Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke
I'm looking forward to that one. Ridley Scott isn't always on his A-game but he delivers more often than not.
I thought his movie last year, Exodus, didn't get the acclaim it deserved.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke
I'm looking forward to that one. Ridley Scott isn't always on his A-game but he delivers more often than not.
I thought his movie last year, Exodus, didn't get the acclaim it deserved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke
I like Leo but I'm just not totally sure what to think about this one. The trailer is weird. It definitely looks INTERESTING but I'm not sure that it looks GOOD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SPX
I did. Sorry, it's not for me....but that doesn't mean I won't watch it someday
Quote:
Originally Posted by SPX
It definitely looks odd. It's not a movie I'll go to the theater to see. Was planning on going to see The Martian, though
Never saw Exodus
Exodus was dogshit, man. Australians and Scots playing egyptians with british accents, in a film where they couldn't even get the material of sword blades right. The dialogue was gay, the story was worse, and the choices in casting were even bigger disappointments than the way the movie turned out after all that hype.Quote:
Originally Posted by SPX
Now you're speaking my language.Quote:
Originally Posted by SPX
Nope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludo
First off, Joel Edgerton did a damn good job as Ramses. How you could criticize that performance I have no idea. And I have no idea why you would think the dialogue was gay or the story was gay. Actually, I bet I do know. It's biblical. Biblical shit probably just doesn't fly with you.
Even though it's not my normal protocol, I went ahead and read QT's leaked first draft of the script. just finished it a couple of days ago, actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by zY|
Why?Quote:
Originally Posted by SPX
I'm studying screenwriting pretty seriously right now and I thought it would interesting for once to read a script, build the movie in my head and then see the kind of choices the director made. Also, QT has said that he has extensively re-worked the ending since the first draft.Quote:
Originally Posted by zY|
Biblical shit flies just fine with me. I enjoyed "The Bible" mini series that History channel did. First off, how can you defend a film in which almost every fucking character was blonde haired, blue eyed, with a british accent, and european features?Quote:
Originally Posted by SPX
I'm sorry, but my suspended disbelief only goes so far when they fuck up the easy shit. Steel fucking swords, that weren't even the right shape in some or all of the battle scenes, when they weren't even out of the Bronze age yet. Again, this is easy shit. Casting the Scot from Alien Vs Predator as an Egyptian when he has an accent thicker than Sean Connery's is the worst casting decision since they casted Connery as an Egyptian named Juan Sanchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez.
Spike recently had a mini series, Tut, which was worlds better than Ramses. And it didn't need a made up monkey shit storyline to be better, either.
Think the only Bible movie I've ever watched was Ben Hur
Consider this our first disagreement and if I knew how to neg, I would neg the shit out of you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke
Agreed. Tarantino has always excelled at separating himself from many other directors with his dialogue, and his use of sequencing in film. Using Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill as the best examples of a timeline that isn't sequential, but it still makes perfect sense(though, Pulp Fiction is the better example, as Kill Bill does culminate in the death of the "villain" and a happy ending for the hero/protagonist).Quote:
Originally Posted by Éire
Gotta say my favorite Tarantino joint is Reservoir Dogs.
1. Pulp FictionQuote:
Originally Posted by Ludo
2. Reservoir Dogs
3. Inglourious Basterds (SURPRISE SURPRISE UNDERRATED MOVIE)
The man is just brilliant.
Click the little star looking thing and the bottom left of his post and then neg the fuck out of him. Because yeah, Tarantino is awesome. I love almost all of his movies. One of my favorite writers and directors of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Éire
BTW, welcome to the OT thread. Feel free to talk about ANYTHING in here.
There really is no "wrong" answer when those three are at the top to be honest. They're all magnificent. Kill Bill could easily occupy one of those spots also.Quote:
Originally Posted by Éire
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludo
On this we must disagree. Reservoir Dogs is the only QT movie that I just don't like and never feel the desire to rewatch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Éire
My list:
1. Pulp Fiction
2. Kill Bill (I consider them a single film)
3. Inglourious Basterds
4. Jackie Brown
5. Django
6. Death Proof
7. Reservoir Dogs
I can see RD not making the top 3 in favor of Kill Bill, but last? Come on, man. In no universe, parallel or not, does Reservoir Dogs belong lower than Death Proof. Death Proof barely had a cohesive plot. And while I did thoroughly enjoy Django, I just don't see it stacking up to the more "classic Tarantino" style films.Quote:
Originally Posted by SPX
My list probably looks something like:
1. Reservoir Dogs
2. Pulp Fiction
3. Kill Bill
4. Inglorious Basterds
5. Django
6. Jackie Brown
7. Death Proof
HUH? What do you possibly not like about it, lol?Quote:
Originally Posted by SPX
1. Pulp Fiction
2. Reservoir Dogs
3. Inglourious Basterds
4. Django Unchained
5. Kill Bill Vol. 2
6. Kill Bill Vol. 1
7. Jackie Brown
8. Death Proof
I guess I see what you're saying cause I didn't much like Jackie Brown but HOW THE FUCK ARE YOU GONNA RATE RESERVOIR DOGS UNDER DEATH PROOF?
EDIT: My newly found neg trigger finger is itching.