Well if you'd like to look at it so simple mindedly, and I honestly don't know why I expected anything else, then feel free I guess. But basically what I was trying to say is, you can't take a piece of abstract art, set it next to a photograph taken for a McDonalds add, then ask someone which of the two gives you a better feeling or which you'd rather look at. They both may be visual art, but they are indeed different with different intentions.

You know, the fact that we haven't lynched darkeningday yet is no indicator that the arrival of even more douchey, try hard elitists like you is welcome. Don't lame up this thread with that crap.

Shit I don't think I've watched even a third of the movies from which he takes his references from. It doesn't really matter to me though, because I know how Tarantino makes his films; usually a big collage of well-shot tribute scenes with great actors and choice of soundtrack. That doesn't bother me in the least, and if anything I can admire Tarantino's tastes and love for movies. Anyway, most of his films (including Kill Bill) I find entertaining and fun to watch, and it's still fun to pick out the references. When I saw Uma Thurman in a yellow track suit, I didn't flip the bird at the screen going "Bruce Lee is rolling in his grave! " I thought "Oh cool, a Bruce Lee reference. Respect. " If people didn't get the reference, well then too bad. We live in the age of the internets, and as such there are no secrets. Curious fans will find out. People will either be told (sometimes rudely), or come across it by accident or through research. There's no sense in acting like a haughty jerk and calling people uneducated morons because they enjoy watching films made by a passionate director.


Sure, but I simply don't regard Tarantino's films as McDonald's adverts compared to the variety of their source materials. This also doesn't necessarily imply that I dislike the source material either. YMMV.

Well I didn't mean to say you had to watch 100% of Tarantino's influences to say anything about him. Just that people who've seen none of them and yet treat him as a god and get butthurt when you criticize him are super annoying.

I understand that. Though I have to say, I don't think I've come across such people. I mean I don't think that I've seen this happen here, for starters. (I very well could be wrong, I don't follow this thread like other regulars)

EDIT: After a quick search, I'd say that people who discuss Tarantino are generally aware of what they're getting in his films.

Are you serious man? Calling people elitists while at the same time saying something like "we haven't lynched darkeningday yet"...
It's called having a discussion, and other than your posts, it seems everyone is fine with actually doing just that, discussing what is at hand. You should really take a step back and read what you are saying.

While comparing Tarantino's work to a Mcdonalds add is perhaps extreme, I still feel it is an appropriate comparison when talking about the works of most of the directors he is directly influenced by, specifically the New Wave directors of the 60's. What those guys did, in my opinion, was the most important movement to ever happen in the short history of film itself, and while Tarantino's movies may be aesthetically pleasing in many different ways, they are historically insignificant when compared to the likes of those he learned from. The analogy may be extreme, but I feel relatively appropriate.

The Pentagram movie - Last Days Here, is awesome. It follows Pentagram singer Bobby Liebling throughout what could have very well been his last days. At the start he is a massive crack/heroin addict living amongst filth in his parents basement. He had these crazy gashes in his arm and constantly picked at his wounds because he was convinced he had parasites. His "manager" Pellet bends over backwards to get him clean and to get him to make music again. By the end of the movie he's clean with a girlfriend and a baby and playing again. I'm honestly surprised he didn't die and actually managed to get clean.

Just to weigh in on the Tarantino inferno while it's still raging, I suppose I ultimately see him as the epitome of a style-over-substance artist. His works, while superficially engaging in certain ways, leave me entirely hollow, and even when speaking only to style I can't summon much admiration for him because of how frequently and eagerly he indulges in what amounts to masturbatory quasi-plagiarism. His ideas simply aren't his half the time. The whole thing is just kind of perverse... there's very little originality there, cloying caricaturism, terrible fucking writing... shit, even the action bits usually aren't convincing, to say nothing of the casting choices.

The most I can give the man is that he's a collage artist of sorts, and collage doesn't necessarily have to suck. I respect his knowledge of cinema, and his obvious ability to geek out on film is pretty intense. It's just his way of going about things doesn't create any new landmarks in creative effort; instead of a compelling synthesis of influences you get the cinematic equivalent of sitting in some man-child's poster-plastered bedroom, listening to him go through his top 200 favorite scenes in film history. It's just... kind of odious.

And one last point to end this on: One of the biggest failures of Tarantino's work is that it tries as hard as it can to co-opt the camp charisma that those 60s/70s films brought about, yet goes about it so extremely self-consciously that it can't hope to hold any of the DIY naivete that gave rise to that special personality in the first place.

Speaking of Tarantino taking loads of influences for his movies, I highly recommend City on Fire for those who liked Reservoir Dogs. The general theme/plot what almost lifted from that film - the jewelry heist with an undercover cop that goes wrong. It's impossible he was not influenced by that film considering his love for Hong Kong cinema. Although the approach is quite different obviously as City on Fire works more with the relationship between the uncover cop and one of the criminals, from the beginning of his investment (the undercover cop) in the gang to the bloody finale, while Reservoir Dogs has a much bigger emphasis on when it all goes to hell.

After being thoroughly disappointed with the Hobbit, I saw Painted Skin II: The Resurrection.

It's also a fantasy film, set in medieval China. Not exactly underground, it's the biggest box office success for a Chinese movie in China. Great film, I highly recommend it. Excellent sad music too, rivals any gothic band.

I have yet to see the first Painted Skin.

Tarantino wasnt just influenced by City on Fire, he directly COPIED City on fire, some camera angles, some lines, ect. Taratino just plagerized the movie and just made it his way. Reservoir dogs is still a great. Movie, it is plagerized.

Jusy how like Death Proof was a direct cooy of Vanishing point. They (the characters in the movie) dont say they love that movie for a reason.

I'm late to the party but I'm currently watching the Avengers. It is stupid and overrated and annoying with some good action. For one, They keep pn calling the cube a "Tessaract" while other characters still call it a cube. tesseract =/= Cube. It is stupid and Whoever wrote it has pulling shit out of his ass.

Also, that Django movie is pretty awesome. it isn't a Django movie, but it is a good movie. (who those who dont get it see the original Django and compare).

Yeah, because when I watch The Avengers I'm really watching it to make sure they got all their scientific and mathematical facts correct.

Eh. I'm in a bad mood, so of course I would want to nitpick the hell out of this movie.

It is just the first act is so hard to watch. At least the action is fun

I agree with you about Tarantino having a huge mindless following, but to his credit he's always been very vocal about his many influences. It's not as if he's plagiarizing (I know you didn't accuse him of that) without acknowledging where his quirks and style come from.

I just saw Django Unchained today and really enjoyed it. Not his best, but thoroughly entertaining stuff. I simply love Christoph Waltz and, not surprisingly, he completely stole the show for me. I think the rock-solid cast was what really held the movie together so tightly with Jamie Fox as a solid lead and DiCaprio, who is sometimes a bit hit and miss for me, also being a major highlight. Samuel L. Jackson was also in a really strange but interesting role (one of the minor problems I had with the movie was in not really developing his character or exploring any kind of justification for his bizarre nature).

Anyway, if you're a fan of Tarantino and go in expecting action packed fun, I'd be surprised if you're disappointed.

It's a very good thing that you and Dakeningday have a very small shell from where you can be heard, microscopic in terms of the scope of the internet.

In other news, I watched Grown Ups just out of curiosity if a film with that line up could be as bad as people said, and wow.. Normally I'd give a write up but it honestly doesn't deserve it, it would be filled with too many complaints and expletives that it might cause temporary disorientation. I will say in summary that for a comedy, I barely smirked throughout it's 102 minute runtime, and that was only because an old lady was making fun of Rob Schneider. I found out there is a sequel to this abomination set for release next year, I know things aren't great in mainstream Hollywood but I was overwhelmed with disbelief at that news. Hell, I'd take another Chuck and Larry over a Grown Ups 2.

Thoroughly enjoyed Lawless with Tom Hardy and Shia Labeouf. Easily Labeouf's best effort to date. I found certain aspects of the film hard to believe but in the scope of the action and terrific acting that all took a back seat. The action had meaning and wasn't overblown to drive the film, the characters stories accomplished that. I really enjoyed watching Labeouf's character develop and progress throughout the film, I really felt a sense of progression in a steady flow, which of course was aided by excellent editing. I was attentive and completely entertained from the moment it began, so for me it's one of my favourite movies of the year next to Looper. Mind you I haven't seen every new release yet.

What a thoughtful, totally not fallacious thing to argue. You'll do well here.

Yeah, and saying everyone who even sees the new Tarantino movie is an idiot is great debating, sure. You can't make statements like that and also play the victim when someone else turns your own garbage back on you. Doesn't work both ways.

Fool me seven times, shame on you. Fool me eight, shame on me. (hint: Django is #8)

I miss when this thread wasn't 90% pointless bickering.

I've been here for awhile. You probably haven't noticed because I don't post pretentious, self righteous spew from my arse about artfag movies and British sitcoms that are average at best. I also don't express my excitement for shows nobody knows or cares about continually without response, routinely each week like an utter fool. Like MA is your personal diary

^

Is this guy for real?

There are a few movies missing from this list (After Earth, etc.), but these are the movies that is coming out in 2013:

Grown Ups 2?

GOD I FUCKING HATE YOU AMERICA.

Django Unchained was pretty great I thought, but I'm not super hard to please when it comes to movies. A few big laughs, and a lot of great action scenes. I was actually surprised how little banter there was compared to a normal Tarantino film. Might make it easier to stomach for some of his detractors.

They ran a preview for Stand Up Guys before the movie which I hadn't heard about but now I'm fucking super psyched for. If you haven't heard of it allow me to pitch you the story: Christopher Walken and Al Pacino hang out all day, but Walken has to kill him at the end of it and doesn't want to.

This is a truly horrible list. Looks like 2013 will be the worst yet.

Oh cool, a new Riddick movie? I actually quite enjoyed Pitch Black and the Chronicles of Riddick, not the height of cinema by any stretch of the imagination, but the latter especially was stylish and original as hell. It looks like an HR Giger version of the Flash Gordon movie or something. They're in same the classic "dumb but fun" sci-fi/action vein as Predator, except the second movie adds to that a really fantastic visual style, and has quite a bit more going on plot-wise. I'm definitely excited to see the new one.

Holy shit, they made a sequel to that Percy Jackson movie? That was easily one of the worst films I've ever seen.

And that is why Movies that were based on books tend to suck (well, most of them).

Whoa whoa whoa. Wait. Clockwork Princess by Cassandra Clare? AKA the author who got famous from writing Harry Potter fanfiction? Jesus Christ.

Why is that again?

Because The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, Trainspotting, Casino, The English Patient, The Fly, The Shining, Dr. Strangelove, Out of Sight, Lord of the Flies, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, The Silence of the Lambs, Stand by Me, Memento, Die Hard, A Beautiful Mind, and Lord of the Rings were all really shitty movies.

Ohh, that's why.

Don't forget Blade Runner. Or Ran. Those really suck a lot.

In fairness though, a lot of movies based on books do suck a lot, but probably not at a higher percentage that movies NOT based on books suck. I doubt there's much difference between book-movies sucking and original movies sucking, given that the screenplays have to go through similar approval processes no matter what they're based on. Producers might be in a hurry to get their hands on a screenplay adapted from a book by a popular author, but then they would probably feel the same about a screenplay by a popular screenwriter.

Hollywood tends to make a "few changes" when making a movie off of a book. In some movies, it turns out great (E.g. Harry Potter, The Warriors). In other movies, it ruins it (e.g. Diary of a Wimpy Kid, Peter Jackson & the Olympians).

Did no one actually pick up on why I asked this question in the first place?

@failsafe: Tru dat. U ryte. *rasta snap*

It's almost 2013. Darkeningday, talk about a movie. I'm ready to CLASH GLORIOUSLY

The Hobbit was fucking brilliant. Easily a 9/10.

I....I can't disprove that cause I haven't seen it (nor want to) but you're joking, right?

Actually, no. I honestly much preferred it to the overblown LotR films... will write more later when sober.

Why do people say "overblown" as if it's a bad thing? When did being grandiose become a flaw?

(The answer is never.)