Quentin Tarantino's "The Hateful Eight"

Nothing, but there are just fuller opinions, like this:

Tarantino says this is not necessarily new—marginalized groups attacking movies, of all things—but the problem with “socially conscious” filmmakers is that their work can suffer when they resist genre, which Tarantino prizes, and give into something more earnest and PSA-like. Jonathan Demme, for example, makes the noble AIDS drama about a dying gay lawyer, Philadelphia, after the success of his ghoulish Oscar-winning thriller The Silence of the Lambs, which was—hard to remember—boycotted by gay-rights groups in its depiction of Buffalo Bill, a serial killer who isn’t transsexual but believes himself to be. Tarantino sympathizes with what Demme’s intentions might have been in making Philadelphia after the complaints of The Silence of the Lambs. “Look, it would be a drag if my movie won Best Picture and all these gay people were outside protesting the movie—that would be a big drag,” Tarantino says. “Well, it would probably be a bigger drag for Jodie Foster, but it would be a drag. And they were wrong when it came to The Silence of the Lambs, and part of being an artist and putting out your work is that sometimes people you would like to be on your side don’t get it. But you have to stand your ground and say ‘I wish I were on your side in this issue but I’m not and I think you’re wrong and I think it will be perceived as silliness as years go on.’” Tarantino doesn’t go negative on this—his optimism about the future of movies always surges forward full-force: “This is the best time to push buttons. This is the best time to get out there because now there actually is a genuine platform. And in this world where everybody lives with identity politics, you’re going to piss off a whole lot of people, and now your film has fervor. Now it’s being talked about.”

sorry i meant that as an xpost to morbs

What did he say about Ford

― polyphonic, Tuesday, November 3, 2015 1:27 PM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

http://www.filmcomment.com/article/intolerance-quentin-tarantino-john-ford/

(tarantino bragging ahistorically about his enlightened ally's contempt for john ford would be one thing but bragging about it to henry louis gates is some srsly advanced-level whiteness)

(i did laugh unhappily the other day when he said something about digital projectors being run by "billy who scoops your popcorn". hi.)

funny how the director of revenge fantasies sighs about identity politics and "I wish I were on your side in this issue."

Buffalo Bill, a serial killer who isn’t transsexual but believes himself to be.

is this ellis' own analysis

maybe the stock clueless psychiatrist explains about it after bragging about how rare it is to capture psychopaths alive

this can be quite a fun town if you have the right guide

Whatever ye do don't let's discuss the fuckin movie anyways

deems i love u fyi

Saw a screening last night. Loved this. Great casting all around, as usual per Tarantino films. Super dark thematically, no uncompromised heroes to really root for on this one (it's no Django), lots of mystery. In some ways it's like that basement scene in Basterds stretched out to three hours, extremely slow, very tense build up the entire way. Not everyone's gotta love a locked-room bloody Western/Agatha Christie mash-up, I think - expecting a worse reaction publicly than his last two films.

h8 quentin tarantino. can't wait to see this and hate it.

how come you've seen it Nhex? have there been any reviews yet? i haven't seen any of so.

i like the idea of 'slow Tarantino'!

In some ways it's like that basement scene in Basterds stretched out to three hours, extremely slow, very tense build up the entire way.

sounds like my ideal QT movie, hyped.

I think what you mean is the farmhouse slaughter in Once Upon a Time in the West stretched out to three unbearable hours

On a scale of 1-10, how excited are you when you get one of these wicked burns in on Tarantino?

"I think what you mean is the farmhouse slaughter in Once Upon a Time in the West stretched out to three unbearable hours"

Woo hoo!

embargo, shembargo

http://www.slashfilm.com/hateful-eight-early-buzz/

"Ridiculous 6 > Hateful 8" - Armond White, probably

how excited are you when you get one of these wicked burns in on Tarantino?

almost as much as when i have a great BM.

"boy-master"?

"Brooklyn" style Manhattan:

Brooklyn Cocktail
makes one drink

2 ounces whiskey (rye or blended)
1 ounce dry vermouth
dash of maraschino liqueur
dash of Amer Picon (A bitter, orange-flavored cordial. Torani Amer may also be substituted.)

Combine all ingredients in a cocktail shaker over ice. Shake and strain into a cocktail glass. Garnish with a lemon twist.

my shits > everything after Jackie Brown :D

even the ones w/out caramel corn in them

70mm shits?

Does twitter count for breaking embargoes?

Oh ok, that letter shows yes

BTW I would recommend avoiding any plot or character summaries, definitely the kind of movie that's better not knowing such things going in.

I can't imagine the colon that would shit caramel corn.

it's in boldface

Hell on earth to some - Tarantino and Bret Easton Ellis in two hours of conversation on BEE's podcast today.

it's a good conversation

@NickPinkerton
The Revenant and The Hateful Eight offer two sharply-contrasted concepts of cinema, both of them dull and reductive.

Who is Nick Pinkerton? Revenant does look pretty dull though.

Nick Pinkerton is a freelance journalist and film programmer. He has written about films for Sight & Sound, ArtForum, the Village Voice, Moving Image Source and Reverseshot.com, among other publications. He is currently a member of the New York Film Critics Circle.

He was born in Cincinnati, Ohio, lives in Brooklyn, NY, and has programmed at a variety of venues throughout the NYC area.

Is it so hard to imagine he's totally right?

Easy to imagine he's right for Nick Pinkerton.

Pinkerton's a good writer - his blog Bombast (now defunct) was smart and funny.

http://www.filmcomment.com/author/nick-pinkerton/

Yup, this one from about this time last year was a worthy sigh of contempt against Oscar-season biopic dross:

http://www.filmcomment.com/blog/bombast-the-black-list/

These sorts of movies are popular for the same reason that fat tomes of historical fiction by the likes of James Clavell, James A. Michener, and Leon Uris used to be the only fiction that you’d find in houses otherwise devoid of books: there is a significant segment of the American public that thinks this business of making characters and stories up out of thin air is a little suspicious and possibly effeminate. Backers gravitate towards True Story film properties because, like superhero movies, franchise reboots, and genre work, they utilize recognizable icons and known quantities—though, unlike all of those examples, true-life stories of famous people triumphing over honest-to-God hardships are widely and erroneously considered to belong to a higher category of morally improving works.

Pinkerton was the other person who voted for Blackhat in the S&S poll, so I guess his idea of dull and reductive cinema differs from mine.

I guess so.

my favorite recent Pinkerton bit (from a column about Revolutionary War flicks and TV):

I watched John Adams some time after its original airing, because I was curious to see any screen depiction of a period in American history that has always seemed to me insanely overlooked by Hollywood, and because a friend told me: “You get to see John and Abigail Adams fuck in it.” It did deliver on this front, as well as offering several instances of framing shots from unlikely and disadvantageous angles, meant to lend the affair some immediacy though it plays as though the movie was shot by paparazzi nervous to get a glimpse of the Second Continental Congress.

lol

Hah Blackhat.

i still get excited about a new QT movie, but i bet this one will just play on over familiar QT-isms, i.e. bravura but hollow cinema (i know QT is allowed to repeat certain tics and tropes as hes an Auteur etc but *most* of his interesting recurring stuff is stylistic rather than thematic). and i bet revenant will feel weighty but dull, as that is basically innaritu in general these days (birdman felt like someone trying to show they have a light touch and humour, without ever convincing). obv i have no clue and nothing to go on but am just lazily trying to figure out why that writer might think these new films are dullsville. also anything that is a big money western these days usually ends up a bit oversized, epic, and the inadvertently bloated (and to ageing academy voters obv).

This was fucking endless, made doubly so by a decision to include a flashback (!) after a fifteen-minute intermission (!!). A couple of SLJ quips aside, the dialogue was flat, the performances nothing you haven't seen. And I hated especially the way it espouses vigilantism while paying lip service to justice.

and, yeah, the movie version of Murder on the Orient Express is a chore too.

i wouldn't be surprised if i wasn't into this, basically inglourious basterds was the only tarantino i've been 100% into post-jackie brown (kill bills are fun, death proof's first half is tight as hell and ends amazingly, second half is a drag till the chase, django was sloppy) and this one looks more akin to what i don't like abt him the more i see of it. i'll definitely give it a go, though.

Yeah, I'm so unenthused by new movies these days that I'm not gonna let any word of mouth kill one of the very few upcoming things I'm actually excited about seeing.