It's 100% fresh on rotten tomatoes. It does have 109 uses of a n word. That has been getting a lot of press
I can't wait to see this. Jamie Foxx, DiCaprio (who is always great), Christoph Waltz (who I have read kills it). Quentin Tarantino. Violence, nudity. Everything I read and the preview clips I've seen says this is going to be a really good movie.
~rthomas
It's 100% fresh on rotten tomatoes. It does have 109 uses of a n word. That has been getting a lot of press
No word on who's playing Mongo
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
Jason,
I feel like the ads for this movie have been shoved down my throat for several months.
I have no empirical evidence to support this, but I just feel like the amount of advertising I have been exposed to for this film is even more than a lot of summer blockbuster type movies.
Am I right in saying this movie is being pushed uber-hard?
Hmmm -- while I have seen a decent number of ads for it, I don't think it has been an unusual amount for a major studio film coming out at a prime time of the movie season. I don't think it has been that much more than Jack Reacher or This is 40 for example. It has almost certainly been less than what I saw for Skyfall, Wreck-it-Ralph, or Rise of the Guardians.
Tarantino movies don't tend to be the kind of films a studio forces down your throat. That is just not good marketing because his movies are not for everyone due to the extreme violence and language in them. What's more, the film is being distributed and marketed by The Weinstein Company and they do not put nearly as much money into tradition advertising/marketing as do the Big 6 studios Warner, Disney, Paramount, Sony, Universal, and Fox (Lionsgate is about to join that top tier, by the way).
Anyway, I would be quite surprised to hear that Django has an appreciably larger advertising budget than most of the big titles being released this season.
-Jason "still dying to see it" Evans
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
In finally got to see it today. Fabulous film! I don't know if it was quite as entertaining to me as Basterds was, but it came close. I would certainly hate to be Quentin's next target -- though picking on Nazis/Hitler and then malicious slave owners is low-hanging fruit. Gonna go after Satan next, QT?
I actually found it a tad less violent than I expected. Sure, when the blood flowed, there were splashing pools of it, but that almost served to make it comedic rather than gruesome. It was also largely confined to a few scenes as well as the climax, so it is not like there is blood flowing all over the place, all the time.
The acting is wonderful. Jamie Foxx and Christoph Waltz deserve the accolades they have gotten and any nominations they land will be fitting. That said, I don't think either of them will win. I also want to note that Kerri Washington is a star on the rise. Between this movie and her TV show, Scandal (which is zooming in the ratings lately), she is on her way to being the biggest African-American woman in Hollywood. Good for her!
As an aside, the controversy over the use of the N-word is just so insane. That is what African-Americans were called back then. To sanitize that would take away from the movie and do a disservice to the story. I truly did not notice it as being offensive because it felt natural in the story. I don't think anyone else in the packed theater noticed either.
All in all, I found this to be a fun afternoon at the movies -- even if it was a tad longer than it should have been. If you can numb yourself a bit to blood splattering everywhere, it is a film certainly worth your $8-$10.
--Jason "certainly among my top 10 of the year" Evans
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
Look, Pulp Fiction is a solid notch above all the rest of Tarantino's work, in my opinion. It was genre-defining and contained some of the most imaginative storytelling of the past 25 years in films. So, it is not nearly on par with that film.
I thought Kill Bill I and II were amazing in parts, but spotty in others. There are sections, especially in Kill Bill I, that I fast forward through on DVD. I just have no need to see them again. Most of Kill Bill II is great, but it too has some weak moments where Tarantino is dragging things out too much or where he sorta forgets about his narrative structure. Much of the interlude with Esteban is like that. I think QT sometimes really needs a editor who is willing to say, "Do we really need this scene to last 12 minutes? Wouldn't it do just fine at 4 minutes?"
So, that said, I think this film is better than Kill Bill Vol I but perhaps a little tiny bit below Kill Bill II. It is not as crazy as either the KB films or Basterds, which is largely a good thing. This movie feels much more grounded in actual storytelling versus the gonzo fantasy stuff we see in the KB movies and especially in the end of Basterds. The only reason I rank Basterds ahead of Django is the opening milk drinking scene as well as the lead-up to the basement bar shoot-out. Both of those are great examples of dialogue driving tension and excitement in a way rarely seen in a visual medium.
I think most anyone would rate Pulp Fiction as QT's best film. I would put the rest of them in the following order:
- Pulp Fiction
- Kill Bill Vol 2
- Inglorious Basterds
- Django Unchained
- Reservoir Dogs
- Kill Bill Vol 1
- Jackie Brown
- Death Proof
I would note however, that the gap between #1 and #2 is far greater than the gap between #2 and #5. I could make a solid argument for putting those 4 films in just about any order... heck, I am even considering moving Reservoir Dogs up to #2 as we speak. I consider all the Top 5 films on that list to be worthy Best Picture nominees and all would easily be among the top ten films released in any year.
--Jason "I wish I could have put 8 blank spots between Jackie Brown and Death Proof... easily Tarantino's worst film" Evans
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
Agreed that Pulp Fiction is in rare air... One of the best and most influential in my memory.
Jason, would you consider True Romance a Tarantino film? I know he did not direct (wasn't it a Scott who did it?) but it was SUCH a Tarantino flick nonetheless... And it is better than anything on that list that isn't Pulp Fiction...
And while the n word is certainly historically appropriate you know that QT also adores it
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
Just saw the film. Loved it! I thought it was awesome! I was thoroughly entertained throughout and my wife and I can't stop talking about it. Just a really fun evening at the movies. I would agree with Jason's assessment of the film but I think I may have enjoyed it a little more than him.
Just got back. It was good, but I couldn't help leaving with a bit of a "Meh" feeling. I feel disappointed for saying that, like it's my fault. But it didn't blow me away like Inglorious Basterds or Kill Bill (especially the 2nd one). Can't put my finger on it, but suffice it to say I don't really care to see it again.
There were a couple of scenes that belonged in Blazing Saddles. I get this is QT, and he winks at himself sometimes, but the baghead scene and the australian scene seemed straight out of a different movie. Especially the former.
Waltz is great. I wish he were in more movies here in the states where he wasn't just the bad guy with the foreign accent (anyone seen Carnage that cares to comment?).