Re: An Idea Part 3: Same $h!t, Different Thread

[Buscemi]

The diehards. And anyone who takes Harry Knowles seriously.

[NSpan]

The diehards. And anyone who takes Harry Knowles seriously.

serious as a heart-attack

[Buscemi]

I can't believe that Harry Knowles is even considered a critic. All he ever does is write good reviews so he can get free stuff from the studios.

I bet that he hasn't ever paid for anything since he started that site. You know, the essentials (airline tickets, hotel rooms, expensive meals, deodorant).

[NSpan]

we see him around town here and there--and, i can assure you, he doesn't pay for deodorant

[Buscemi]

He looks to me like the world's richest bum.

[BanksIsDaFuture]

I don't even know who Harry Knowles is, but ironically, I just saw a G.I. Joe commercial with a quote from him in it.

[Buscemi]

Harry Knowles is a Texas-based writer who runs Ain't It Cool News. Though a rich fat fuck, he is also a controversial fat fuck. The reason being that he gives nearly every film a positive review so he can get free swag from the studios. Mainly this means that you are a quote whore, but Knowles is one of those guys who takes quote whoring to a new level (see also: Jeffrey Lyons, Joel Siegel and Shawn Edwards).

Meanwhile...

Inglourious Basterds ****/****

This is now the best film of 2009 (passing Star Trek). Tarantino shows once again what he can do with his pen and a budget by creating a fun and entertaining film that is never once boring or dull. The film hooks you in from its multi-font opening credit sequence to the final standoff between good and bad. Brad Pitt is great as Lt. Aldo Raine and shows a comedic side rarely seen from him. Christoph Waltz makes a terrifying villain and hopefully will get an Academy Award nomination for his role as Hans Landa. Melanie Laurent makes a nice impression as the strong-willed refugee Shosanna. Even some of the guys who you wouldn't expect to do well such as Eli Roth are good (his film inside of a film, Nation's Pride, is also very good).

In short, everything about the film is great. It's 153 minute run time is feels a lot shorter and it's always nice to see a war film that breaks the rules and creates something different. Though it probably won't be an award contender, it would be nice to see Waltz and the techicals win some praise.

[transformers2]

Inglorious Basterds 9.5/10

Taraintino has done it again! Completely brillant in every sense. Brad Pitt was hysterical and did perfectly in his role. Lunda was pure evil and Waltz was completely fantastic in his role and deserves the awards. This just passed Star Trek for the best film of 09 so far.

[Keyser Soze]

Alrighty, this is going to ruffle some feathers.

Inglorious Basterds 2/10

What a piece of self indulgent crap. The total equivalent of directorial masturbation. If it had not been for the awful piece of trash that was Gammorah, this would have to be the worst thing I have seen on the screen this year.(The wife agrees) Tarentino should not only have his directorial license removed for making this film, but should have to give back his acknowledgements for Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs. I can't even begin to describe how bad this movie was.

First off, we are sold a bill of goods that this movie will be about Brad Pitt and the Inglorious Basterds. What a crock. Were they even on the screen for more than 45 minutes out of 2 1/2 hours? The times that either they or Hans Landa were on the screen, the movie was decent (Hence, I gave it a 2 and not a 0), but the rest of this movie was so much cinematic bullshit. I mean, come on, "We're French, we appreciate directors" Yeah, so do we in the USA when they make a movie worth appreciating. Does QT ever get tired of patting himself on the back?

This was supposed to be Tarentino's homage to war movies and Spaghetti Westerns. Has he ever even watched either one? After seeing this, I highly doubt it. He continually loves to throw in little bits of minutia or cinematic trivia that he assumes only a true film nerd like himself will get. Quentin must have thought he was so superior to the rest of us film novices when he decided to have an entire segment of the movie hinge on the fact that he knew that the German symbal for three was two fingers and the thumb instead of the English/American version of using 3 fingers. I can just see him laughing with giddiness somewhere that he knows this bit of trivia and the rest of us don't. Talk about smug.

Another thing, I couldn't believe a good majority of the audience actually stood and applauded when the climactic scene occured like this was how it happened in real life. Did they not read the intro that said "Once upon a time in Nazi occupied France" Hmmmm, sounds like a fairy tale to me.

There was just so much wrong with this movie, that there just isn't enough space to fit it all in. Quentin should be given the equivalent of a Game Misconduct penalty in hockey and be forced to not make any more movies for 3 years.

All I can end this with is not only do I want my $10 back, I want the 2 1/2 hours of my life back!!!!!!!

[Buscemi]

This is coming from someone who didn't see the pretentious of Adventureland?

[W]

Umm... I knew that Europeans used their thumb to represent the first counting number (hence 3 uses a thumb and two fingers and two uses a thumb and one finger). I thought it was well known... Maybe its just because that's how they score Freestyle wrestling and the fact that I took German in HS...

[Keyser Soze]

This is coming from someone who didn't see the pretentious of Adventureland?

That's the best counter argument you could make?

This coming from someone who actually thinks that not only is the Quick and the Dead a better Western than Silverado, but also thinks that Back to the Future 3 is too.

[Keyser Soze]

Umm... I knew that Europeans used their thumb to represent the first counting number (hence 3 uses a thumb and two fingers and two uses a thumb and one finger). I thought it was well known... Maybe its just because that's how they score Freestyle wrestling and the fact that I took German in HS...

I've been to Europe six times, and I still had no idea that that was how they represented numbers using their hands. I've also watched plenty of Olympic wrestling, and took French for 5 years in HS and college

[numbersix_99]

Umm... I knew that Europeans used their thumb to represent the first counting number (hence 3 uses a thumb and two fingers and two uses a thumb and one finger). I thought it was well known...

Think it's a bit of a generalisation. Having spent many years in the company of Europeans people, whether its the mainland, UK or Ireland, most of us use our main fingers to count to 4 and use the thumb at the end. There's no real standard when it comes to regular people because something like this isn't regulated.

Inglorious Basterds 2/10

Inglourious Basterds ****/****

I TOLD y'all that this film would split the Fantaverse. I personally can see both sides. I loved the balls of rewriting history (Keyser, I think most of us didn't read into the Once Upon a Time... reference as a note on the entire film) and Pitt gave a great comic performance. Yet I felt many of the scenes dragged and it felt too self-indulgent at times. But lets face it, Tarantino was the epitome of self-indulgence since Pulp Fiction.

First off, we are sold a bill of goods that this movie will be about Brad Pitt and the Inglorious Basterds

I can't blame Tarantino for the marketing campaign. I mean, how much input do directors have on such matters? Very little I imagine.

Quentin must have thought he was so superior to the rest of us film novices when he decided to have an entire segment of the movie hinge on the fact that he knew that the German symbal for three was two fingers and the thumb instead of the English/American version of using 3 fingers.

In all fairness, that moment lasts for about 2 minutes. Yes, it's an important scene, but the fingers issue is merely a plot device.

[BanksIsDaFuture]

Well, about the Basterds not getting alot of screen time - that's why I compared them to The Joker in TDK. The same way the movie was sold on The Joker in the trailers and ads and the way the story wasn't really about him and how he kind of just pops in periodically but when he does, those are the best parts of the movie - same thing with The Basterds.

As fas as the finger counting thing, I don't see a problem with it. It's something a English person would mess up on, I think. I think it's a suitable plot device, I doubt he's laughing at the viewer's stupidity of not knowing that. In fact, to make the scene work, he needs us not to know that.

I do agree that it was self-indulgent, but it's a good self-indulgent. I think he's been like that since Pulp Fiction, so basically his whole career. Every Tarantino flick has shit that's not needed for the story, things that would've been cut under anyone else, but these usually add to his movies. Besides the out of the trunk shot, I think bloated is a director trademark of his. A bad self-indulgent would be Transformers 2.

[Keyser Soze]

Well, about the Basterds not getting alot of screen time - that's why I compared them to The Joker in TDK. The same way the movie was sold on The Joker in the trailers and ads and the way the story wasn't really about him and how he kind of just pops in periodically but when he does, those are the best parts of the movie - same thing with The Basterds.

But Banks - Here's where it differs. That movie was called "The Dark Knight" not "The Joker". This movie was titled "Inglorious Basterds" hence I expected them to be in the movie for more than 45 out of 150 minutes.

I do agree that it was self-indulgent, but it's a good self-indulgent. I think he's been like that since Pulp Fiction, so basically his whole career. Every Tarantino flick has shit that's not needed for the story, things that would've been cut under anyone else, but these usually add to his movies. Besides the out of the trunk shot, I think bloated is a director trademark of his. A bad self-indulgent would be Transformers 2.

I completely understand that every Tarentino movie is an homage to some genre of film style that he loved as a kid or while working in the video store. That doesn't necessarily mean that he'll hit it out of the park with every swing. Sometimes, the emperor really does have no clothes on, and I'm not afraid to tell him when he does.

Oh, and by the way Mr. Smarty Pants, QT, the term "Going Yard" to describe hitting a home run as "The Bear Jew" did when he said, "Teddy Ballgame(the nickname of Ted Williams for those of you that did not know) goes yard" was invented sometime in the late 90's or early 0's by an anchor on ESPN Sports Center. It was not used back in the 40's. You would think someone as maniacally anal as QT would have known this.

[BanksIsDaFuture]

Well, if you had Brad Pitt in your movie, wouldn't you put him in all the ads? You can't really get mad at a movie because the advertising is mis-leading.

Kinda sounds like you're nitpicking, but ah well. Can't please em all

[Keyser Soze]

Well, if you had Brad Pitt in your movie, wouldn't you put him in all the ads? You can't really get mad at a movie because the advertising is mis-leading.

Kinda sounds like you're nitpicking, but ah well. Can't please em all

Nitpicking? Banks - I could go on for hours about what I didn't like about this movie(In fact, I could go on longer than I had to sit through the movie), and I'm a huge Tarentino fan. The only thing he ever did that I did not like before this was Death Proof which, technically, now makes two in a row for him that I didn't like. I hope it's not a trend.

I just thought I'd throw the little "Yard" thing in there because QT is supposed to be the master of inane trivial things in his movies, and to let something like that slip by is very un-QT like.

[Buscemi]

Back To The Future Part III is better than Silverado, Keyzer. Back To The Future Part III was a great way to end the Back To The Future trilogy and a fun homage to the classic westerns. Silverado is good but a little cluttered (can you think of any other western with twelve main characters and a rather thin plot?).

Meanwhile, Inglourious Basterds may be a little pretentious but it makes up for it. Adventureland comes from the Garden State School of Pretentiousness and hits us in the fucking face with it. The audience expected Superbad but we got Garden State 2.

[W]

I haven't seen Garden State, but I'm sure I'd take the sequel over another Superbad...

I'm not on either side as I haven't seen the film yet, but just for the sake of argument, isn't Inglourious Basterds a title for a film about Inglourious Basterds? I mean, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button had mostly screen time with the title character...

[Buscemi]

Brad Pitt's army is called Inglourious Basterds, or The Basterds for short. Hence the title.

[W]

What I mean is, wouldn't they have a more prominent place than 1/4 of the film?

[Buscemi]

Actually, the Basterds appear in about half of the film. The other half is occupied by Shoshanna's attempt to avenge her family's death. Eventually the two plots merge, as with other Tarantino films.

[Keyser Soze]

Back To The Future Part III is better than Silverado, Keyzer. Back To The Future Part III was a great way to end the Back To The Future trilogy and a fun homage to the classic westerns. Silverado is good but a little cluttered (can you think of any other western with twelve main characters and a rather thin plot?).

Meanwhile, Inglourious Basterds may be a little pretentious but it makes up for it. Adventureland comes from the Garden State School of Pretentiousness and hits us in the fucking face with it. The audience expected Superbad but we got Garden State 2.

Boosh Boosh Boosh, The fact that Back to the Future III was a nice way to end that trilogy in no way makes it a better western than Silverado. In fact, I'm pretty sure if you asked the makers of BTtF III, they would tell you Silverado was a better movie than theirs. Your use of the argument, "Can you think of any other western that uses 12 main characters" holds absolutely no water at all. Just because it hasn't been done before, doesn't make it a bad thing because if it did, that would make "Once upon a time in the West" bad for being the first time Henry Fonda was used as a villain or "The Cowboys" a bad movie because they had the audacity to let Bruce Dern be the first person to kill John Wayne. Perhaps trying to follow the storylines of 12 main characters was a little much for you to follow, but please do not let that influence the quality of the movie.

As to your continued comparison between Adventureland and Inglorious Basterds, I need you to do me a couple of favors.

1. Go and ask your mother or your HS English teacher what the term "Straw Man" means.

2. Go and pick up a little book called Noah Webster's Dictionary of the English Language and look up the word "Pretentious". I'm pretty sure by the way you have been throwing it around in this little debate that you really have no idea what the definition of it is.

I'm not sure where you get the ideas that 1. Anyone went into Adventureland expecting to see Superbad(You see most of us that don't live vicariously through the movies, and that would be the great majority of folks, don't expect that everytime we go to see a movie by someone who made one previously that we liked that it will be that same movie again) and 2. You have any idea why I even liked the movie.

You see the amusement park where they filmed Adventureland is the same one I went to all through my childhood (Which just happened to take place during the time frame of the movie) and still go to today. I liked getting to see Kennywood Park on the big screen as well as all of the other local spots here in Pittsburgh that were used in the film. Some really good friends of mine worked at Kennywood growing up so it was cool to have them telling us about what in the movie was the type of stuff that really happens and what was made up. Was it a fine piece of cinematic work that I'll be quoting 10 years from now? Nope, but it was a nice piece of cinematic nostalgia, something which I'm sure you'll begin to understand in another 10 or 15 years.

[Buscemi]

In The Cowboys, there really isn't a main character. They are a collective (for another example, see Walter Hill's films). In Silverado, there is no collective. And the plot is all over the place.

And anyone can figure out the meaning of the word pretentious. Just watch any Hollywood-made indie-styled film in the last five years.

Also even if I were from Pittsburgh, I would still hate Adventureland and I would still hate the way that they poorly used the settings. They could have easily set the film in Disney World or Busch Gardens and it would still be the same film. Apparently this was the intention because the film doesn't make you want to visit Pittsburgh any time soon. If you've got a film set in a certain area, use the damn area instead of making everything look the same.

[Sponsored content]