love

Author Topic: 1990s US Bracket: Verdicts  (Read 712369 times)

roujin

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 15508
  • it's all research
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #170 on: March 17, 2008, 12:35:24 AM »
He's a really bad influence :(

facedad

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10983
  • World Phucking Champions.
    • Be my netflix friend
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #171 on: March 17, 2008, 12:37:19 AM »
After talking to faceboy, who articulated what I thought about both films much better than I could, I wasn't sure about my choice anymore.

Dammit, I knew I should have been in chat tonight!

pixote
If only my computer hadn't crashed. God only knows what I might've done.
You're just jealous! Nobody loves you because you're tiny and made of meat!

https://twitter.com/thefaceboy

http://www.thereelists.com

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #172 on: March 17, 2008, 12:40:16 AM »
Winner
Ultimately I went with Bottle Rocket because I feel it is more ambitious and ultimately more fulfilling.

Although I enjoyed both these films, when I think of them, I tend to focus on how they end.  Tommy Boy is one of my go-to examples of modern comedies that forget to be funny at the end while they wrap up the dumb plot that nobody cares much about.  Bottle Rocket, on the other hand, has that great scene between the two guys in the driveway, with Dignan in that yellow jumpsuit.  I love that scene, and thus I totally support your decision.

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #173 on: March 17, 2008, 01:10:58 AM »
Tarantino has never been that original. His whole schtick is taking what he likes from the past, combining it with something else and putting a pretty cool song on top of it. The guy isn't a revolutionary and neither is Reservoir Dogs a particularly innovative film.

I feel like Tarantino gets a bad rap for this kind of thing, maybe only because he's more open about his influences than some, but I don't find his various borrowings any more problematic than I do those of Woody Allen, Akira Kurosawa, Howard Hawks, etc.

Another thing that bothered me when I revisited the film is how "cool" (whatever that means) it tried to be. Everything that is done in the film is done to enhance the "cool" effect. From the music choices to the pop culture gabfest of the opening scene. Not really a flaw but it bothered me.

I think this read is a bit skewed by being sixteen years removed from the appearance of Resevoir Dogs.  Because, back then, there wasn't a built-in audience for the film, and no guarantee that Tarantino was going to become 'Tarantino'.  I think it's much more likely that Tarantino was just filling his first film with things he loved, things he himself passionately found cool, without all that much regard for how they'd be perceived by an (imagined) audience.  That's overstating it a bit, but you get the idea.

While Tarantino's film is meant to enthrall, this one is meant to linger.

I can't really praise or condemn your verdict without revisiting Resevoir Dogs — I think I've only seen the whole thing once, and that was a long time ago.  Still, it stuck with my pretty well, with a lot of its moments proving indelible (and not just the ones embraced by pop culture at large).  On the other hand, it's only been two years since I revisited My Own Private Idaho, and while I liked it, it hasn't lingered in memory at all ... except for that one damn song which I can't find anywhere ("Getting Into the Outside").

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

roujin

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 15508
  • it's all research
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #174 on: March 17, 2008, 08:29:24 AM »
I feel like Tarantino gets a bad rap for this kind of thing, maybe only because he's more open about his influences than some, but I don't find his various borrowings any more problematic than I do those of Woody Allen, Akira Kurosawa, Howard Hawks, etc.

I suppose that came off more negative than it meant to. It's not really a flaw or anything but as I watch more and more films, Tarantino is just one of those directors that comes off as just not being very interesting.

Quote from: pixote
I think this read is a bit skewed by being sixteen years removed from the appearance of Resevoir Dogs.  Because, back then, there wasn't a built-in audience for the film, and no guarantee that Tarantino was going to become 'Tarantino'.  I think it's much more likely that Tarantino was just filling his first film with things he loved, things he himself passionately found cool, without all that much regard for how they'd be perceived by an (imagined) audience.  That's overstating it a bit, but you get the idea.

You're probably right on this regard. But does that mean that with his later films, he was trying to be  cool?

I don't know. This is probably the only time when all the trademark "Tarantino" crap is sorta annoying.


Quote from: pixote
I can't really praise or condemn your verdict without revisiting Resevoir Dogs — I think I've only seen the whole thing once, and that was a long time ago.  Still, it stuck with my pretty well, with a lot of its moments proving indelible (and not just the ones embraced by pop culture at large).  On the other hand, it's only been two years since I revisited My Own Private Idaho, and while I liked it, it hasn't lingered in memory at all ... except for that one damn song which I can't find anywhere ("Getting Into the Outside").

Honestly, the only reason why I chose MOPI was because Elliott Smith was playing in the background and it felt right. So don't blame faceboy, blame Elliott Smith!

winrit

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4934
  • “Positively the same dame.”
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #175 on: March 17, 2008, 09:42:48 AM »
Winner
Ultimately I went with Bottle Rocket because I feel it is more ambitious and ultimately more fulfilling.

Although I enjoyed both these films, when I think of them, I tend to focus on how they end.  Tommy Boy is one of my go-to examples of modern comedies that forget to be funny at the end while they wrap up the dumb plot that nobody cares much about.  Bottle Rocket, on the other hand, has that great scene between the two guys in the driveway, with Dignan in that yellow jumpsuit.  I love that scene, and thus I totally support your decision.

pixote

I was thinking about the end too when I made my decision. The end is completely true to the movie and just makes you love the movie more:

"Anthony and Bob visit Dignan in prison. They catch up and tell him how Mr. Henry robbed Bob's house. Dignan begins rattling off an escape plan and instructs his friends to get into position for a get-away. After a tense moment, the two realize that Dignan is joking. Before leaving, Dignan says to Anthony, "Isn't it funny that you used to be in the nuthouse and now I'm in jail?" as he walks back into the prison. As in all Wes Anderson movies the ending is in slow motion."
"Kickboxing. Sport of the future."

karlwinslow

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3707
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #176 on: March 17, 2008, 12:26:41 PM »
Winner
Ultimately I went with Bottle Rocket because I feel it is more ambitious and ultimately more fulfilling.

Although I enjoyed both these films, when I think of them, I tend to focus on how they end.  Tommy Boy is one of my go-to examples of modern comedies that forget to be funny at the end while they wrap up the dumb plot that nobody cares much about.  Bottle Rocket, on the other hand, has that great scene between the two guys in the driveway, with Dignan in that yellow jumpsuit.  I love that scene, and thus I totally support your decision.

pixote

I was thinking about the end too when I made my decision. The end is completely true to the movie and just makes you love the movie more:

"Anthony and Bob visit Dignan in prison. They catch up and tell him how Mr. Henry robbed Bob's house. Dignan begins rattling off an escape plan and instructs his friends to get into position for a get-away. After a tense moment, the two realize that Dignan is joking. Before leaving, Dignan says to Anthony, "Isn't it funny that you used to be in the nuthouse and now I'm in jail?" as he walks back into the prison. As in all Wes Anderson movies the ending is in slow motion."

plus the funniest heist scene in the history of cinema.

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #177 on: March 17, 2008, 12:28:07 PM »
plus the funniest heist scene in the history of cinema.

I dunno, I remember Topkapi's being pretty funny...

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

facedad

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10983
  • World Phucking Champions.
    • Be my netflix friend
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #178 on: March 17, 2008, 02:57:40 PM »
Tarantino has never been that original. His whole schtick is taking what he likes from the past, combining it with something else and putting a pretty cool song on top of it. The guy isn't a revolutionary and neither is Reservoir Dogs a particularly innovative film.

I feel like Tarantino gets a bad rap for this kind of thing, maybe only because he's more open about his influences than some, but I don't find his various borrowings any more problematic than I do those of Woody Allen, Akira Kurosawa, Howard Hawks, etc.

The difference for me is that his references are used to accommodate his desire to rework and winkingly skewer whatever genre he's working in. In this way, he's similar to Allen, except that I find Allen to have a slightly more experimental bent in his own filmmaking, even if most of it is a reference to Bergman/Dreyer. Kurosawa, Hawks and the like worked in genres and with influences but not in the same meta-fictional way. It's not to say it makes his films bad, however, it leaves his films, particularly RD, with moments that fall a bit flat as they over-reference to the degree that they become generic.

While Tarantino's film is meant to enthrall, this one is meant to linger.

I can't really praise or condemn your verdict without revisiting Resevoir Dogs — I think I've only seen the whole thing once, and that was a long time ago.  Still, it stuck with my pretty well, with a lot of its moments proving indelible (and not just the ones embraced by pop culture at large).  On the other hand, it's only been two years since I revisited My Own Private Idaho, and while I liked it, it hasn't lingered in memory at all ... except for that one damn song which I can't find anywhere ("Getting Into the Outside").

pixote
Besides the Shakespearian elements that I think help MOPI's case but that roujin respectfully didn't comment on, I just think MOPI deserves distinction on a structural basis. The film doesn't tell it's story as much as it slowly divulges it to you, while using the setting and fictional society around  it (along with the Shakespearian inserts) to give the audience context and meaning so that by the end you've been shown not only what the story is but also what it means to the people involved. Also, it made decent use of Keanu, which deserves recognition.
You're just jealous! Nobody loves you because you're tiny and made of meat!

https://twitter.com/thefaceboy

http://www.thereelists.com

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #179 on: March 17, 2008, 03:03:11 PM »
It's not to say it makes his films bad, however, it leaves his films, particularly RD, with moments that fall a bit flat as they over-reference to the degree that they become generic.

I see that more with Kill Bill than with Resevoir Dogs.  Can you provide an example from the latter?

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad