Just saw the new Tarantino film. It's good, and has some amazing references to 60s music, cinema, TV, etc.

There's a Stones cut on the soundtrack, although you'd argue that technically it's a Jagger / Andrew Loog-oldham Orchestra cut of Out of Time - the first track on Metamorphosis from 1975.

Certainly, it makes a change from Scorsese's Gimme Shelter fixation.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-12-21 16:35 by bv.

Out of Time is great. I have never had a problem with that version of it.

Agreed; it's a great cut.

The backing track is also exactly the same as the Chris Farlowe version.

EG Magazine -- 16 August 2019



ROCKMAN

Glad that you liked it. I have been meaning to see it. Tarantino's soundtracks are usually good overall IMHO.

Greetings from the Jersey Shore.

Great movie. Saw it for the second time last night. Brad Pitt should get an oscar
Typical Tarantino movie: too long, too violent and too many in-jokes, which is probably why I like it so much!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-08-16 01:14 by ElGeordie.

I loved this movie. Pitt was fantastic but Leo was Oscar-worthy. Jaw dropping great acting.

Quote
kv2915
I loved this movie. Pitt was fantastic but Leo was Oscar-worthy. Jaw dropping great acting.

Agree.
First movie I've seen in a long time that I immediately want to see again.

From the above EG Magazine review:
"...Tarantino: there seems little
doubt that every detail of the tableau has been
selected to give him pleasure, and we are being
permitted to witness a private ritual of self-
gratification, on more than one level."

---

Sounds like a metaphor for masturbation.

Never cared for Tarantino's work.

Both he and David Lynch are overrated and clichéd.

Pointless hipster hogwash.

A much better ending than real life. Really liked that one.

I stay away from Tarantino and Lynch.

Best movie I've seen in a long time. The 2.75 hour run time went by quickly. I want to see it again but will wait for blu-ray. Rumour has it Tarantino is preparing an extended version for netflix. I'm in.

Quote
kv2915
I loved this movie. Pitt was fantastic but Leo was Oscar-worthy. Jaw dropping great acting.

Agreed. Leo's performance was brilliant - a great actor playing an awful actor. It reminded me somewhat of Vincent Price in Theatre of Blood, in that the actor playing the actor knows that the timing needs to be a little bit off, a little bit awry, and that's what makes the character.

Sadly, that was the first Tarantino movie that I didn't like.

But the last part of the movie was very satisfying to me, especially as a Polanski's compatriot.

I might go see it this weekend.

I've been a fan of Tarantino ever since Reservoir Dogs, but I REALLY didn't like The Hateful Eight (although Kill Bill Vol. 2 was a letdown for me as well).

I'm tiring of his increasingly bloated, self-indulgent style (the death of his longtime editor affected his quality control), so based on what I've read, OUATIH may rub me the wrong way.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-08-16 16:54 by keefriff99.

I enjoyed it a lot. I thought Brad Pitt really stole the show. Leo was great as well and Margot is a beauty!

Anyone who hasn't seen it yet should stay in a bubble and not read anything about it before they do.


So much of this film speaks to the perspective of an older audience. If you're not at least closing in on 60, I don't think you'll fully appreciate how well he re-created 1969 visually, or the context of what's happening to Rick's career.


If you're 60-something, and grew up in Southern California, it's even better. There are some obscure local things in there that are just fantastic--one that even made me exclaim out loud because I couldn't believe he went to the trouble of putting it in there.

Quote
noughties
I stay away from Tarantino and Lynch.

Ever see the David Lynch film The Straight Story?

He intentionally made a G-rated film. And it's still got a "David Lynch" feel.

A very moving film. I recommend it.

Quote
Straycat13
A much better ending than real life.

So QT rehashed his old motto from "Inglourious Basterds" that is cinema is so strong it can change the course of history in a good way. It can kill H!tler... (or save Sharon Tate from Manson?)

That's very naive and childish from a guy who's 56...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-08-17 10:26 by dcba.

Quote
dcba

Quote
Straycat13
A much better ending than real life.

So QT rehashed his old motto from "Inglourious Basterds" that is cinema is so strong it can change the course of history in a good way. It can kill @#$%&... (or save Sharon Tate from Manson?)

That's very naive and childish from a guy who's 56...

Can you two Spoilers please delete your posts? For the sake of those who haven't seen it and might stumble onto them?

Quote
loog droog
Anyone who hasn't seen it yet should stay in a bubble and not read anything about it before they do.


So much of this film speaks to the perspective of an older audience. If you're not at least closing in on 60, I don't think you'll fully appreciate how well he re-created 1969 visually, or the context of what's happening to Rick's career.


If you're 60-something, and grew up in Southern California, it's even better. There are some obscure local things in there that are just fantastic--one that even made me exclaim out loud because I couldn't believe he went to the trouble of putting it in there.

Only black slaves who lived through the 1850s and the outbreak of the American Civil War will fully appreciate Django Unchained; otherwise the film isn’t for you.

What a load of crap.

Quote
Bastion

Quote
loog droog
Anyone who hasn't seen it yet should stay in a bubble and not read anything about it before they do.


So much of this film speaks to the perspective of an older audience. If you're not at least closing in on 60, I don't think you'll fully appreciate how well he re-created 1969 visually, or the context of what's happening to Rick's career.


If you're 60-something, and grew up in Southern California, it's even better. There are some obscure local things in there that are just fantastic--one that even made me exclaim out loud because I couldn't believe he went to the trouble of putting it in there.

Only black slaves who lived through the 1850s and the outbreak of the American Civil War will fully appreciate Django Unchained; otherwise the film isn’t for you.

What a load of crap.

Check out a few of this week's Dilbert comic strip for "Bad Analogy Guy"

[dilbert.com]



Does the idea that you might be missing out on something actually disturb you?

I'm not saying that anyone else won't enjoy themselves at this film. But to fully "get" what he nails on period detail requires a knowledge of the time period.

If you were there, and you're from LA, the placement of that cheap-ass Brew 102 is a period detail that rings a memory bell and speaks volumes. Anyone else will just see a beer.


There are also plenty of references to movie and TV stuff that only a film geek would get. The more you know about movies and pop culture, the more you can appreciate any Tarantino film. Is saying that truth also a "load of crap?"

Quote
loog droog

Quote
Bastion

Quote
loog droog
Anyone who hasn't seen it yet should stay in a bubble and not read anything about it before they do.


So much of this film speaks to the perspective of an older audience. If you're not at least closing in on 60, I don't think you'll fully appreciate how well he re-created 1969 visually, or the context of what's happening to Rick's career.


If you're 60-something, and grew up in Southern California, it's even better. There are some obscure local things in there that are just fantastic--one that even made me exclaim out loud because I couldn't believe he went to the trouble of putting it in there.

Only black slaves who lived through the 1850s and the outbreak of the American Civil War will fully appreciate Django Unchained; otherwise the film isn’t for you.

What a load of crap.

Check out a few of this week's Dilbert comic strip for "Bad Analogy Guy"

[dilbert.com]



Does the idea that you might be missing out on something actually disturb you?

I'm not saying that anyone else won't enjoy themselves at this film. But to fully "get" what he nails on period detail requires a knowledge of the time period.

If you were there, and you're from LA, the placement of that cheap-ass Brew 102 is a period detail that rings a memory bell and speaks volumes. Anyone else will just see a beer.


There are also plenty of references to movie and TV stuff that only a film geek would get. The more you know about movies and pop culture, the more you can appreciate any Tarantino film. Is saying that truth also a "load of crap?"

I just find your gatekeeping pathetic. I don’t doubt the lengths that Tarantino went to in recreating an authentic LA; those scenes of Cliff driving round were so fun to watch. I understand how growing up in that era would invoke feelings of nostalgia and authenticity. But to suggest that the film speaks specifically to an older audience because you recognised a beer brand is just downright laughable.

The film is a love letter to a golden age of Hollywood and Tarantino’s love of character acts and their dwindling relevance - perhaps even mirroring how he perceives his own role in the industry today. Perhaps not.

Suggestions of Tate’s portrayal in the film by others as being distasteful have completely missed the mark in my opinion. She’s given back to the world as a budding, young and enthusiastic professional with so much future potential - the scenes of her in the cinema were very endearing.

Seems to me you’re sad that your generation have been irrelevant for decades now
I didn’t miss out on anything by not growing up in 1969 LA, and to quote Tarantino himself, I reject your hypothesis.

Great film, loved it!

Dude.

WTF.

That was quite a leap.

Of course a film made in a particular location recreating a particular time could have more for people who lived there or close etc etc.

A film set in Aberdeen in 1982 is going to trigger local people more than someone who might not even know Aberdeen exists.

I saw an argument and wanted to join in.

Quote
loog droog
Dude.

WTF.

I concur. Massive overreaction.

Quote
ElGeordie
Great movie. Saw it for the second time last night. Brad Pitt should get an oscar
Typical Tarantino movie: too long, too violent and too many in-jokes, which is probably why I like it so much!

imo this movie was the opposite of that very little real life violence in the movie and i was ready for another hour

Quote
Bastion
The film is a love letter to a golden age of Hollywood

"golden age"? By 69 Hollywood was dead : it had sunk into formulaism and it'd churn out garbage after garbage.
What was called later "the New Hollywood" injected a bit of life into the stiff.
Take a film like "Easy Rider" for instance, starring Peter Fonda... who just died last night.

Didn't like the film. Not a huge pro or against Tarantino fan, but just thought this one meandered. Its clearly his love letter to late 60s California, which is totally fine, but I can't see it for much other than that. I thought most of the film just dragged, and then the end was essentially just Tarantino gimmick. I don't think he earned that ending despite it being good (of course, like everyone, I was applauding when he pulled out the flamethrower) but then I also thought its just a bad rip off of Bastards ending. Killing @#$%& felt satisfying. I don't know if anyone thought you could ever do that. This one was a retreat to that same formula, so its not even really original, and its just far less satisfying.

Totally fine with those that enjoyed it. I didn't hate it, and thought the acting was fantastic, as well as the attention to detail with California. But I'm very sick of people saying to me "well you need to know about the Manson murders and 1960s Hollywood to truly appreciate this film." I DO know all about the Manson murders (I was the only one who laughed and probably got the Dennis Wilson reference in my theater) and I also majored in film in college so I know the late 60s era extremely well. My knowledge of that did not change my opinion, and I also think thats a crutch that the film would have to rely on that to fully appreciate it. It should work on both levels, I kinda didn't think it worked on its own and I thought the knowledge of those two things was rather unnecessary to most of the movie, given the outcome at the end.

Oh, and bravo to Margot Robbie who should get an Oscar for least amount ever done in a film despite getting third billing. Love her, but seriously, everything they did with her was entirely superfluous. I thought Leo, Pitt, Olyphant, and several others were excellent though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-08-17 22:34 by RollingFreak.

I am a newspaper columnist in Florida and saw this movie with Charles Manson's grandson.

I wrote about it here:

(SPOILER ALERT)

[www.heraldtribune.com]