Red Mosquito

BurtReynolds wrote:I'm using this thread as research for an Adam Sandler vehicle that will appeal to all LoathedVermins ages 13-42. The perfect demo.

It's called Jack and Jill.

Jackie Brown is quite a bit better than Pulp Fiction.

@SkitchP wrote:Jackie Brown is quite a bit better than Pulp Fiction.

No, but its better than everything he did after that.

@SkitchP wrote:Jackie Brown is quite a bit better than Pulp Fiction.

I could possibly get behind this. JB is great.

VinylGuy wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:Jackie Brown is quite a bit better than Pulp Fiction.

No, but its better than everything he did after that.

I might like Inglourious Basterds more.


But those 2 are by far my favorites

I only like about three scenes in Inglorious Basterds. Or however he spelled it.

durdencommatyler wrote:I only like about three scenes in Inglorious Basterds. Or however he spelled it.

The stuff with the basterds themselves is fun. The rest can be kind of a drag. QT's dialogue at its most annoyingly precious.

Django is a lousy movie.

VinylGuy wrote:Django is a lousy movie.

I quite enjoyed Django.

Am I still your 2nd account?

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:I only like about three scenes in Inglorious Basterds. Or however he spelled it.

The stuff with the basterds themselves is fun. The rest can be kind of a drag. QT's dialogue at its most annoyingly precious.

Precious is one way to describe it. I'd call it "indulgent", and I would agree, but I enjoy where he takes it; the small pockets of drama that tense and yield with each one of these extended interaction. I'm not a big Quentinhead, but Basterds may be my favorite movie of his.

Rangi Guy wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:Django is a lousy movie.

I quite enjoyed Django.

Am I still your 2nd account?

You can't fool me simply by pretending to disagree with yourself.

theplatypus wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:I only like about three scenes in Inglorious Basterds. Or however he spelled it.

The stuff with the basterds themselves is fun. The rest can be kind of a drag. QT's dialogue at its most annoyingly precious.

Precious is one way to describe it. I'd call it "indulgent", and I would agree, but I enjoy where he takes it; the small pockets of drama that tense and yield with each one of these extended interaction. I'm not a big Quentinhead, but Basterds may be my favorite movie of his.

The scenes that I like are my favorite scenes in any QT movie, probably. Or damn near. But they aren't enough to save the overall experience. I'd still put Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs above it.

theplatypus wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:I only like about three scenes in Inglorious Basterds. Or however he spelled it.

The stuff with the basterds themselves is fun. The rest can be kind of a drag. QT's dialogue at its most annoyingly precious.

Precious is one way to describe it. I'd call it "indulgent", and I would agree, but I enjoy where he takes it; the small pockets of drama that tense and yield with each one of these extended interaction. I'm not a big Quentinhead, but Basterds may be my favorite movie of his.

I appreciate what he's going for with those subtle shifts in tension and tone, I just don't think they're executed interestingly or deeply. Frankly, I don't think QT is a skilled enough filmmaker to earn them. I'd point to the dinner scene in Fury as a much better-done example of this dynamic.

He's uneven. Sometimes the dialogues and long shots do a great job of building tension or building character (reservoir dogs, pulp fiction), and other times its pointless and indulgent (Death Proof and Jackie Brown, a movie that shouldn't be regarded as highly as it is).

But yeah Django was a letdown.

In the theme of this thread though, I'll say Kill Bill volume 2 Is his second best movie.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:I only like about three scenes in Inglorious Basterds. Or however he spelled it.

The stuff with the basterds themselves is fun. The rest can be kind of a drag. QT's dialogue at its most annoyingly precious.

Precious is one way to describe it. I'd call it "indulgent", and I would agree, but I enjoy where he takes it; the small pockets of drama that tense and yield with each one of these extended interaction. I'm not a big Quentinhead, but Basterds may be my favorite movie of his.

I appreciate what he's going for with those subtle shifts in tension and tone, I just don't think they're executed interestingly or deeply. Frankly, I don't think QT is a skilled enough filmmaker to earn them. I'd point to the dinner scene in Fury as a much better-done example of this dynamic.

That scene was too predictable and cheeseball to be taken seriously. Don't kid yourself, it was a fun movie but not a good one. It was a cartoon. The whole thing felt like "ok here's the scene where we ape Tarantino aping someone else."

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:I only like about three scenes in Inglorious Basterds. Or however he spelled it.

The stuff with the basterds themselves is fun. The rest can be kind of a drag. QT's dialogue at its most annoyingly precious.

Precious is one way to describe it. I'd call it "indulgent", and I would agree, but I enjoy where he takes it; the small pockets of drama that tense and yield with each one of these extended interaction. I'm not a big Quentinhead, but Basterds may be my favorite movie of his.

I appreciate what he's going for with those subtle shifts in tension and tone, I just don't think they're executed interestingly or deeply. Frankly, I don't think QT is a skilled enough filmmaker to earn them. I'd point to the dinner scene in Fury as a much better-done example of this dynamic.

That scene was too predictable and cheeseball to be taken seriously. Don't kid yourself, it was a fun movie but not a good one. It was a cartoon. The whole thing felt like "ok here's the scene where we ape Tarantino aping someone else."

I do not agree with that at all. I think there's some interesting stuff going on in that movie. I don't see how that scene is "cheeseball." It could certainly be argued that the final act gets a bit ridiculous, though.

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:I only like about three scenes in Inglorious Basterds. Or however he spelled it.

The stuff with the basterds themselves is fun. The rest can be kind of a drag. QT's dialogue at its most annoyingly precious.

Precious is one way to describe it. I'd call it "indulgent", and I would agree, but I enjoy where he takes it; the small pockets of drama that tense and yield with each one of these extended interaction. I'm not a big Quentinhead, but Basterds may be my favorite movie of his.

I appreciate what he's going for with those subtle shifts in tension and tone, I just don't think they're executed interestingly or deeply. Frankly, I don't think QT is a skilled enough filmmaker to earn them. I'd point to the dinner scene in Fury as a much better-done example of this dynamic.

That scene was too predictable and cheeseball to be taken seriously. Don't kid yourself, it was a fun movie but not a good one. It was a cartoon. The whole thing felt like "ok here's the scene where we ape Tarantino aping someone else."

his two last movies are like that....quentin greatest hits. Fuck that.

VinylGuy wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:I only like about three scenes in Inglorious Basterds. Or however he spelled it.

The stuff with the basterds themselves is fun. The rest can be kind of a drag. QT's dialogue at its most annoyingly precious.

Precious is one way to describe it. I'd call it "indulgent", and I would agree, but I enjoy where he takes it; the small pockets of drama that tense and yield with each one of these extended interaction. I'm not a big Quentinhead, but Basterds may be my favorite movie of his.

I appreciate what he's going for with those subtle shifts in tension and tone, I just don't think they're executed interestingly or deeply. Frankly, I don't think QT is a skilled enough filmmaker to earn them. I'd point to the dinner scene in Fury as a much better-done example of this dynamic.

That scene was too predictable and cheeseball to be taken seriously. Don't kid yourself, it was a fun movie but not a good one. It was a cartoon. The whole thing felt like "ok here's the scene where we ape Tarantino aping someone else."

his two last movies are like that....quentin greatest hits. Fuck that.

Quentin doesn't make serious movies. If he did and it came out as pulpy and silly as Fury, he'd be doing it wrong, but I'd still probably enjoy it.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I think Freddy Got Fingered is something of a masterpiece.

Btw, you aren't wrong about this.

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I think Freddy Got Fingered is something of a masterpiece.

Btw, you aren't wrong about this.

What the fuck, did you just agree with me? What's your angle, pervert?