Fenwick said:

sextonseven said:

Well, it was a fantasy, right? The dialogue made the film for me. It was QT dialogue done right. Compared to QT dialogue done wrong like in Death Proof.

Hey my friend. I hear what you are saying, which is why I think a second viewing is definitely in order. Like Michael Clayton, sometimes a second viewing gives you a new found perspective. I just remember the first 15 mins being so spectacular and tense, and everything else being over the top.

You know what? If the entire Inglourious Basterds movie was as tense as that opening scene, I wouldn't be able to take it. I'm happy it lightened up after that. And there were other tense moments throughout so as not to make that opening scene stand apart so much in terms of tone.

NDRU said:

sextonseven said:

But you're still recommending it?

These threads are just a jumping off point for my soap-boxing which fulfils a desperate need for validation. I am not here to conform to their boundaries!

[Edited 8/16/10 15:54pm]

I TOTALLY agree with your assessment of Inglorious Bastards, NDRU. Well said. Not only was it making war into a comedy, but subtly making a holocaust into a comic book. I agree it was very inconsistent in tone and approach. It didn't work for me at all. I can't stand all that Tarantino comic-bravado crap anyhoo. Except in Jackie Brown. Love that one.

I will say, however, the film was significant in its 'treading on the sacred ground' of WWII history. When I saw that movie, I thought, wow, we are really at a turning point, where that history is gaining such distance that he make a splash by treating it so irreverently and all the Tarantino fans will faun over it, as usual. Not to mention the script rewrites historical events. In that sense, I found it fascinating and telling of the collective memory and its attitudes.

heartbeatocean said:

NDRU said:

These threads are just a jumping off point for my soap-boxing which fulfils a desperate need for validation. I am not here to conform to their boundaries!

[Edited 8/16/10 15:54pm]

I TOTALLY agree with your assessment of Inglorious Bastards, NDRU. Well said. Not only was it making war into a comedy, but subtly making a holocaust into a comic book. I agree it was very inconsistent in tone and approach. It didn't work for me at all. I can't stand all that Tarantino comic-bravado crap anyhoo. Except in Jackie Brown. Love that one.

I will say, however, the film was significant in its 'treading on the sacred ground' of WWII history. When I saw that movie, I thought, wow, we are really at a turning point, where that history is gaining such distance that he make a splash by treating it so irreverently and all the Tarantino fans will faun over it, as usual. Not to mention the script rewrites historical events. In that sense, I found it fascinating and telling of the collective memory and its attitudes.

I haven't even seen Basterds yet because I couldn't get excited over it, for the very reasons you're mentioning. Another film where I find that the tone didn't work is The Informant. It could have been a great straightforward drama but they seemed worried about going there and added "comedic" touches throughout that misfired almost every single time. Too bad, because that movie had a lot of potential.

Sadly, I cannot now recommend "The Expendables" unless you have $10 and 2 hours that you absolutely, positively do not need for any reason whatsoever.

heartbeatocean said:

NDRU said:

These threads are just a jumping off point for my soap-boxing which fulfils a desperate need for validation. I am not here to conform to their boundaries!

[Edited 8/16/10 15:54pm]

I TOTALLY agree with your assessment of Inglorious Bastards, NDRU. Well said. Not only was it making war into a comedy, but subtly making a holocaust into a comic book. I agree it was very inconsistent in tone and approach. It didn't work for me at all. I can't stand all that Tarantino comic-bravado crap anyhoo. Except in Jackie Brown. Love that one.

I will say, however, the film was significant in its 'treading on the sacred ground' of WWII history. When I saw that movie, I thought, wow, we are really at a turning point, where that history is gaining such distance that he make a splash by treating it so irreverently and all the Tarantino fans will faun over it, as usual. Not to mention the script rewrites historical events. In that sense, I found it fascinating and telling of the collective memory and its attitudes.

Yes, that is exactly how I felt.

I just watched Shutter Island, which was a fairly superficial thriller, but the scenes set in WWII were appropriately disturbing, not fist pumping.

NDRU said:

heartbeatocean said:

I TOTALLY agree with your assessment of Inglorious Bastards, NDRU. Well said. Not only was it making war into a comedy, but subtly making a holocaust into a comic book. I agree it was very inconsistent in tone and approach. It didn't work for me at all. I can't stand all that Tarantino comic-bravado crap anyhoo. Except in Jackie Brown. Love that one.

I will say, however, the film was significant in its 'treading on the sacred ground' of WWII history. When I saw that movie, I thought, wow, we are really at a turning point, where that history is gaining such distance that he make a splash by treating it so irreverently and all the Tarantino fans will faun over it, as usual. Not to mention the script rewrites historical events. In that sense, I found it fascinating and telling of the collective memory and its attitudes.

Yes, that is exactly how I felt.

I just watched Shutter Island, which was a fairly superficial thriller, but the scenes set in WWII were appropriately disturbing, not fist pumping.

I think DiCaprio got his role in Inception because of his performance in Shutter Island. The characters are very similar; smart, sharp dressers that like to be in control but are tortured by a tragic family history and tend to get sucked into dream worlds, lol.

NDRU said:

heartbeatocean said:

I TOTALLY agree with your assessment of Inglorious Bastards, NDRU. Well said. Not only was it making war into a comedy, but subtly making a holocaust into a comic book. I agree it was very inconsistent in tone and approach. It didn't work for me at all. I can't stand all that Tarantino comic-bravado crap anyhoo. Except in Jackie Brown. Love that one.

I will say, however, the film was significant in its 'treading on the sacred ground' of WWII history. When I saw that movie, I thought, wow, we are really at a turning point, where that history is gaining such distance that he make a splash by treating it so irreverently and all the Tarantino fans will faun over it, as usual. Not to mention the script rewrites historical events. In that sense, I found it fascinating and telling of the collective memory and its attitudes.

Yes, that is exactly how I felt.

I just watched Shutter Island, which was a fairly superficial thriller, but the scenes set in WWII were appropriately disturbing, not fist pumping.

Was Basterds not advertised as a Jewish revenge fantasy though? I can see finding the movie odd or unsettling if you didn't know that beforehand, but the fist pumping and the historical inaccuracies all were in context to me.

sextonseven said:

NDRU said:

Yes, that is exactly how I felt.

I just watched Shutter Island, which was a fairly superficial thriller, but the scenes set in WWII were appropriately disturbing, not fist pumping.

Was Basterds not advertised as a Jewish revenge fantasy though? I can see finding the movie odd or unsettling if you didn't know that beforehand, but the fist pumping and the historical inaccuracies all were in context to me.

I guess, though I did not know what it was about when I saw it, just that it was a war movie.

I don't question his intentions, I know it's anti-nazi, and having a strong villain makes a story more powerful.

Like I said, I'd give it another chance, but I just wasn't sure what to make of it on first viewing.

NDRU said:

sextonseven said:

Was Basterds not advertised as a Jewish revenge fantasy though? I can see finding the movie odd or unsettling if you didn't know that beforehand, but the fist pumping and the historical inaccuracies all were in context to me.

I guess, though I did not know what it was about when I saw it, just that it was a war movie.

I don't question his intentions, I know it's anti-nazi, and having a strong villain makes a story more powerful.

Like I said, I'd give it another chance, but I just wasn't sure what to make of it on first viewing.

I knew of a few films I'd love to watch again because I was totally lost the one time I've seen them. And that if I followed more closely the second time around, I might actually think they are great. Tilda Swinton's Female Perversions immediately comes to mind.

[img:$uid]http://www.allposters.com/IMAGES/MMPO/503320.jpg[/img:$uid]

sextonseven said:

NDRU said:

I guess, though I did not know what it was about when I saw it, just that it was a war movie.

I don't question his intentions, I know it's anti-nazi, and having a strong villain makes a story more powerful.

Like I said, I'd give it another chance, but I just wasn't sure what to make of it on first viewing.

I knew of a few films I'd love to watch again because I was totally lost the one time I've seen them. And that if I followed more closely the second time around, I might actually think they are great. Tilda Swinton's Female Perversions immediately comes to mind.

Sometimes that's the case, Chinatown is a movie I had to watch a few times.

But Basterds was not confusing, it's just that emotionally I did not connect with it. But that could have been my mood or simply my expectations.

NDRU said:

sextonseven said:

I knew of a few films I'd love to watch again because I was totally lost the one time I've seen them. And that if I followed more closely the second time around, I might actually think they are great. Tilda Swinton's Female Perversions immediately comes to mind.

Sometimes that's the case, Chinatown is a movie I had to watch a few times.

But Basterds was not confusing, it's just that emotionally I did not connect with it. But that could have been my mood or simply my expectations.

Do you mean you felt nothing for the characters, like sympathy, etc? Were they all hollow to you?

Eyes Wide Shut is a good example of a movie I thought was just interesting the first time, but having seen it several times now, I totally get it. And love it.

sextonseven said:

NDRU said:

Sometimes that's the case, Chinatown is a movie I had to watch a few times.

But Basterds was not confusing, it's just that emotionally I did not connect with it. But that could have been my mood or simply my expectations.

Do you mean you felt nothing for the characters, like sympathy, etc? Were they all hollow to you?

Eyes Wide Shut is a good example of a movie I thought was just interesting the first time, but having seen it several times now, I totally get it. And love it.

Yes, Eyes Wide Shut is a good example, or a David Lynch movie where you have to figure out what is happening before you can really judge it.

What I mean with this movie is I understood the story, I did not know how to feel about it. I did not feel good about the violence, but I thought I was supposed to feel good about it. It was not the same as Pulp Fiction where I could laugh at an innocent bystander getting shot in the leg because it was all over the top silliness.

sextonseven said:

NDRU said:

Sometimes that's the case, Chinatown is a movie I had to watch a few times.

But Basterds was not confusing, it's just that emotionally I did not connect with it. But that could have been my mood or simply my expectations.

Do you mean you felt nothing for the characters, like sympathy, etc? Were they all hollow to you?

Eyes Wide Shut is a good example of a movie I thought was just interesting the first time, but having seen it several times now, I totally get it. And love it.

there was something to "get"? oops!

NDRU said:

sextonseven said:

Do you mean you felt nothing for the characters, like sympathy, etc? Were they all hollow to you?

Eyes Wide Shut is a good example of a movie I thought was just interesting the first time, but having seen it several times now, I totally get it. And love it.

Yes, Eyes Wide Shut is a good example, or a David Lynch movie where you have to figure out what is happening before you can really judge it.

What I mean with this movie is I understood the story, I did not know how to feel about it. I did not feel good about the violence, but I thought I was supposed to feel good about it. It was not the same as Pulp Fiction where I could laugh at an innocent bystander getting shot in the leg because it was all over the top silliness.

Which is a lot of work

I love David Lynch, his madness is sincere but the thing that annoys me about his movies is the other stuff(I don't wanna call them random) that he puts in the middle of the story, I don't know if his intention is to throw off the watcher's focus from the primary storyline(which in itself is not an easy task anyway) or they happen to be just another fraction of the story.

One thing for damn sure, Inland Empire took a lot of energy from me and I STILL don't get it.

Harlepolis said:

NDRU said:

Yes, Eyes Wide Shut is a good example, or a David Lynch movie where you have to figure out what is happening before you can really judge it.

What I mean with this movie is I understood the story, I did not know how to feel about it. I did not feel good about the violence, but I thought I was supposed to feel good about it. It was not the same as Pulp Fiction where I could laugh at an innocent bystander getting shot in the leg because it was all over the top silliness.

Which is a lot of work

I love David Lynch, his madness is sincere but the thing that annoys me about his movies is the other stuff(I don't wanna call them random) that he puts in the middle of the story, I don't know if his intention is to throw off the watcher's focus from the primary storyline(which in itself is not an easy task anyway) or they happen to be just another fraction of the story.

One thing for damn sure, Inland Empire took a lot of energy from me and I STILL don't get it.

I'm a big fan of David Lynch and I couldn't sit through Inland Empire.

It was like watching a series of images, each one one more unrelated and irritating than the next

ZombieKitten said:

sextonseven said:

Do you mean you felt nothing for the characters, like sympathy, etc? Were they all hollow to you?

Eyes Wide Shut is a good example of a movie I thought was just interesting the first time, but having seen it several times now, I totally get it. And love it.

there was something to "get"? oops!

Only that it was one long exercise in explaining how total honesty can do serious damage to a marriage and it's best to keep some secrets to yourself. An experienced wife like you I'm sure picked that up immediately and thought, "who doesn't know that?"

sextonseven said:

NDRU said:

Yes, that is exactly how I felt.

I just watched Shutter Island, which was a fairly superficial thriller, but the scenes set in WWII were appropriately disturbing, not fist pumping.

Was Basterds not advertised as a Jewish revenge fantasy though? I can see finding the movie odd or unsettling if you didn't know that beforehand, but the fist pumping and the historical inaccuracies all were in context to me.

Jewish revenge fantasy. Hmm... Obviously. I don't see usefulness or enjoyment out of creating such a fantasy at all. It's turning violence into pleasure and entertainment. It reifies the atrocity albeit from another angle. But that's why I'm not a Tarantino fan.

[Edited 8/20/10 12:13pm]

heartbeatocean said:

sextonseven said:

Was Basterds not advertised as a Jewish revenge fantasy though? I can see finding the movie odd or unsettling if you didn't know that beforehand, but the fist pumping and the historical inaccuracies all were in context to me.

Jewish revenge fantasy. Hmm... Obviously. I don't see usefulness or enjoyment out of creating such a fantasy at all. It's turning violence into pleasure and entertainment. It reifies the atrocity albeit from another angle. But that's why I'm not a Tarantino fan.

[Edited 8/20/10 12:13pm]

I have no problem turning violence into pleasure and entertainment if it's done in a cartoony way such as this.

You're such a hippie.

sextonseven said:

ZombieKitten said:

there was something to "get"? oops!

Only that it was one long exercise in explaining how total honesty can do serious damage to a marriage and it's best to keep some secrets to yourself. An experienced wife like you I'm sure picked that up immediately and thought, "who doesn't know that?"

oh!

I can't even remember the plot - I saw that when it was a new release at blockbuster

ZombieKitten said:

sextonseven said:

Only that it was one long exercise in explaining how total honesty can do serious damage to a marriage and it's best to keep some secrets to yourself. An experienced wife like you I'm sure picked that up immediately and thought, "who doesn't know that?"

oh!

I can't even remember the plot - I saw that when it was a new release at blockbuster

Most people only remember everyone was naked in the movie.

I saw Coco and Igor last night - about the affair between Coco Chanel and Igor Stravinsky. It was a visually stunning film, and quite naked.

I'm pretty sure I'm going to get lung cancer, now. Damn, they smoked a lot!

I just saw "Men Who Stare at Goats"... I think it fails to compell as a movie, but the subject matter and characters are exactly what me and my friends were about in 1977-78 in third and fourth grade. So my friend form back then is who called me up and said that the movie left him with a strong unique (wistful?) feeling. Misfit nostaligia.

sextonseven said:

ZombieKitten said:

oh!

I can't even remember the plot - I saw that when it was a new release at blockbuster

Most people only remember everyone was naked in the movie.

pretty much

sextonseven said:

heartbeatocean said:

Jewish revenge fantasy. Hmm... Obviously. I don't see usefulness or enjoyment out of creating such a fantasy at all. It's turning violence into pleasure and entertainment. It reifies the atrocity albeit from another angle. But that's why I'm not a Tarantino fan.

[Edited 8/20/10 12:13pm]

I have no problem turning violence into pleasure and entertainment if it's done in a cartoony way such as this.

You're such a hippie.

I really don't like violence in general, especially cartoon violence. I loved Old Country For Old Men though, because it was coherent and philosophical. Not gratuitous entertainment but making a statement about modern culture which I found valuable.

i wonder if anyone took notice of danish movies ?

like that one:

Just watched a couple of movies this past week and thought I'd share.

Homicide - Written and directed by David Mamet - stars Joe Mantegna William Macy and bit role for Ving Rhames. Very disappointing. Felt like it didn't know if it wanted to be a play or a movie. Thumbs down.

All of Me - Lily Tomlin and Steve Martin - Very cute and funny feel good comedy. Some of those mid 80s comedies have dated H.O.R.R.I.B.L.Y But this one was very entertaining. Big thumbs up.

The Ice Storm - Directed by Ang Lee - Ensemble cast including Kevin Kline - Joan Allen - Elijah Wood - Kaite Holmes - Sigourney Weaver - Good, slow paced movie about 1970s post hippie culture middle class suburbia. Actually wished it was longer. Thumbs up.

Coming To America - I'm sure most have already seen this classic with Eddie Murphy and Arsenio Hall. I actually just watched it for the first time in probably 10 years this weekend and all I can say is what a brilliant movie. Literally every scene that started up I found myself saying, "OH YEAH - THIS SCENE IS GREAT"!!! I literally did that over and over again throughout the entire movie. Two huge, huge thumbs up. Has to be ranked right at the top of the all time best comedies.

I am now in the middle of trying to get through the series The Wire and am in the middle of season two. So far it's pretty good. I've heard some folks call it the best TV series ever made. I wouldn't go that far but I am most defintiely enjoying it.

Fenwick said:

The Ice Storm - Directed by Ang Lee - Ensemble cast including Kevin Kline - Joan Allen - Elijah Wood - Kaite Holmes - Sigourney Weaver - Good, slow paced movie about 1970s post hippie culture middle class suburbia. Actually wished it was longer. Thumbs up.

This was the movie that me and my ex went to see on our first date. It's remarkable looking back how many big names were in it; Tobey Maguire and Christina Ricci in addition to the actors you mentioned. Excellent film. Criterion needs to upgrade their DVD release to blu-ray.

sextonseven said:

Fenwick said:

The Ice Storm - Directed by Ang Lee - Ensemble cast including Kevin Kline - Joan Allen - Elijah Wood - Kaite Holmes - Sigourney Weaver - Good, slow paced movie about 1970s post hippie culture middle class suburbia. Actually wished it was longer. Thumbs up.

This was the movie that me and my ex went to see on our first date. It's remarkable looking back how many big names were in it; Tobey Maguire and Christina Ricci in addition to the actors you mentioned. Excellent film. Criterion needs to upgrade their DVD release to blu-ray.

Yes sir. I loved how it ended. If left me wanting for more....

Harlepolis said:

One thing for damn sure, Inland Empire took a lot of energy from me and I STILL don't get it.

I was absolutly exhausted after watching Inland Empire. One day Im going to watch it again on DVD, to see if it makes anymore sense the second time around. Just waiting for a wet miserable weekend.

mostbeautifulboy said:

Harlepolis said:

One thing for damn sure, Inland Empire took a lot of energy from me and I STILL don't get it.

I was absolutly exhausted after watching Inland Empire. One day Im going to watch it again on DVD, to see if it makes anymore sense the second time around. Just waiting for a wet miserable weekend.

I liked the people in rabbit suits.