Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

This is the place where you can conflab about all the other stuff besides videogames
User avatar
Alex79uk
Member
Posts: 7241
Joined: September 2nd, 2012, 12:36 pm
Location: Walsall, UK.
Contact:

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by Alex79uk »

I can't wait for it, been looking forward to it for years. I hope he doesn't retire, as he's often mentioned he will. Not made a bad film yet in my opinion.

Also yeah, I'm not a fan of the cinema. I think under perfect circumstances - alone, really comfortable chair, able to pause if I need a wee :lol: - it would be fine, but as it is, I much prefer to watch a film at home.

Double also yeah, DeCaprio is a fantastic actor I think. Gangs Of New York is probably my favorite film. I remember hating him after they butchered The Beach, but he's been in some brilliant films since.

User avatar
KSubzero1000
Member
Posts: 3365
Joined: August 26th, 2015, 9:56 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KSubzero1000 »

I'm not a big fan of DiCaprio, personally. He always comes across to me like the kind of Hollywood superstar who thinks that the film's purpose is to serve him instead of the other way around and who expects to be the centerpiece of every frame, surrounded by various supporting actors who are mainly there to prop him up. In fact, I can not recall any supporting role he's chosen to play over the course of the past 15 years except for Django Unchained. That's not to say he isn't a great actor or that talented writers, photographers and directors can't make the best out of a DiCaprio vehicle (like Inception, The Revenant or most of his collaborations with Scorsese), but I prefer to view cinema as a more collaborative effort. To be fair, I have a similar issue with most other actors of his star power (Tom Cruise, Johnny Depp, Russel Crowe or Will Smith come to mind), but the issue seems particularly pronounced with him.

Pitt on the other hand appears to be one of the few exceptions who tries to keep his ego in check, chooses scripts based on the quality of the writing first and foremost and doesn't hesitate to play supporting roles or throw his weight around to help get smaller projects off the ground. I think he has an excellent track record and a much healthier relationship with the material he's working with. I've been a fan of his since Se7en.

Really looking forward to OUAT...IH! I'll go with my mate to the theater for sure.

User avatar
Alex79uk
Member
Posts: 7241
Joined: September 2nd, 2012, 12:36 pm
Location: Walsall, UK.
Contact:

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by Alex79uk »

I can't say I've got that impression from interviews or watching him on screen.
KSubzero1000 wrote: July 31st, 2019, 3:53 pm To be fair, I have a similar issue with most other actors of his star power (Tom Cruise, Johnny Depp, Russel Crowe or Will Smith come to mind), but the issue seems particularly pronounced with him.

Pitt on the other hand appears to be one of the few exceptions who tries to keep his ego in check, chooses scripts based on the quality of the writing first and foremost and doesn't hesitate to play supporting roles or throw his weight around to help get smaller projects off the ground.
I mean Johnny Depp is well known for choosing smaller indie films and has often stated that he'll do the odd blockbuster here and there so that he can afford to keep on being in films he actually wants to be in.

User avatar
KissMammal
Member
Posts: 415
Joined: August 22nd, 2014, 5:52 pm

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KissMammal »

I couldn't take DiCaprio seriously until a couple of years ago - he always looked like a teenager to me until he hit his late thirties, when he suddenly started looking his age. I'm not sure what their relative ages were at the time, but I could never buy him and Kate Winslet as a couple in Titanic, as she looked more like his babysitter than his love interest to me. I think Django Unchained might have been the turning point. He was also great in Wolf of Wall Street.

User avatar
ratsoalbion
Admin
Posts: 7493
Joined: August 28th, 2012, 9:41 am
Location: Brighton, England
Contact:

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by ratsoalbion »

I know what you mean, but DiCaprio is almost a year older than Kate Winslet.

User avatar
duskvstweak
Member
Posts: 1004
Joined: August 23rd, 2017, 6:40 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by duskvstweak »

I think it was Blood Diamonds and Shutter Island that convinced me that I enjoy DiCaprio. Since then, he seems to have a really good head for picking roles. I can't think of a performance of his in the last 15 years I haven't enjoyed.

Also, I did see Once Upon a Time. I talked about it in What You've Been Watching, but the gist is I liked it without loving it. I'm interested to see what everyone here thinks of it when they see it.

User avatar
KissMammal
Member
Posts: 415
Joined: August 22nd, 2014, 5:52 pm

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KissMammal »

ratsoalbion wrote: July 31st, 2019, 5:26 pm I know what you mean, but DiCaprio is almost a year older than Kate Winslet.
Thats nuts.

User avatar
KissMammal
Member
Posts: 415
Joined: August 22nd, 2014, 5:52 pm

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KissMammal »

Saw Once Upon a Time... last night.

Solidly entertaining and frequently funny, but a little aimless and meandering at times. I'm still not quite sure what Tarantino was going for with this, honestly. I probably need a little more time to digest it. I'd probably rank it as lower tier Tarantino, however I found both Django and Hateful Eight similarly indulgent and overlong at first and enjoyed them a lot more on second watch, so that could change.

More than anything, it's just refreshing for a big name director to get a lavish budget to spend on things other than cgi for a change - in that respect alone it's worth supporting and seeing on the big screen.

User avatar
KissMammal
Member
Posts: 415
Joined: August 22nd, 2014, 5:52 pm

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KissMammal »

DiCaprio is absolutely amazing in it btw.

User avatar
KSubzero1000
Member
Posts: 3365
Joined: August 26th, 2015, 9:56 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KSubzero1000 »

duskvstweak wrote: July 31st, 2019, 6:15 pm I'm interested to see what everyone here thinks of it when they see it.
I went to watch OUATIH on Sunday.

I didn't like it nearly as much as I would have wanted it to. If I had to sum it up in one word, it would be "inconsistent".

Top cinematography and performances aside, the film mostly consists of a loose succession of occasionally amusing vignettes with barely any connective tissue or leading thread unifying them all and I found it very hard to look past what I consider to be massive structural problems. Some of the scenes are brilliant and some are completely pointless. DiCaprio and Pitt are fantastic and make the absolute best out of the material they're presented with, but about half of their scenes could (should?) have been cut. Robbie is as great as she can be considering she has absolutely nothing to work with.
Spoiler: show
I also wasn't a fan of the historical revisionist ending. It seems like an uninspired re-do of IB without any of the narrative weight of that movie nor the much-deserved conclusions to Shosanna's and Aldo's character arcs.
It's Tarantino at his most self-indulgent but also least creative. All the usual ingredients are there, but it doesn't seem like they're in the service of any greater purpose. His recurring actors are being wastefully shoehorned into single scenes that don't lead anywhere, the weird feet close-ups cross the line from being an occasional yet harmless kink to a regular and pointless crudeness, and the dialogue is surprisingly uneven. Some of it is as great and quotable as usual, some of it falls disappointingly flat.

I took a few days to let it sink in and I'll have to watch it again when it comes out on Blu-Ray, but for the time being it probably ranks near the bottom of my personal Tarantino ranking, barely edging out Death Proof. It pains me to say it, really. And it'll be even sadder for me if this movie turns out to be the much-rumored swan song of his career... :(

User avatar
KSubzero1000
Member
Posts: 3365
Joined: August 26th, 2015, 9:56 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KSubzero1000 »

ThirdMan wrote: September 17th, 2019, 8:12 am the movies need stars
I'm not sure I would agree with that, personally.

Star vehicles have a long history of commercial and critical success in Hollywood, but they also have some inherent drawbacks, I would argue. Generally speaking, the bigger and more recognizable the actor is, the more difficult it becomes for most audience members to view them as the character they are trying to portray. It ties the hands of the writers whenever the stars become too closely associated with their signature on-screen persona (you can't make Hugh Jackman too sleazy, you can't make Will Smith too incompetent, you can't make Tom Hanks too vile, etc...), and the ensuing cult of personality often leads to an unhealthy feedback loop behind the scenes and some superstars viewing themselves as more important than the film they're in.

But even on a purely cinematic merit, I think there's something to be said about the immersive quality that a no-name cast can bring to the table. A lot of Hollywood cultural milestones (Psycho, the original Star Wars trilogy, Jurassic Park, Lord of the Rings, arguably The Godfather, etc...) were made with very little initial star power, which allowed people to fully buy into their respective universes and characters. I would argue this is also a positive side effect of watching foreign movies without any internationally renowned actors. I would imagine that my reaction to City of God or (the original!) Oldboy would have been very different if I had kept thinking "oh yeah, it's that guy from all those other movies and TV shows".

It can certainly be done right (the gentleman in your avatar, old-school Humphrey Bogart, Katharine Hepburn and Clint Eastwood flicks, most of the Hitchcock-Stewart collaborations, etc..), but it's far from a pre-requisite to success, in my opinion.

User avatar
KSubzero1000
Member
Posts: 3365
Joined: August 26th, 2015, 9:56 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KSubzero1000 »

ThirdMan wrote: September 17th, 2019, 12:22 pm I personally have zero issues separating an actor, and his or her previous roles, from the performance I'm currently watching. You mightn't feel like movies need stars but you've clearly bought into the concept of stardom more than I have, so much so that you have difficulty detaching fantasy from reality.
Ouch, okay.

I wasn't speaking about my own personal (non-existent) issues with separating actors from their characters, more about what I'm observing in terms of the general public and the conversation surrounding casting choices. I get the impression that when people went to see Lord of the Rings, they saw the characters on-screen, whereas when they went to see The Wolf of Wall Street, they went to see a DiCaprio flick. I think there's a cultural distinction between the two. And there's also a distinction between the way Denzel Washington approaches his work and the way Gary Oldman does. I'm not hating on either, all I'm saying is that both can work.

ThirdMan wrote: September 17th, 2019, 12:22 pm Hugh Jackman is an old-fashioned, honest-to-goodness movie star.
Well yeah, I'm obviously not disagreeing with that...? When I said "you can't make Jackman too sleazy", I was alluding to the fact that a lot of people seem to have bought into his Wolverine persona so much that a lot of his more villainous roles have fallen flat with both critics and audiences. I was thinking of films like Deception, Chappie and Pan, for example.

I love Jackman, and I think he has a lot of range (I adore The Fountain and The Prestige, for example), but for a lot of folks out there, he is and will probably always remain the Wolverine guy, which doesn't necessarily work in his favor. His stardom is a double-edged sword. That's all I was trying to say.

You could easily substitute Jackman with Gregory Peck and my argument would still be the same, btw. A charismatic male lead rises to stardom by playing heroic types and has trouble taking on different types of roles later on in his career because the general public now has certain expectations of them.

Maybe we're just talking past one another or using different definitions of stardom here.

User avatar
KSubzero1000
Member
Posts: 3365
Joined: August 26th, 2015, 9:56 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KSubzero1000 »

ThirdMan wrote: September 17th, 2019, 12:59 pm
KSubzero1000 wrote: September 17th, 2019, 12:52 pmI get the impression that when people went to see Lord of the Rings, they saw the characters on-screen, whereas when they went to see The Wolf of Wall Street, they went to see a DiCaprio flick.
You're not comparing like with like there and I think you know it.

Why would an audience, primed to see a new DiCaprio film based on a brand-new IP, be going to see it for the characters? They don't know the characters.
They wouldn't, because those are two completely different types of films, which is my entire point.

All I'm saying is that you can make a successful film based on star power and you can make a successful film without any star. Both can work. Neither approach is inherently superior.

User avatar
KSubzero1000
Member
Posts: 3365
Joined: August 26th, 2015, 9:56 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KSubzero1000 »

I genuinely don't understand as to why we're arguing or where all this snark is coming from. :?

I took your initial statement as meaning that movie stars were a necessary part of Hollywood filmmaking. If I misunderstood something then I apologize but that's how it read to me and I thought there were several pros and cons to the topic of Hollywood stardom that were worth exploring.

I don't want to fight with you so I'll leave it at that for now.

User avatar
KSubzero1000
Member
Posts: 3365
Joined: August 26th, 2015, 9:56 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by KSubzero1000 »

:(

Fair enough, my bad...

User avatar
Alex79uk
Member
Posts: 7241
Joined: September 2nd, 2012, 12:36 pm
Location: Walsall, UK.
Contact:

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by Alex79uk »

It's an interesting debate. My two cents are that I do think movie stars are important for the Hollywood movie industry, but don't necessarily make for a better film. But that's what brings in the audience and their money and keeps the industry going. I'm as guilty as anyone for wanting to see a film because of who's in it, but at the same time I'd never be put off a film I thought looked interesting because it had a cast of unknowns.

User avatar
Alex79uk
Member
Posts: 7241
Joined: September 2nd, 2012, 12:36 pm
Location: Walsall, UK.
Contact:

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by Alex79uk »

That opening scene though...

User avatar
Alex79uk
Member
Posts: 7241
Joined: September 2nd, 2012, 12:36 pm
Location: Walsall, UK.
Contact:

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by Alex79uk »

Ah no I was still taking about Inglorious, with the people hiding under the floor.

User avatar
FemalePheromones
Member
Posts: 256
Joined: August 20th, 2018, 7:17 am
Location: Oxford

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by FemalePheromones »

clippa wrote: November 25th, 2019, 5:50 pm Oh yeah, that was dead tense and the guy playing the german officer was great. I was worried his campness might veer into allo allo territory, but he toed the line wonderfully.
Christoph Waltz. Won himself an Oscar for it. And then another one for his character in Tarantino's Django Unchained a couple of years later.

User avatar
Alex79uk
Member
Posts: 7241
Joined: September 2nd, 2012, 12:36 pm
Location: Walsall, UK.
Contact:

Re: Let's rank Tarantino films, for no reason whatsoever...

Post by Alex79uk »

I decided to rewatch Tarantino's back catalogue, and just reached Jackie Brown tonight. I've only seen it once or twice before, and it's instantly leaped right up from my least favorite to a much higher position. What was I thinking? It's really excellent. Really enjoyed it, and - I would never usually make such a clichéd male chauvinist comment - but Pam Grier in that film is just about one of the most smoulderingly hot performances ever caught on film. Damn.

Post Reply