntman Mike is a lame, one-dimensional villain. None of it seems remotely like grindhouse/exploitation films of the past. Unless it's being rewritten on the spot, this will be the 2007 version of the awful FOUR ROOMS.
That'd better be a fucking HYBRID! by BannedOnTheRun	Sep 4th, 2006 04:14:04 PM
I'm so sick of Hollywood glamorizing vehicles that burn fossil fuel. At least they won't show anyone smoking. Nah, I keeed.
Yakkity Yak Yak! by alienindisguise	Sep 4th, 2006 04:21:02 PM
Is all that I usually hear when I sit down to a Tarantino flick...He's as bad a writer as Kevin Smith! I did like Kill Bill vol.1 though. All Iwant to see out of Rodriguez is Sin City 2! Rose McGowan with a gun leg....STUPID!!!!!!
DanielKurland by LilOgre	Sep 4th, 2006 04:29:47 PM
Good observations man. But according to Tarantino he has three distinct film universes. And I think your comparisons are not helped when you take out what was in the screenplay and compare it to what actually made it to the final film. According to Harry, QT is adamant that characters in the different universes NEVER cross over. The "realer than real," the "movie movie," and then the Elmore Leonard (not his). See my or RenoNevada2000's posts and check out the link to Harry's old article.
HARRY - passive sentence structure! by s00p3rm4n	Sep 4th, 2006 04:44:32 PM
You are not Yoda. Passive sentence structure is roundly frowned upon in all modern grammar styles. They may not know of the APA or MLA on Dagobah, but we're in America, sir. Oh, and fun article. I'm excited. I just hope Robert focuses on storytelling to the same degree as Quentin. I know, I'll get slapped for saying this, but I just don't think Robert's as strong a storyteller as Quentin. Not that Robert's not a good director - I just think Robert makes indelible visual moments that serve one-dimensional characters, rather than multi-faceted characters whose actions spawn wonderful visual moments.
I Cant wait by WISEBLOOD	Sep 4th, 2006 05:48:16 PM
QT, and KR in the same cinematic space...KNEEL DOWN BITCHES, ITS GONNA GET SLOPPY
Fine, I concede... by DanielKurland	Sep 4th, 2006 06:01:12 PM
Good points, but if QT stated that, than what can I do? Also, Four Rooms wasn't ALL terrible. Tarantino's part is above average, and the final tracking shot is great, and Rodriguez's segment is maybe the best thing he has done, and worth buying the DVD, exclusively for it. It's that good and hilarious.
They've got a couple Guero's here in Phoenix... by Chastain-86	Sep 4th, 2006 06:28:07 PM
They can barely keep the doors open, because they suck so hard.
Yeah Yeah. Whats going on with Inglorious Bastards? by SydBarretsMyDad	Sep 4th, 2006 06:54:06 PM
Im sure ill watch the grindhouse flicks.....but really, theya re a dime a dozen these days....gimme Inglorious Bastards!!!
Old Novas a favorite with hot rodders by BrandLoyalist	Sep 4th, 2006 09:35:51 PM
Had ample space under the hood for a larger engine than its stock 6 cylinder. Just about everything could be readily replaced. Perfect for death proofing, no, No-Op?
Nova by No-Op	Sep 4th, 2006 10:45:26 PM
They really look great when the wheels start splaying out from the weight and frame bends.... If you are building a strip rod, for straightline burnouts, maybe. Not for maneuvering at speed. IMHO.
by SonnyC79	Sep 4th, 2006 10:48:26 PM
anyone know if they are still going to be filming there this week? i wanna stop by and check it out! my pal ran into Tarantino at the Omni Hotel bar last weekend...she said that he was drunk and talking a mile a minute--as if that's a surprise.
2 SOON 2 FURIOUS!!! by Johnno	Sep 4th, 2006 10:57:52 PM
I didn't need to know there was a badass car in this film!
Hey, two of those Four Rooms were pretty cool! by Zeke25:17	Sep 4th, 2006 11:36:33 PM
Loved the Rodriguez and Tarantino shorts; coulda done without the others...though the scene where Jennifer Beals comes out with about 50 different ways to say "cock" is hilarious. Regarding the car...doesn't really do it for me; Christine would chew it up and spit it out. I say, bring back the Deathmobile from Animal House! Now THAT was a badass fucking ride!
The Nova in Death Proof... by crazyeyezkillah	Sep 5th, 2006 12:32:23 AM
doesn't behave and maneuver like a real life Nova? Maybe because it's a movie. It's made up.
Guero's is SO overrated by Mister Man	Sep 5th, 2006 12:57:11 AM
Try Manuel's, Fonda San Miguel or Curra's.
Tarantino lost it when the post PF adulation hit him. by Filmrage	Sep 5th, 2006 07:09:21 AM
Res Dogs, Pulp Fiction, True Romance etc were great, great pieces of writing. Sure they may be collages on some level but they are more than the sum of their parts and that bit more is the part we love. . . . . but, i don't know what it was, if he lost his hunger, if he got old, or if he was just spreading himself thin doing episodes of ER, contributing to Crimson Tide, hosting festivals etc that he became like a lidless kettle simmering but never boiling (to steal a William Gibson metaphor) . . but somewhere between Pulp Fiction and Jakie Brown he just lost it. Odel was a great character in JB and Beumont was just rubbed out toooo soon as he should have been the new Vincent vega. Even so, evenin Jackie Brown the lethargy could be detected. . . . . A simple way to describe Jackie Brown and Kill Bill compared to Res Dogs, PF is that they are good 'but' they are no longer more than the sum of their parts. The magic has gone. QT's work is still good but no longer great. He is just another geekfest director. In fact i'd go as far as to say that Kill Bill was 'less' than the sum of its parts. When yo worship your chidhood glee so much that it blinds you to common movie sense then you are well and truly on the decline as a main stream force. . . . If QT is happy to be a 'God to Geeks' then good luck to him but Pulp Fiction changed the world and i dont just mean the movie world. Kill Bill was a four hour distraction. There's the difference. I have not ran one single line of Kill Bill through my head since giving it a couple of viewings. Since Pulp fiction was released in '94' (twelve years ago) i'v gone over the lines, the scenes and even possible alternatives in my head hundreds of times. I love trying to think of something Brad could say to get out of being ventilated. Now thats power. All i ever hear from Kill bill is the dopey Japanese femele band chant of 'Oo ooo oo oo oooooo'. . . . . . I'm sorry but the Emporer 'used' to be one finely dressed mofo pimp but now he's but naked. QT could pull it together and get back on messege but it's more likely that he'll wallow in self reverence and churn out geek homages and only geek homages. But for my cinematic enjoyments sake i hope he returns to form.
I'm sorry, but... by DanielKurland	Sep 5th, 2006 07:14:11 AM
How could have Beaumont become the next Vincent Vega?
because he . . . . by Filmrage	Sep 5th, 2006 07:43:39 AM
he was really interesting and could have become an Icon. I don't mean replace VV. The VV character in PF was a breakout character who stuck in peoples minds. er, in that way. But Beumont's role was cut short.
Badass Car? More like just Ass... by Ecto-1	Sep 5th, 2006 07:43:43 AM
Don't even know why I'm bothering to post this as I have no time at all for the latest load of QT bollocks. He's nothing but a plagarist who robs his ideas from everywhere else except his own imagination.
As bad a writer as Kevin Smith? by Cruel_Kingdom	Sep 5th, 2006 08:17:54 AM
Dude, love them or hate them, QT and Kevin Smith write terrific dialogue. I suppose you loathe the dialogue of David Mamet, too? WTF? I'll give you that QT "borrows" all of his ideas from old movies and the screenplays of old friends (Craig Hamann, Roger Avary, etc.), but if he does one thing really extraordinarily well, it's write dialogue.
KILL BILL Is QT's Best by LaserPants	Sep 5th, 2006 08:25:01 AM
Sorry, Reservoir Dogs doesn't hold up; a little too melodramatic; a little too self-important. Pulp Fiction is great, but tries too hard to be "hip." Jackie Brown is, in alot of ways, his most "mature" film, but it also feels generic, as if it could have been shot by anyone. KILL BILL, as his 4th and best, is a splattertastic explosion of flat out geekery -- theres no prentense at something deeper, no overreaching into realms of melodrama he's unable to pull off effectively. KILL BILL just is what it is -- an epic exploitation film; a trash art, hilarious, high camp apotheosis. I think people who didn't like it so much are confused -- QT isn't (and never was) a genius: he's retarded. Brilliantly retarded! A cinema-savant raised by twin synthetic parents -- the tv screen and the movie screen. This is why I am so excited by this whole GRINDHOUSE project; its more unrestrained chaos from a brain damaged mutant weirdo hipster-dork. Who could ask for anything more from a guy who thinks Psycho 2 was better than the original? I mean cmon. He isn't Kubrick, hes a trashcinema-savant. Its not that the emperor has no clothes now, he never had any clothes, you just confused yourself into thinking that he did. I think this whole exploitation thing is QT at his most nakedly honest. He's just forcing you to admit that the guy who was called an "auteur" after one movie (?!) really is just kind of a brilliant retard, and that, ultimately, we love trash just as much as he does.
well LaserPants . . . by Filmrage	Sep 5th, 2006 08:52:25 AM
Ah so millions of people who not only loved Pulp Fiction but found themselves quoting lines from it even a decade later just somehow 'fooled themselves' into thinking they actually liked it did they? . . . . dude the proof is in the pudding, you know a tree by its fruit. Here's the facts. When i see a movie i totally groan inside when i find my self easily predicting where the scene is going. I recently saw 'The last hangman' and as soon as Pierpoint was introduced to he's friends girlfriend i just knew he was gonna end up hanging one of them. Of course it's just as bad when a movie takes sudden turns just cause 'a twist' is the thing to do. Pulp Fiction did not do neither and as a result i did something while watching it that i almost never (and i mean almost never) do, including when watching Kill bloody Bill and that is i sat on the edge of my seat. I didn't just enjoy or love what was going on as geeks do when the see the 'so slow it looks slo mo' sword twiddling in KB. I was 'engrossed' in the characters and their plights in PF. I loved the dialogue, i loved and hated the characters. The experience of pulp fiction became part of people's psyche after watching it and it's an insult for you to tell people that they fooled themselves into thinking they liked it that much. Kill bill on the other hand stayed with me only for slightlly longer than the taste in some chewing gum that i popped into my mouth on exiting the cinema. . . . . . not until Deadwood has soemthing come along that is as enthralling as PF was. And RD might have been slightly paler in comparison to PF but it was still a joy and way superior to the dialogue barren KB.
Cruel_Kingdom is right on... by Childe Roland	Sep 5th, 2006 08:55:23 AM
...in his assessment of where QT's truest talent lies. Which is why LaserPants is just, well, not so right about Kill Bill being worth a shit. The dialogue in that movie is sparse and horrid. Kill Bill is wholly a product of Tarantino the egomaniac director subjugating Tarantino the gifted screenwriter. I honestly get the feeling that Tarantino is the bizarro Shyamalan (who seems to want the world to respect him for his god-awful writing when its obvious that his true strengths are as a director). QT's been a writer (struggling and probably underpaid for longer than he would've liked) and now he wants the world to recognize him as some sort of visionary cinematic stylist when, in fact, he's pretty much a sample-happy video DJ. Kill Bill is the clearest example of this dynamic at work, making it one (or two, if you're being technical) of his worst films. Reservoir Dogs holds up even better than Pulp in that you could take Tarantino's script and give it to a troupe of talented Jr. High School players to be performed on a near-bare stage with minimal props and you'd still have a very watchable production. Stolen plot aside, the dialogue and resultant characterization are just that well done.
Filmrage by LaserPants	Sep 5th, 2006 09:04:43 AM
I didn't say people fooled themselves into liking PULP FICTION, I said they fooled themselves into thinking it was smarter than it actually was. I loved PF, and I loved it as a work of trash-art-noir, not the "genius" some people thought it was. KILL BILL took that, and eliminated all the pretense, thereby being a purer (and far superior) work of trashart. Please read, and understand, before you retort. Thank you.
well put childe by Lost Prophet	Sep 5th, 2006 09:47:59 AM
Pure tarantino is not necessarily a good thing. I personally think Kill Bill part 2 was ponderous, turgid and bloody awful. It is a fallacy to even try to compare it to RD and PF. I could not believe the same man that wrote two of the best scripts in a long time (and I am not even including the very quotable True Romance) wrote that turgid piece of rubbish. I remember Harry's review which harped on about an emotional connection that we were meant to feel. I found the script so heavy and the lines delivered so poorly that it was nigh on impossible for me to give a toss about any of the characters, let alone about the relationship between Bill and The Bride.
Caring About The Characters... by LaserPants	Sep 5th, 2006 10:38:26 AM
is sort of irrelevant in an exploitation film, isn't it? I mean, did you honestly care about the characters in RESERVOIR DOGS or PULP FICTION? Did they honestly resonate with you as relateable, human characters? Or did you just think they were cool? That they had cool stuff to say about pop culture? Because thats pretty much all thats there. Not saying thats not cool, I mean, those movies are great (although R.DOGS is extremely overrated), but, did you actually feel any empathy for the characters? Really? Be honest. **** Of all of QTs films, the only one that features characters that seem even remotely human and empathetic are in the highly underrated JACKIE BROWN,; a movie the geek-o-sphere straight up hated. To be honest, I think there is a profound disconnect between what people saw, and what they think they saw in QTs films. All of them are trashy and dumb, but only one of them doesn't pretend to be anything more than what it is; taking the trash-art to the level of gloriously operatic insanity; and thats KILL BILL. Again, I liked them all, but KILL BILL is far and away my favorite (not to mention the most honest representation of the aesthetic).
how do you define 'genius'? by Filmrage	Sep 5th, 2006 10:58:54 AM
Laser, I personally define genius by how a movie affects me, how it stays with me and how the characters and dialogue and scenarios become a part of my 'occasional' thought process. Sometimes movies and TV shows and books and comics seep into my soul and their impact sets me on a slightly different trajectory in life. if someone can have this rare impact on me then i consider that to be a result of genius. The fact is loads of teen geek types got a thrill from KB and nothing more wheras RD and PF had a real and lasting impact. That, simply put is the difference between great cinema and good cinema. . . . . as far as caring about the characters, ok i'll be honest for one. I didn't give a toss about one single character in KB. I'm not a Uma fan at all but i disliked her in PF, she was pure menace, the kind of woman that could get a guy thrown out of a window. I like that i disliked her, it means i felt something. I truly liked harvy Kietel in RD (i can never remember the darn colours) I loved the way he intoned 'you're not gonna dieeeee, your gun a hurt for a long time etc' as if it was talking to a little kid. I really liked Buscemi's character. And i really hated MR Orange (oh i guess i got one). I hated MR Orange in the way i hated menacing bullies from my real life. He had charisma and he was horrible. In PF I cared about many of the characters, i tend to sympathise with the losers and i even felt sorry for Zed (post nut shot) as it got the lines from Marcelis which were so lovingly stolen from 'Charley Varek'. But more than the characters i loved the situation between the characters PF in particular was a movie that evoked 'empathy' with the audience. That's why we were on the edge of our seats about what was gonna happen next. The choice Butch made when he went back down to help marcelis and the understanding between them was great and totally believable. So, Yes, i cared about them. . . . . I really, really like Kurt Russel. He even turned in a great performance in Soldier which sucked on the whole. So i'll enjoy Grind House in the same way you enjoyed KB. But if QT stays on his current form it'll fade with the taste in my gum as i pull out of the parking lot.
QUENTIN TARANTINO... WHERE DID YOU GO???? by moto	Sep 5th, 2006 11:45:25 AM
Thos who say Kill Bill is his best suffer from geeknomia. Kill Bill was the start of the true downfall of Tarantino. The movies are fun as hell, but nothing more than throwbacks to kung fu and 70s revenge flicks. Boring. RD and Pulp Fiction remain to be his best. I just ask Quentin... PLEASE stop making these piece of crap throwbacks. You have more talent than that. Let's make some original stories like you used to. Yeah, Pulp Fiction had some throwback in it, but not as direct as Kill Bill and the upcoming Grind House crap. Quentin, we know you like movies. But you're looking so overly self indulgent that the excitement factor regarding your upcoming projects is just boring. RD and Pulp scripts were cool and pulpy. But now your work just seems too self aware. Get back to some STORYTELLING. Forget these movies that are "honoring" crappy genres. You're better than that.
Genius Or Entertainment? by LaserPants	Sep 5th, 2006 11:46:26 AM
Genius for me is a work of art which transcends the art itself. There are precious few artists who can do this. Kubrick was a genius. Kurosawa was a genius. Fellini was a genius. Lynch is a genius. QT, for me, on the other hand, is an Entertainer. He does have a kind of genius, much like George Lucas does (when you think about it, both of them are actually quite similar in terms of being 'genre-remixers'), but its not the kind of transcendent spooky wisdom that I think of as 'genius' (although there is a kind of spooky childlike fairy tale wisdom to STAR WARS that is oftentimes sadly overshadowed by the marketing side of it). Anyways, both of these guys -- QT and Lucas (in his prime and in the 11th hour franchise saver known as Episode III, anyway) -- strike me more as "ingenius', inventive, clever; having the ability to recontextualize stuff in a way that seems both new and familiar at the same time. That being said, to be honest, I don't see how PULP FICTION did anything more than entertain; it was cool, it made us feel cool to watch it and quote the dialogue; not unlike STAR WARS, though, perhaps, more self-consciously "hip"; but it didn't leave me with any sense that it was any more than something "cool". I mean, I love the movie, don't get me wrong, but it didn't give me anything other than what it was -- a more self-conciously pulp-literate genre/exploitation film. KILL BILL, to me, signifies QT getting over it and going balls out insane-o; embracing the Entertainer; the maker of spectacle; and not trying so hard to appear "hip." To me, KILL BILL represents a film by a guy who has no illusions as to what he is: a trash-cinema savant. I also think that if KILL BILL was the first movie he made, it would have been received with the same level of enthusiasm and praise that RD or PF did; in fact, maybe more. I don't think it qualifies as "high art" but neither does RD, PF or JB.
moto, Explain How QTs Other FIlms Weren't Throwbacks by LaserPants	Sep 5th, 2006 11:58:26 AM
I think this is the thing thats freaking everybody out: QT was always making "throwbacks." Jesus, I mean, he outright stole from BADLANDS not once, but twice(!!!) in two separate scripts. The truth is that he was always referencing other stuff in this kind of dumb, trashy, though also very clever pop-cult blender. He's all about style and thats all he ever was. The only difference now is that he sort of singlehandledly created an entire legion of people who have, in his wake, become wanna-be pomo pop-cult auteurs / offcianadoes / videostore clerk armchair directors. Its not so much that his talent is declining as the layers of the onion have been peeled away to reveal the truth that was always screaming at you from the get go of his "auteurdom".
Don't analyze, enjoy. by Filmrage	Sep 5th, 2006 12:17:10 PM
Laser, whenever anyone starts refferencing Fellini then i start to feel that we are in art/film school angst ridden debate territory. If you have seen the film 'Tristran Shandy' there is a black production assistant in it who rambles on about the deep meaning of film and how film should meen something deep. I think film can be a good place to stuff your fat face with popcorn and just enjoy yourself. I also think some films can be deep and life changing. I also think that some film can fall somewhere in between. RD and PF were events. They wern't ultra deep but they wern't bubble gum either. KB was bubblegum. I honestly got really bored while watching. Re watched them later to see if i was missing something but nope. . . . . .Dude i feel that you like to analyze and polarize films to much. They dont have to be profound or trashy. They can just be gripping and most people here and everywhere else side that RD and PF were gripping and KB was very very forgetable. You can analyze it all you want and contextualize it all you want but the fact remains that RD and PF (and i'd say the script with clarence dying for True Romance) were just magnificent bastards of films. They gripped and influenced people then and still do now. KB is fading into obscurity just like 'The Rock' 'Con Air', Armagedon' and all the other shallow crap is. I'm happy for ya if you love KB But even though PF etc is 12 years old, like Spinal Tap, it still get referenced all over the place whereas, as i said, the only KB reference so soon after the pr blitz around it has died down is "Ooo oo oo oo oooooo". KB is now a none entity where as RD and PF still have a giant influence. After all the analysis RD and PF touched people for whatever reason and KB was a simple date movie. QT dropped the ball. Who knows, maybe he only had a few initial good scripts in him. If so it's sad but it's still far more than most manage so cheers to him for that.
EXACTLY! Don't Analyze, Enjoy! by LaserPants	Sep 5th, 2006 01:28:31 PM
So you didn't enjoy KB because... why? I can't think of any film that screams at you to "not analyze, just enjoy" more than KILL BILL. Did I not say, several times, that KB is so great precisely because its not deep? That it doesn't pretend to be anything more than what it is -- gleefully insane-o escapist exploitation entertainment? Moreover, its got virtually the same sense of style and genre mixing as RD and PF, but is a wholehelluva lot more fun and crazy. Its QT to the MAX! QT on Overdrive. Its the movie he always wanted to make. Again, I'm not saying that I didn't like RD (overrated though it is) and PF; I just said I always liked them for what they were -- POP-COLLAGE TRASH ART. I never had any illusions that they were more than that. Chin-scratching wannabe cineastes confused themselves into thinking that his trash-art was high-art, when it never really was. Furthermore, where they fall a step below KB (imho) is in having "high art" pretentions that aren't really there; trying too hard to be "hip." KILL BILL, on the other hand, doesn't try to be anything but what it is: a completely insane-o exploitation movie, and, as that, it succeeds on nearly every conceivable level. Okay, it may lack the laconic, jokey dialogue of PF, but what it lacks in these laidback monolgues about footrubs it makes up for in in insane-o genre exploitation; which was the point of the movie! And, again, you're proving me right: its not that RD or PF were such edgy cutting edge or brilliant films; they were just marketed that way: as the work of an "autuer" who made all of two movies (?!). The real thing is that people are getting tired of QTs entire aesthetic; you now get it for what it is, was, and ever shall be -- clever pop-cult trash-art. Nothing more, nothing less. And I can only imagine the reaction it would have gotten from geeknation if KILL BILL was about two laidback gangsters and their rambling monologues about various popculture phenoms. (BTW, I wonder why JACKIE BROWN keeps getting left out of the equation. Its easily his most "mature" film; the one that has recognizable human characters in it, and its the one people never, ever talk about. Curious...) I think peoples dislike for KB has more to do with the fact that it forces people to reeavulate their assumptions; "oh shit, Pulp Fiction was trash too! But I wrote my dissertation on it! No wonder I still work at the videostore! Damn you QT!"
That Is To Say... by LaserPants	Sep 5th, 2006 01:45:47 PM
"iconic" dialogue, not "laconic."
Great 'because' it's not deep? by Filmrage	Sep 5th, 2006 02:20:47 PM
Dude i can see how 'A' film might be not deed and still manage to be great but it doesn't follow that a film can be great 'because' it's not deep. there are lots of shallow but great films . . . but for every one that manages to be great despite being shallow there are a hundred that are rubish. It's not important weather a film is deep or not, or somewhere in between as pf is. The only important thing is whether a film is great or not. If you think KB is great then fine. My point is that, generally, people dont agree with you. It has made very little impact. Wheras RD and PF have. You can put that all down to hyberbole or whatever but the fact is people are nuts for RD and PF and people class KB as just another few hours distraction. I mean, come on. those sword fights were the most tepid i've seen in a film in a long time. Just like the kung fu scenes in Matrix one were pretty good but sluggish in Matrix 2 and 3. Just going through the motions cause they figure all they have to do is visually reference kung fu and the fans will get excited. KB just went through the motions and referenced swoardplay andexpected us to get excited. KB was just a collection of montages and homages. That's all it was. It was less than the sum of it's parts. RD and PF were way way more than the sum of their parts. In 5 years KB will have sunk without a trace and be gone from the publics consciousness. The only thing that raised it at all was the marketing. Once the cinema run, dvd run, cable run is done people will just forget it as it's not so much eclipsed but lost in the crowd. PF, 12 years on, still manages to be special and is held above most films.
the proof of the pudding is the eating! get it right! by durhay	Sep 5th, 2006 02:46:38 PM
Now make like a tree ... and get out of here.
Dear. God. by LaserPants	Sep 5th, 2006 04:35:00 PM
Filmrage, please take the time to read more than just the first sentence before you retort, again, please? As I've said several times now, its more than it not being "deep"; its alot of fun to watch, super-exciting, and totally hilarious! Its the very antithesis of pretension; in short, its just is what it is: a badass action flick with tounge firmly planted in cheek; an incredible piece of meta-camp trash art. In alot of ways I'd even argue that its smarter than PF because its so gleefully and intentionally ludicrous; it never even tries to approach being realistic; all of this summarized by Bills dead-on monologue at the end -- this is a comic book movie about a superhero. Exactly! Totally perfect! Regardless, where is this deeper level of meaning that you see in PF? What elevates it above being 2 hours of escapism? Yes, theres more quotable snarky dialogue. Is that it? The snarkiness? The ultra-selfconcious pop-cult-referential hipster slang? The popculture identity phenomenon? I mean, that was fresh and new in '94, now? Not so much. Of course, this is all totally obvious, and totally subjective; I understand how someone could find the insane-o exploitation trash art of KB upsetting; but If you found those action scenes boring, you're pretty much the only person I have ever discussed this with who thinks so. The only criticism that I hear, and its totally subjective, is that people didn't like KB as much as PF because it lacked the ultra-selfconcious pop-cult referential dialogue. Rather than snarky, it goes for campy. I'd argue, yes, thats true, it is all about insane-o camp, but, more importantly it suceeds wildly on that level; as it was intended. And dude, beg to differ, but KB is still very much planted in the pop-conciousness. For chrissakes, that 5,6,7,8s song is still being used in commercials! Girls are still dressing like THE BRIDE at costume parties. Haven't heard the surf guitar thing in years. Haven't seen anyone dressed up like Jules and Vega in years either. This isn't to say PF isn't cool, or whatever, just that its not really held up by anyone outside of the geek-o-sphere as a milestone. And on what planet is PF "held above most films"? More than Goodfellas? Godfather? Apocalypse Now? Even The Wizard of Oz or STAR WARS? No freakin' way, man. I don't think anyone really references it at all anymore, do they? Probably because its a film made up of references not unlike KB. Again, I'm not saying that KB will be held above those films either, but it seems to me that KB, even if its only by virture of it being recent, is talked about or referenced far more often than PF is. Yes, of course PF caused more of a stir at the time of its release what with this whole "cinema of cool" thing that happened in the early 90s, but that whole aesthetic is no longer fresh. At the time it was hip and cool, now its olde news. If QT came out with a movie that was yet another take on these laid-back gangster types it would have been critically panned, and it would have bombed. Regardless, it seems that what you are saying is that you like PF and RD and disliked KB not because you necessarily thought they were better, but because they were more popular amongst filmgeeks. Thats kind of dodgy position to take isn't it?
I understand where you're coming from... by Childe Roland	Sep 5th, 2006 05:08:53 PM
...LaserPants, but I think we look for drastically different things in films. If you're into the all-flash/no-substance sort of thing Tarantino clearly embraced in Kill Bill, then more power to you. I'd imagine it was like a wet dream come true for you. But it both bored and disappointed the ever-loving fuck out of me. I agree with you that Jackie Brown was highly underrated by the geek community, but it also could've used a good hard edit for pacing. I completely disagree with your assessment of the characters in Pulp and, more importantly, in Dogs. Pulp was clearly self aware and trying a bit too hard to be hip in retrospect however, the characters (most of whom were reprehensible to varying degrees) were still made human and appealing by virtue of the words Tarantino put in their mouths to express the thoughts he put into their heads. This was even moreso the case with Dogs, where there was literally no one you could admit to liking in general company (given the choice between several thugs, a mafioso, a sociopath and a lying undercover cop) yet you could understand where all of them -- even the sociopathic Mr. Blonde -- were coming from. It's what made that very unreal (and totally unorgiginal) situation populated with its arch (borderline stereo)typical characters so very real, distinct and resonant. But QT's best movie is one he didn't even direct. When you see the way his words can be used by a talented director (working in conjunction with a good editor) in True Romance, it's evident that QT's first, best destiny is that of a script doctor (if I were producing a movie from a screenplay I wrote and had the budget, I'd pay him as much as I would a director just to do a final polish on my script). He even elevated the very formulaic Crimson Tide above the plethora of other military submarine thrillers to come out in that decade. The man does (did) one thing really, really well...and he seems to be getting further and further away from that. It just makes me sad. If I want homage clip mixes of old 70s action/exploitation films, I'll just set up a few DVD players on various inputs on my big screen and flip back and forth between some of my favorite flicks from the era. Or, if I'm in more of a QT state of mind, I'll just talk about how cool it would be to do that and never get around to it.
Good Points, Roland by LaserPants	Sep 5th, 2006 06:01:49 PM
You make some good points here Roland, and now I see where you're coming from. I guess it is all a matter of perspective/aesthetics. I think where we differ with QT is that I don't see how any of his films are even remotely realistic in terms of character (with the exception of the underrated JACKIE BROWN; a movie we seem to more or less agree on); I think they're all kind of ludicrous, to be honest. I get no real humanity from any of his characters in RD, PF, or KB; they all seem more like 'types' than anything remotely resembling actual human beings. Thats another reason why KB is my favorite, and why I see it as his most honest film (as well as his most over-the-top meta-transgressive); its the only film where he seemed to be able to admit to himself that his characters really are just ludicrous charactures of coolness and cartoonish menace rather than anything remotely human; skirting the need to burden them with rather naive (though super-ultra-manly) and transparent melodrama (like we see in RESERVOIR DOGS), or having them endlessly remind us of how hip they are (like PULP FICTION). Its all exagerration all the time! A grindhouse apotheosis! QT isn't Kubrick or Altman or Bergman or Cassevetes; he's Mr. Trash; may as well go for the grindhouse gold, right? At least, IMHO.
QT on CT by readingwriter	Sep 5th, 2006 08:52:25 PM
Apparently only two bits of his rewrite were used--the exchange about the Silver Surfer and the one about Scotty from Star Trek. Robert Towne came in and created the scene that, I think, really set up the rest of the movie, the exchange between Hackman and Washington about their differing views of what they're doing there. That set up the whole damned movie. (Towne is like Dick Smith towards the end of his career, someoen who does special projects while others handle most of the works--Towne adds scenes, Smith makeup creations). Didn't Towne write a scene in Armageddon? i think QT's calling is as film critic, or even a studio exec. His comments on why Patriot Games sucked were perfect. He knows film and has that even rarer ability, he can articulate what's good or bad about a film. (He almost got me to like Forest Gump. Almost.)
dodgy indeed by Filmrage	Sep 5th, 2006 10:23:21 PM
Dude you invent a position i'm taking then tell me it's dodgy. I made my points about why i think PF is a grea film then i mentioned that it's still held up by movie lovers after all these years. That doesnt follow that i think it's great because they still like it. . . . . . and i'v mever restricted my opinion that people still love PF so much to geek. I actaully have no interest or special love for geeks and their likes and dislikes. I find them to be quite biased. Anything that reveres their childhood joy automatically gets elevated. You see it in Harry's reviews all the time. Some real crap gets praised by him or really awful scenes get excused just because the subject matter appeals to his geeklove. I find geeks to be permanantly regressed. . . . . i just had a sleep but before i want to bed i checked out some vids on spikedhumour and there was one animation of the Man U player Rooney fighting Ronaldo. In the intro it used the surf guitar theme from PF. I wasn't searching for an example but came across one while in between responses on here. Nope, didnt see any Kill Billage. . . . . .Now, don't wanna make any mistakes here and get accused of not understanding your point but you seem to think that a movie cant be considered great in the sense that Apocalypse, good fellas, godfather etc are great if it's not realistic or the characters are not believable. Well i agree with you that the characters in PF are total characatures and the dialogue is snark heavy but so what. There are loads of believable things in PF thats one of the things that made it special. They happen between characatures but well, thats movies. They also happen to be twenty feet hight sometimes. In PF when Butch retrieves his watch, instead of walking into his pad and gettig caught he gets the drop on Vincent cause V is taking a dump that's believable. Later when he's driving away and verything is peachy it all turns to shit and he ends up in gimpsville, thats' believable. The fact that he goes back and saves Marcelis after he escapes and that he and marcelis make peace, thats believable. QT made many believable scenes in PF the fact that they were between unreal characters doesnt matter. Just the same as an artists style is impressionistic. The painter captures the real idylic mood or the pathos of the scene without painting a realistic image. Thats something like what QT did in RD and PF. That's what he didnt do in KB. Without the pathos and 'believable' twists in PF it would have been what you describe it to be. I think you under appreciate the elusive elements in PF. The spaces between things are jus as important as the objects that create them and help to define the objects. In PF it's not 'just' the characters or the dialogue or the individual scenes. There is areason they call it movie magic, that phrase doesnt refer only to the special effects. Kill Bill was just a collection of scenes, it lacked that magic. . . . . .Oh and on Jackie Brown. I really liked it but i just happened to find the DeNero character and the bail bondsmans character really dull. I would have loved it to explore Michael Keaton and Chris Tuckers characters more.
Super Sport... by ewokstew	Sep 5th, 2006 11:31:16 PM
Nova's were actually pretty fast in the day but needed weight over the rear wheels in the trunk (tons of sandbags) as the ass ends were to light and they just spun in a smoky haze out when you stomped the gas. If Quentin did his homework he'll work this into the script in some creative way. Yeah...
Tarintito is a hack. by alucardvsdracula	Sep 6th, 2006 07:42:07 AM
He simply nicks, yeah thats right nicks, not borrows or steals, but nicks other peoples ideas (especially the BAD ones) and turns them into... gold. Fucker. Wait a minute. Just hang'on. Yep. Thats real interesting. Just going to the shitter for a dump. Back in a mo. Anyway where was I? Oh yeah I've got this great idea for a movie. A total rip off of a noir-ish 90's crime thriller called "Pulp Dogs". It kinda goes like this: "Weekend at Bernies" meets, shit, I don't know, er... some Tiritto movie. The corpse can be played by the fat dead Penn brother (see where I'm going with this one?) and we'll need a couple of washed up has-beens to play the 'funny' dudes who get dead penn into all kinds of funny shit. Get that erm, gay kid from Fright Night, you know the spiky haired little fucker who ended up in those hard core gay porn movies, and if he's still alive Ralph (Karate Kid) Macho. You see any old shit will do. Now all I need is a BAD wig for my bolding head and a HUGE chin. My ass is ready for its close up Mr Tirititoo.
alucardvsdracula, what the fuck does "nick" mean? by deadlegend	Sep 6th, 2006 07:32:46 PM
Really, what does it mean? Does it mean he "chips" off bits of story from other movies? If it does, then damn straight he does. If you think he's a hack, then it's perfectly clear that you don't watch his films. No, he's not a genius, but he's more intelligent and clever than you and I. Especially you, since you resort to childish bullshit like calling him "Tirititoo". I bet you say M. Night "Shamalamalamallan" and Steven "Spielturd" too, don't you? You fucking asshole. Fuck your mother.
Bulldoggie by rambozo	Oct 4th, 2006 02:15:16 PM
Who the hell is gonna take restaurant advice from a guy named "3 Bag Enema"? What a joke. Talking shit about Austin restaurants when we have some of the best and healthiest and most affordable and videst variety of food in the nation.
donde esta my edit button by rambozo	Oct 4th, 2006 02:18:54 PM
"videst" = "widest"
To No Op re Chevy Nova by Toastyrp	Jan 9th, 2008 02:46:32 AM
Hi, you're an idiot. People who dont no a dang thing about cars should nor write about them! The 1970 Chevy Nova Super Sport is an EXTREMELY FAST car, it came standard with a 396 with over 400hp. It does the 1/4 mile in 11.2 seconds with a speed of 188mph. It hits 0 to 60 in less than 2 seconds. buh bye.

Talkbacks

Pics of Kurt Russell's Badass Car from Tarantino's Grindhouse Flick, 'DEATH PROOF'!!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks