 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.160.130.12
On the huge screen.
One of the landmark works of modern cinema, whether or not you appreciate it (I very, very much do so).
Directors from every continent, from different eras, have praised it as an earthquake to film language. It's impact is very similar to that of Proust's, "Remembrance of Things Past:" it warped the dimension of time in art.
Has any film given more to cultural communication?
"It's a chopper, baby."
Follow Ups:
We rarely ever agree on anything. In fact this might be a first!
However, I too think this is one of the best movies ever made.
(Despite the non-linear timeline in the movie, of which I am not that much of a fan, but I can get past it). This is the only movie I've ever seen three times in the theater.
It certainly made several of the actors into stars, and revitalized the slumping acting careers of a couple of others.
The dialog is superb, and I love the dark humor running throughout the movie. (And the soundtrack was no slouch either!)
Two thumbs up from me! :-)
d
I think it is a good movie, but not as good as "Pulp Fiction".
The performances are very good, but the plot and dialog just does not come up to the level of PF.
But then again, very, very few movies do.
In fact, I believe I prefer Reservoir Dogs and the Kill Bill movies to Jackie Brown. But that is merely a matter of slight preference.
(But I've only seen JB once, and it took me a couple of viewings of RD to fully appreciate it, so perhaps I should take the time to rewatch JB.)
I am looking forward to the new Quentin Tarantino movie "Django Unchained" which is coming out shortly. The initial reviews have been fantastic!
Jackie Brown, Reservoir Dogs, and Pulp Fiction. Don't get me wrong, I really like JB as well but I've seen it exactly once. Amongst Tarantino's ouvre, it would easily place last in number of viewings. Maybe it was the uncomfortableness accompanying Jackson's portrayal of the gangster but the movie just hasn't demanded second viewings from me.
My rating:
Pulp
IB
KB1
KB2
RD
JB
.
.
.
Death Proof (1/2 damned good, 1/2 Godawful)
--------------------------
A pox on his family and 100 years of bad luck for the inventor of "Intelligent Touchpads" for laptops!!!
I thought this was Tarantino's finest moment. The character studies worked and the resurgence of Harvey Keitel that year with Bad Lieutenant and The Piano was one of the more enjoyable career resuscitations in cinema history. The dialog flowed better than most of his movies, where it seems forced and stilted. With the low-budget feel and most of the film taking place in an abandoned warehouse, it had the feel of a broadway play in contrast to Tarantino's more overproduced efforts that left me cold.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Michael Keaton, DeNiro---- and of course, Sam Jackson.
Spectacular dialogue, as usual, a nicely involved plot from Elmore Leonard's, "Rum Punch," and the trademark Tarantino editing: what more could you want? And the soundtrack, also, is legendary.
A crime film w/a vicious criminal, a weak-willed but kind-hearted heroine, her leather tough but similarly soft-hearted and shy love interest, a conniving and amoral federal agent: this film has it all.
Pam Grier should have gotten an Oscar for this. She breathed life into Jackie, making her a multi-dimensional, complex, and enduring character.
This is Tarantino's one film where I think you sense a lot of human warmth. You see flashes of it in Pulp between Vincent and Mia, and Butch and his doe-eyed squeeze, but here it's much more of the story. DeNiro's "relationship" with Fonda's character, also, is bittersweet.
I think JB is a great, not just very good, film.
Thought Robert Forster easily could have got an Oscar as well. This one ranks up there for me....for Tarantino films. It certainly ranks higher than the Kill Bills or Inglorious Bastards.
pulp to another level.
Noir was serious, dark.
Tarantino took it, colorized it, and added a lot of humor.
.
Your wife should love it.
I think you'll enjoy it, too.
It is a memorable film, but I don't think quite at the level of Barry Lyndon.
The first half goes down fairly easily, the second loses you quickly, with too many intertwined characters, names, etc, so by the time you make a partial recovery it is already over! :) At one point I gave up on trying to remember all the names, and just went with the flow. When you read a book like this, you go back and forth often, here you are denied that luxury, so you are bound to lose some. Maybe when watched by the original audience, in native language there is less of this issue.
The cinematography is outstanding, much like in BL, with many images worthy of a canvas, but the characters are mostly static, and the story telling tedious. Some sub-plots border on ridiculous, like the deadly 80,000 of something for a night... Perhaps in the TV show format it was more easily digestable, with long pauses between the segments, here it created the acute sense of overload.
So overall, as I said, it is a memorable film, and I am glad we watched it, but I would rate it on par with true masterpieces.
BTW, I was listening to the music of the Portuguese language and I am still unable to crack it. I can recognize many languages by their music, here it is still escaping me... there is something in it that at times sounds almost like Polish, with many Sh sounds, and there are definite spanish parallels, but it is hard to grasp.
Anyway, with something like that your perception often changes with time, but I am afraid a second viewing of this 4 1/2 hour monument will be hard to arrange. I think it could have been easily shrunk down to maybe 3 hours, with more dynamic flow and less tedium.
.
http://db.audioasylum.com/mhtml/m.html?forum=films&n=83248&highlight=lisbon+tinear&r=&search_url=%2Fcgi%2Fsearch.mpl%3Fforum%3Damp%26searchtext%3DASL
Slim pickings these days among the streamable films... fortunately our 1-at-a-time service seems to be going faster now.
Never seen a Tarantino film that I liked. Pulp Fiction IMO is one of the most over-rated films made; I couldn't sit thru another viewing. Strange doesn't = good to me.
.
----------
Tin-eared audiofool, large-scale-Classical music lover, and damned-amateur fotografer.
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted." Albert Einstei
I don't like Tarantino... he is definitely not without a talent, but he constantly uses shockers to keep the viewer interested, so I am not sure he would ever be able to put together a quiet story like, say, Forbidden Games, that would keep the audience riveted without resorting to cheap tricks.
I think cheap is the key words when talking about his art.
Does it meet your criteria of greatness?
I can tell you right away - it exceeds mine.
common line among our family and friends.
What is your thoughts on that one?
Part 1 of Storytelling, "Fiction", is something I couldn't get out of my head for quite some time. Scene with "Say it - n..., f... me hard!", being told by professor to his female student, is alone worth the time.
His films after Storytelling are "tame" in comparison, however style is still easily recognizable.
Dawn "Weinerdog" Weiner as it was the first of his films I saw. Happiness is obviously a much more ambitiious effort. Storytelling fell flat for me...and a lot of it seemed a bit contrived if my memory of my thoughts on this one is correct.
I don't think I have seen any of his films after Storytelling.
N/T
I don't recall seeing that film, maybe I did, I don't know, but I have to tell you, I have an extremely strong distaste for American films made by the under-50 directors. Not that above-50 Americans are guaranteed to make good films, but lately I had the serious misfortune to see several more or less recent pieces of crap by young directors, and without an exception they were pure stinky garbage, self-absorbed in their own significance, full of endless stupid superficial self-loving dialogue, sense of self-importance in every scene... and that awful, awful, awful American "music" - a constipated, strangled voice trying to tell me some story over a lame guitar. Seems like today 35 is an old adolescent. Solondz is just over that 50 mark, but the film's description tells me I would have to do with no dinner for a few days - don't think that is exactly the kind of a film my wife would appreciate. :)
Edits: 12/07/12
No self-loving dialogue, no sense of self-importance - and no music that I recall, so it either isn't there, or doesn't call attention to itself.
Instead, what is there - pure, all-encompassing hatred and loathing for humanity in general and American society in particular, with not one character to feel any real sympathy for. Director, in this instance, is just a bystander, looking at all proceedings in utter disgust.
Just the way I love it.
OK, so maybe grits gets some, as he blazes the trail through all that mayhem, blood and kinky sex!
Of the asylum?
Sorry grits, but you didn't shave your legs last time!
ds
To be fair, she is still much pleasant to watch than most WT tenants.
d
.
honest, hard-working, successful (prior to political careers), and good parents.
But, hey, this is a film forum.
And you must detest Kandinsky?
Tarantino is different, but as earth-shaking. He's taken a trite genre, in this instance the noir or pulp fiction-themed film, and elevated it by brilliant story-telling, cinematography, editing. Must the subject matter of art be beauty or told in a beautiful way?
Punk rock. Graffiti art. Video art. Earth art.
All revolutionary impacts on the formal Academy of art critics and the public expectations of art.
It was just an experiment, a concept, not art. Vasya Kandinsky I like, as one likes watching the kaleidoscope. What this has to do with a particular film - I am not sure. I never watched the PF from start to finish, just overlapping pieces many times, and I never had any desire to waste my two hours on it. In reality, you take away the dance scene (owned lock, stock and barrel by Travolta, not Tarantino) and the rest is just that - pulp.
d
And I'm not just saying that because I think Tarantino has no talent. Nolan is one of the greatest directors and I can't stand Momento for the same reason. A director who can't figure out how to make a story engaging linearly is not worth his weight in salt.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
not being able to hold one's interest because it plays with time, just as Tarantino and others do with it in the visual realm.
Not that you can tell the difference.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
... not worthwhile ?
I see.
Your mind is straight-jacketed.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
