Group watch?

[divemaster13]

We haven't had one of these in a while. Since I'm waiting for a couple of orders to arrive, might I suggest a group watch of Sono's Himizu?

I know that "group watch" is a bit of a stretch, because I think there are only 4-5 of us active here. In any event, I plan on watching Himizu soon and will post my comments, either here or in the "Recently Watched" thread.

In the meanwhile, I've got the following DVDs on order (in addition to the K-dramas I mentioned in that dedicated thread):

Helpless (DVD) (First Press Limited Edition) (Korea Version)	​	​	​	​
Hot Young Bloods (2014) (DVD) (Hong Kong Version) (Give-away Version)	​	​	​	​
The Treacherous (Normal Edition) (Korea Version)	​	​	​	​
White: Melody of Death (DVD) (First Press Limited Edition) (Korea Version)

Comments welcome.

 

[clayton-12]

I'm up for watching Himizu.

Of the DVDs you've ordered, I've seen two:

I can remember very little of Helpless (which I saw back when it first came out) apart from that I found it underwhelming and/or unconvincing. I've got a vague recollection of a scene in a carpark very early on in the piece, where I cringed at the male lead's overacting - I'm pretty sure I posted a review on the old imdb, but I can't find it for the life of me.

As for The Treacherous, what can I say? LOL. That about sums it up. A rollicking Korean historical drama, not quite in the same league as Caligula, but maybe sharing some of that film's DNA. Enjoy!

 

[sitenoise]

I'll watch Himizu again ... Fumi!

STUPID FUCKING EDITOR

 

[sitenoise]

Start a new reply and see if this thing insists and BOLDing my words.

Anyway, recent Sono and Quentin viewings piqued my interest in revisiting some of their older stuff. Would ya'll also be interested in group sex around Quentin's Jackie Brown.

I tried starting to rewatch KILL BILL the other night and hated it. I mean, it has its moments, a lot of them, but .. a 20 minute fight scene. OMG

As for your incoming disks, I might re-watch The TREACHEROUS with you. I thought it was a blast. Equally sexy and repulsive. HELPLESS is full of bad acting and a script that over-complicates its plot points trying to appear smart. Awful. MELODY OF DEATH is a little low rent all around but not too icky.

 

[divemaster13]

Anyway, recent Sono and Quentin viewings piqued my interest in revisiting some of their older stuff. Would ya'll also be interested in group sex around Quentin's Jackie Brown.

I'm up and already prepared for a Jackie Brown conversation. I just re-watched it a few weeks ago. I like it better and better with each reviewing. If you start the thread; I'll contribute. If you put it in another forum, let me know else I might not see it.

I tried starting to rewatch KILL BILL the other night and hated it. I mean, it has its moments, a lot of them, but .. a 20 minute fight scene. OMG

Is it possible to give neg 100 rep? LOL How can you harsh on Kill Bill? I rewatch this more than just about every other movie. Perhaps only out-watched by Mulholland Dr. But Kill Bill is just movie perfection, especially if you look at it as a loving homage to Shaw Bros.

 

[sitenoise]

Watched Jackie Brown last night. Interesting to look back on this. When I first watched it when it came out--essentially as the follow-up to Pulp Fiction, it seemed like Quentin lite. At the time it was a let down. But now it seems like a very mature work, especially after seeing Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood. If we think about it, Jackie and Once are his only two films about almost normal people in almost normal circumstances. Grindhouse kind of was, too, but there's an outlier quality to it that sets it aside in most conversations.

Most noticeable to me (esp in relationship to ONCE), is the vision QT has for his actors. The stronger his vision, the stronger the actors and their performances. Pam Grier is a revelation here. Totally gets to the point where you think she's really there, not someone acting in a film. Robert Forster also. (BTW--this film didn't end the way I wanted or expected it to in relation to those two).

Michael Keaton is the only dead dog in this film because, well, he's ... uhm ... put it this way: he needs to chew gum to complete his character development.

Bridget Fonda and De Niro aren't typical QT actors, or something, but they're hilarious in this.

Frankly, now that here we are in 2019, some the the QT lines that SLJ is asked to deliver are a little cringe worthy but overall his performance is outstanding. He does a lot better with his eyes than with his mouth.

Not sure why I focused on saying little things about performances to start this off. I think it's because after ONCE, I'm intrigued and impressed with how QT gets performances (this also struck me in the recent Sono film)

And so but because ... this is a marvelous caper flick. Another flick I started at midnight not even imagining I would get very far before passing out. But I was riveted. I remembered the basic story, or how it ends up--who dies and who doesn't--but I had forgotten or didn't care much the first time through--20 years ago. If I would have thought about it for half a second I would have remembered not to think that the Melanie bag switch might be something that went wrong --(like it wasn't really Melanie out there), but something about the way it went down, how it was filmed, etc., lead me astray again for a moment.

Pam Grier makes it all happen. We totally believe she's a sort of innocent when we first meet her and then she morphs into the smartest guy in the room without being an asshole. Such a great character and great performance.

 

[divemaster13]

@sitenoise, I could have almost written the above post. My first impressions were exactly the same. And my most recent impression (watching it about a month or so ago) was a vastly deeper and greater appreciation, just like you. I think the main difference was that I had another interim watch about 10 years ago where the light went on. So this time, I was prepared to really enjoy it and dive into it a bit deeper.

I think one of the most obvious things that make it seem like "not so much a Tarantino movie" was that he didn't write it. To this day, I think it's the only movie he's made that was an adaptation of someone else's work. In this case, Elmore Leonard's Rum Punch. Oh, but QT puts his own voice to it for sure. Hard not to, when you've got SLJ speaking your lines. And you've given a shot in the arm to the careers of two not-top-list stars. I'm sure QT did not want to give them lame dialogue or cheesy situations. And boy, howdy, he did NOT. He'd never forgive himself if he "brought back" Pam Grier just to give her cliched dialogue.

Pam Grier is a revelation here, especially for folks (like myself) that missed her her first time 'round Hollywood. The opening shot of her in the airport, that is quite lengthy, with the "black funk" soundtrack playing? It's a love scene between the camera and the actress. No wonder Robert Forster sees her the way he does when he's bailing her out for the first time. Forster is just amazing in his role as the bondsman with a heart. That scene where they are sitting at the kitchen table, discussing getting old? That's about a real a scene as I've ever watched.

The plot is twisty and turny, but not gratuitously so. And it's FUN. Watching DeNiro slowly but surely getting tired of Fonda's shit until...well...a man can only take so much ("Is is this car, Louis? No, wait, is it THIS car, Louis?") Hahahahaha. Watching Forster and Jackson playing against each other. Watching Grier and Jackson playing against each other.

And here's another thing. I detest Chris Tucker. He ruined The Fifth Element. As much of a Jackie Chan fan I am, I've never seen Rush Hour because I'd rather stick an ice-pick in my ear than listen to Chris Tucker. Except that Tarantino did the impossible, and inserted a highly amusing Chris Tucker scene right in the middle of Jackie Brown. I love that whole scene with he and Jackson jawing at each other.

As far as QT movies go, this is right up there with the best of them.

4.5 stars

 

[sitenoise]

he didn't write it

I had heard that before but it never entered my mind watching this time. I'm not sure what the impact of it is. As you say, (I think?), probably not as much on the dialog as on the plot points/storyline? I think QT has shown he can write a twisty story, but there was something brilliant about this one. And Elmore Leonard, wow. Good move.

One thing that ... didn't make me roll my eyes or anything, but that I thought was just 'device-y', was the rerun of a few scenes from different perspectives. I think I sighed once or twice when they started, and I think --I'd have to think harder to actually name them-- a couple of them didn't amount to much, or at least the payoff wasn't that profound. Let me think ... he ran the Melanie bag switch 2, 3 times. What did we actually get out of those?

 

[divemaster13]

I liked the three-vantage-point scene replay. Could it have all been done in one take? Sure. But they would have had to cram more plot reveals into that one scene. The way Tarantino did it, each time we see "the switch," he gives us more of the mechanics of the scam. It allows one to savor the "aha" moment(s). One of Tarantino's basic film philosophies, it seems to me, is "why film a 10-minute scene when you can do it in 20?" Is it self-indulgent? Absolutely. Do I enjoy it? Most of the time. (I got a little impatient with the drawn out nature of The Hateful 8, but otherwise I'm pretty much "all in" for Tarantino's indulgences).

My DVD set has some interviews with Elmore Leonard. He loved Jackie Brown.

 

[sitenoise]

I liked the three-vantage-point scene replay. Could it have all been done in one take? Sure. But they would have had to cram more plot reveals into that one scene. The way Tarantino did it, each time we see "the switch," he gives us more of the mechanics of the scam. It allows one to savor the "aha" moment(s). One of Tarantino's basic film philosophies, it seems to me, is "why film a 10-minute scene when you can do it in 20?" Is it self-indulgent? Absolutely. Do I enjoy it? Most of the time. (I got a little impatient with the drawn out nature of The Hateful 8, but otherwise I'm pretty much "all in" for Tarantino's indulgences).

My DVD set has some interviews with Elmore Leonard. He loved Jackie Brown.

I think since I had seen it before the new reveals had a little less effect? And I recognized it as a device he uses. I think I'm pretty much down with you, though, that if we're going to indulge someone's indulgences, QT is about as fun as it can get.

Do you remember how you felt about it when it first came out? I think I was still a little in mind of QT being a way over the top dude and it seemed a bit of a let down. And I've followed him ever since and like some things more than others, and it really wasn't until OUTiH that I felt like I understood what I liked about him --which, as I think about it is kind of a reversal of what I originally "wanted". And that's this notion of more everyday people, everyday places, and grading that on a curve, of course.

 

[divemaster13]

Do you remember how you felt about it when it first came out?

Oh, I agree with you. I felt the same type of "let-down" you did. Like, "yeah that was ok but I was expecting something...more." Or different. Or like, come on QT, rock my world again like Pulp Fiction. But those feelings rapidly dissipated on my first re-watch, and then disappeared completely on viewings 3/4.

I love the "over-the-top" QT, and also all the little things. And the best thing is that every movie has both. Sometimes every scene will have both. Just to pull a scene off the top of my head, from Kill Bill. Budd has just discovered the black mamba that Elle snuck in on him. The mamba bites Bill in the face several times. It's a violent, frantic scene--Budd's all over the place, gasping and swelling up and obviously not long for this world. And then lying on the floor, dying. And Elle pulls out her mamba fact guide and starts reading it to him. She's reading her factoids, calmly, and then perks up a little: "Oh, and you should pay attention to this, because this concerns you...". What other filmmaker can not only pull this off, but pull it off 10, 20, 30 times a picture?

I think one of my favorite Tarantino films is not an actual "Tarantino film." Tony Scott's True Romance. Tarantino wrote it. His signatures are all OVER it. Every line of dialogue. Every scene. True Romance is a QT masterpiece. Also, if you haven't seen it, check out Crimson Tide (another Tony Scott film). Tarantino is not credited as a writer at all, nowhere in the credits, but he obviously script-doctored it.

 

[sitenoise]

I think one of my favorite Tarantino films is not an actual "Tarantino film." Tony Scott's True Romance.

That might be one due for a re-watch. Gary Oldman and Christopher Walken. Great movie. The scene where Walken is questioning Dennis Hopper is one for the history books.

btw - I agree with you about the Kill Bill scene you describe. Both over-the-top and calmly brutal.