CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › The 7th film by Quentin Tarantino Pre-Release Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The 7th film by Quentin Tarantino Pre-Release Thread - Page 3

post #101 of 248

haha, I thought of that too.

post #102 of 248
Thread Starter 

django-unchained-movie-image-jamie-foxx-leonardo-dicaprio.jpg

 

django-unchained-movie-image-jamie-foxx-christoph-waltz-1.jpg

 

django-unchained-movie-image-jamie-foxx-1.jpg

 

django-unchained-movie-image-jamie-foxx.jpg

 

django-unchained-movie-image-christoph-waltz.jpg

 

django-unchained-quentin-tarantino-movie-image-set-photo.jpg

post #103 of 248

Hahahaha that outfit oh lord Tarantino.

post #104 of 248

I like how he gets into costume based on the movie he's directing. I was watching behind-the-scenes "Kill Bill" stuff and he was wearing kung fu master garb. I haven't seen pictures of him directing "Inglourious Basterds". Was he wearing a WWII uniform? Wouldn't surprise me.

post #105 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naisu Baddi View Post

I like how he gets into costume based on the movie he's directing. I was watching behind-the-scenes "Kill Bill" stuff and he was wearing kung fu master garb.

 

I don't know exactly what you're talking about, so I could be way off base, but he was going to play Pai Mei for awhile... so perhaps that's why he was in that particular outfit?

post #106 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post

he was going to play Pai Mei for awhile... so perhaps that's why he was in that particular outfit?

I remember hearing about that too, but in this case, I think he was just being nerdy. And I find it endearing.

kungfutarantino.jpg

post #107 of 248

Even more than before, these shots make me question Kurt Russell leaving the project for "not being Western enough". Those shots are pure Western.

post #108 of 248

Apparently Kurt loves to golf.  Perhaps the schedule was fucking up his tee time?

post #109 of 248

I found the trailer to be awfully generic and underwhelming. Am I alone in this assessment?

post #110 of 248

Yes.  Yes, you are.

post #111 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun H View Post

I found the trailer to be awfully generic and underwhelming.

 

As a trailer?  Maybe.  The movie's not blowing its load in the early marketing.  But the look and style feels anything but generic or underwhelming.  This is going to be every bit the revisionist, Black Power era inspired Western we've expected since we heard he was making a movie about a slave turned bounty hunter.  The released version of the script was already great.  And, if anything, he's probably tightened it up even more.  Now that I see the film looks exactly like it "should" look, I have no doubt this will be great.

 

edit- tired... stupid double negatives. 


Edited by Bailey - 6/6/12 at 2:11pm
post #112 of 248

I don't necessarily subscribe to the notion that a trailer encapsulates the movie it's set out to promote, but I don't think I'm wrong in my assessment. It was cut in a very generic sort of way; I didn't get this sort of feeling when I saw, say, Kill Bill and Inglourious Basterds trailers. I imagine it might have something to do with the material within and being limited on what can be shown, if script reviews are anything to go by. At least, I hope it's more that and less because of the on-set troubles this has been having.

 

But I have to ask: Are you sure you guys aren't feeling that way because you know what's coming and thus overlooking what seems to be a bland trailer?

post #113 of 248

I'm saying I could see someone thinking the trailer itself doesn't have quite that wow factor.  At the same time the trailer makes me feel that this is going to be every bit the movie I was hoping for.  That's not nothing.

 

I don't know why this rather crude analogy springs to mind: but it's like, if the movie is a woman, and the trailer is the dress she's wearing, I'd rather have a ten wearing an outfit that's a seven, than a seven wearing an outfit that's a ten. 

 

Hopefully that makes some sense.

post #114 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun H View Post
But I have to ask: Are you sure you guys aren't feeling that way because you know what's coming and thus overlooking what seems to be a bland trailer?

 

Seeing as I haven't read the script and am spoiler free, I'm going to lean towards no.

post #115 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun H View Post

But I have to ask: Are you sure you guys aren't feeling that way because you know what's coming and thus overlooking what seems to be a bland trailer?

 

It doesn't have to do with knowing what's coming.  A lot could have changed.  It has to do with figuring what Tarantino would be going for, and it looking like he nailed it. Like I said, the trailer may lack a bit of a wow factor, but it seems to confirm we'll be getting what we want.

post #116 of 248

One thing I will say is that shot of blood splattering onto the cotton is beautifully shot.

post #117 of 248

You're not the only one, Shaun.  Some beautiful images and nice lines, but the trailer didn't leave much of an impression on me.

 

Still unsure about Foxx.  DiCaprio looks like he's having fun, though.

post #118 of 248

I seem to recall that the initial response to the IB trailer was kind of "is that it?" Or maybe this is that thing where for some reason Westerns just aren't well recieved these days?

post #119 of 248

I love it.  Cannot wait.  I just love Tarantino's style, and the cast look like they're having a blast.

post #120 of 248

I'm shocked that anyone could call this generic.   I think it's one of the better trailers I've seen this year.  Maybe the best, other than The Master.
 

post #121 of 248

It definitely doesn't look generic.   For better or for worse, it's very obviously Tarantino.   I just am not fond of how the trailer is cut.

post #122 of 248

I didn't like it either, but that was more due to the sudden shift in tone. As far as how it looks, it looks pretty good. Although I do wish we had seen a glimpse of Jackson as Stephen. Also, was Goggins in the trailer?

post #123 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy Youngblood View Post

I seem to recall that the initial response to the IB trailer was kind of "is that it?" Or maybe this is that thing where for some reason Westerns just aren't well recieved these days?

 

Yeah, I definitely remember that with the IB trailer. From a marketing standpoint with both IB and "Django" they're going to try to downplay anything that could be offensive and push both of them as straightforward revenge movies. I did feel the "Django" trailer was a bit underwhelming, but I'm also quite sure there's a lot we still have to discover.

post #124 of 248

It seems, from those disagreeing with my first reaction, that the statement of it looking "generic" might've not been the best way to describe my feeling. Draco seems to be understanding my sentiments in that I meant the way it was cut seemed generic, not that the actual look of the film does.

post #125 of 248

I'm still wondering what exactly these "on set problems" are.  Most of those rumors(?) started once Russell jumped ship awhile back and have spread like wildfire across the 'net ever since.  I've heard a few say that they know people on the production who claim it is an organizational mess, but that just seems odd for a Tarantino film.  His production tend to be well-spoken of and most seem to have a blast on them.  Wonder what, if anything, is different this time?

post #126 of 248

rumors in New Orleans say Tarantino was frequently wasted.

post #127 of 248

...  So?!  Being frequently wasted and somehow shooting a film that can cut THAT trailer is proof of genius.  Plus he's in character as a cowboy.  A cowboy director. 

post #128 of 248

Not impugning his character. Was responding to the previous post re: onset problems.

post #129 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr.cyclops View Post

rumors in New Orleans say Tarantino was frequently wasted.

 

On set?  Is he method-directing it Peckinpah style?

post #130 of 248

My bet is that Kurt got cold feet about playing a nasty nasty racist torture goon.  Stuntman Mike is one thing.

post #131 of 248

Could be.  I wonder if Costner would have stuck with it had he been available (since he was Quentin's first choice)?  I think he might have.

post #132 of 248

Man, I cannot believe people are complaining about that trailer. What do you people want?
 

post #133 of 248

Is it that hard to believe a trailer can generate differing opinions? Don't Chewers usually pride themselves on not being in lockstep?

 

Speaking for myself, I warmed up to it quite a bit after a couple more viewings, but it still doesn't rock my brain or make me hard or anything.

post #134 of 248
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post

What do you people want?

 

500full.jpg

post #135 of 248

I haven't been really keen on this movie. I liked "Inglourious Basterds" well enough, but I was a little disappointed by the whole revisionist/fantasy history angle of it, which is clearly an angle Tarantino is continuing to work at with this flick's premise. I prefer the more grounded in reality (albeit with some extraordinarily bizarre situations/events and exceptionally verbose characters) of his first few movies over the more 'movie world' feel of his more recent ones.

 

"Kill Bill" was obviously pretty wild and implausible, but I like how down-to-earth it got at the end as The Bride had her quiet, touching moments with Bill and her daughter. Of course Tarantino excels at violence, action, and twisted humour, but I think he has a knack for writing some really moving, human, and insightful personal relationship stuff too. For example, the relationships between the Butch and Fabienne characters in "Pulp Fiction", Max and Jackie in "Jackie Brown", and again, Bill and The Bride.

 

I wanted more of that in "Death Proof" and "Inglourious Basterds", which were a little light on that and heavier on movie homage wankery. Everything I'd heard about this movie made me believe it would be more of the same, and I still believe it could be, but after watching the trailer, I don't really care. I'm just excited.

 

I'm excited most of all at the prospect of seeing DiCaprio really cut loose. I was getting really sick of just watching him play dour straight-laced heroes. I love that Pai Mei-like zoom shot of him with a villainous sneer as he blows smoke. Anything that reminds me of one of my favourite things in "Kill Bill" that much is very promising.

post #136 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

 

500full.jpg

 

Word. Not only do they want Pulp Fiction, they want to feel like they did when they first saw Pulp Fiction, and that's an impossibility.

post #137 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Blank View Post

 

Word. Not only do they want Pulp Fiction, they want to feel like they did when they first saw Pulp Fiction, and that's an impossibility.

 

Has anyone even suggested such a thing?

post #138 of 248

I certainly haven't.

post #139 of 248

Not so much here, mind you. Just bitching I see elsewhere.

 

As to the song choice, at least it's not "How You Like Me Now?"

post #140 of 248

Or maybe some people are just left a little cold?  Do we have to perform a psychological analysis for why not everyone thinks in lockstep?

post #141 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naisu Baddi View Post

I haven't been really keen on this movie. I liked "Inglourious Basterds" well enough, but I was a little disappointed by the whole revisionist/fantasy history angle of it, which is clearly an angle Tarantino is continuing to work at with this flick's premise. I prefer the more grounded in reality (albeit with some extraordinarily bizarre situations/events and exceptionally verbose characters) of his first few movies over the more 'movie world' feel of his more recent ones.

 

This is not revisionist history unless every movie that is both fictional and takes place in the past is revisionist history.

post #142 of 248

Have to say I'm more excited about this one than any Tarantino since Kill Bill probably. Performances and characters all look great and it seems like QT may have toned down his indulgences a bit and is just knuckling down to tell a proper story. Looks to be quite beautifully shot as well, which is unusual for him (I'd class his stuff as 'stylish' more than 'beautiful').

post #143 of 248

IB was absolutely, cheerfully revisionist history, but Django is more like grindhouse history. Unless I missed something, it has no actual historical figures in it. Nor does Django singlehandedly stop slavery everywhere by killing the Big Boss Slaver.

 

Basically Tarantino made IB for guys like Eli Roth and Seth Rogen's character in Knocked Up who wanted to see more bad-ass Jews in movies.* Not only bad-ass but personally killing Hitler. I chortled to myself a while back when I thought of Eli Roth going home to visit family and catching shit from his older relatives for his gross movies ("Why? Why do you have the man shtupping the turkey with the man's head on it? You were always such a nice boy") and then saying "Yeah, but Grandma, I got to kill Hitler."

 

*Well, that and a hundred other reasons, of course; his long-talked about "men on a mission" epic, etc.

post #144 of 248

One of the things I've liked about post-Kill Bill homage-heavy Tarantino is how every time he makes a new movie other obscure areas of genre cinema get revisited, so...

 

...anyone seen this or this?

post #145 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post

Have to say I'm more excited about this one than any Tarantino since Kill Bill probably. Performances and characters all look great and it seems like QT may have toned down his indulgences a bit and is just knuckling down to tell a proper story.

 

I'm curious how you define Tarantino's indulgences.  To me it seems like fans only use that word when they dislike something he does.  If they enjoy the film, those "indulgences" are just cool references, or whatever.  I think he's been pretty consistent.  Kill Bill is probably the film most filled with what could be defined as his indulgences... and it's one of his best.

post #146 of 248

Kill Bill is practically a QT indulgence showcase. I mean splitting your little action flick in two is pretty indulgent! It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it would be nice to see him just tell a proper story with a degree of focus again.

post #147 of 248
Quote:
...anyone seen this or this?

 

Haven't seen either of those yet, but Drum is on Netflix Instant - I'm so watching that tonight.
 

post #148 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post

 

I'm curious how you define Tarantino's indulgences. 

Uma-Thurman-feet-Kill-Bill.jpg

post #149 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Blank View Post

Uma-Thurman-feet-Kill-Bill.jpg

 

True, but A) Kill Bill might be his best movie.  And B) Part of Death Proof was about satirizing a director's voyeuristic and fetishistic qualities.  Which all of them have, but are especially prevalent in genre films. He even made fun of his own foot fetish.

post #150 of 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post

Kill Bill is practically a QT indulgence showcase. I mean splitting your little action flick in two is pretty indulgent! It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it would be nice to see him just tell a proper story with a degree of focus again.

 

I think Inglourious Basterds is a good, proper story; I mean it's not just that but it does have a good, reasonably easy to follow storyline and plenty characterization, interesting plot twists, and other stuff that makes for a traditionally "good" story, I think.

 

Kill Bill much less so, but then that isn't the point of those movies - they're, ahem ahem, pure cinema, in that they're a lot more preoccupied with visual language than they are with old-school plot values. All about pretty colours and weird shots and myths and cinematic moments. IB shows off quite a lot on that front too, but I think it's much more interested in telling a story that would be interesting even if it didn't have the visuals to back it up than the KB's are.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › The 7th film by Quentin Tarantino Pre-Release Thread