Author Topic: 90s US Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs  (Read 40075 times)

jagsfans

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
    • Stover's Custom Cakes
1990s US Bracket, Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs
« Reply #40 on: April 16, 2009, 09:23:22 PM »
COOL.
Not SUPERCOOL?

pixote

Maybe, but I agree with sdedalus's review that Roth is the one weak link performance-wise. Sure, QT isn't a great actor either but he is hardly in the film. On the other hand, like sdedalus, I never bought into Roth's performance and couldn't believe that he could pass off as a seasoned criminal.

I'm of the opinion that Roth was one of the strength's.  

worm@work

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 7445
1990s US Bracket, Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs
« Reply #41 on: April 16, 2009, 09:26:20 PM »
Worm is too smart and diplomatic to argue with, so I have to agree with her. :)

Awww, thanks smirnoff :). But diplomatic, I don't know!

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
1990s US Bracket, Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs
« Reply #42 on: April 16, 2009, 09:26:48 PM »
How long does the commode story actually last?  Every month I've been away from the film, I've added like another five minutes to my estimate.  "That damn sequence goes on for like five hours!" I complain to uninterested friends.  "And it's just not that interesting."

pixote

It's about 7 minutes long. And awesome throughout.

Since pix brought up the commode story. I agree with pix's earlier verdict that the flashbacks were really not that interesting. They are jarring when they happen because, like pix pointed out, they are visually just so different from the rest of the film. We've spent most of the time in this confined space and moving locations just took me out of the film. Plus, most of the time they weren't interesting. And didn't really help the plot. Hell, they weren't even particularly funny.

Except with the commode story. I didn't want to go listen to the commode story either. But then that familiar and quotable line "You got to be naturalistic" came on and made me smile (I'm a filmspotting listener, after all). And I love the way it sorta becomes like a film inside a film. QT is really talking about the art of storytelling in that scene. He starts with that screenplay on paper, followed by a discussion on how to tell a story, a rehearsal and then shows us the actual telling. He does all this with motion and includes interaction between the story-teller and the audience. We see how the audience within the film is being manipulated through the way the story is being told. All of this is probably show-offy but somehow I am fine with it. I like my students to show off how smart they are most of the time. As long as they are really smart and I think QT is.

Along with the people listening to the story in the film, QT creates tension for us as well. We are listening to Roth tell his tale which gets interrupted when the cops appear in the bathroom.



We then get to listen to the cop's story and at that moment, I was so completely caught up in Roth's situation with the cops that I forgot for a second that it was all made up... that Roth was safe. So here I am simultaneously worried about whether or not Roth got away from those cops and then anxious to find out that the rest of the gang found his story credible and believed him.

So, for me, it was like I was upset about taken out of the film for a few seconds but then I was enjoying this other story too.. so I was okay with it. I get distracted by shiny things all the time.


Perfectly said. Again, I didn't remember much goodness from this scene in my previous viewing but this time the "naturalistic as hell" bit and the great gimmick of spreading the story out among several places and even going into it worked perfectly. I really love books and movies about creating art/things from the imagination and this scene really got at the center of that, I think.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

jagsfans

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
    • Stover's Custom Cakes
1990s US Bracket, Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs
« Reply #43 on: April 16, 2009, 09:27:38 PM »
How long does the commode story actually last?  Every month I've been away from the film, I've added like another five minutes to my estimate.  "That damn sequence goes on for like five hours!" I complain to uninterested friends.  "And it's just not that interesting."

pixote

It's about 7 minutes long. And awesome throughout.

Since pix brought up the commode story. I agree with pix's earlier verdict that the flashbacks were really not that interesting. They are jarring when they happen because, like pix pointed out, they are visually just so different from the rest of the film. We've spent most of the time in this confined space and moving locations just took me out of the film. Plus, most of the time they weren't interesting. And didn't really help the plot. Hell, they weren't even particularly funny.

Except with the commode story. I didn't want to go listen to the commode story either. But then that familiar and quotable line "You got to be naturalistic" came on and made me smile (I'm a filmspotting listener, after all). And I love the way it sorta becomes like a film inside a film. QT is really talking about the art of storytelling in that scene. He starts with that screenplay on paper, followed by a discussion on how to tell a story, a rehearsal and then shows us the actual telling. He does all this with motion and includes interaction between the story-teller and the audience. We see how the audience within the film is being manipulated through the way the story is being told. All of this is probably show-offy but somehow I am fine with it. I like my students to show off how smart they are most of the time. As long as they are really smart and I think QT is.

Along with the people listening to the story in the film, QT creates tension for us as well. We are listening to Roth tell his tale which gets interrupted when the cops appear in the bathroom.



We then get to listen to the cop's story and at that moment, I was so completely caught up in Roth's situation with the cops that I forgot for a second that it was all made up... that Roth was safe. So here I am simultaneously worried about whether or not Roth got away from those cops and then anxious to find out that the rest of the gang found his story credible and believed him.

So, for me, it was like I was upset about taken out of the film for a few seconds but then I was enjoying this other story too.. so I was okay with it. I get distracted by shiny things all the time.


I really dig the delivery of the cop's story.   Really give off that scumbag quality.

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26251
    • smirnoff's Top 100
1990s US Bracket, Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs
« Reply #44 on: April 16, 2009, 09:31:09 PM »
Junior, I remember about Goodfellas you expressed how it was difficult to care about the characters because they were bad people. Is that accurate? But you didn't seem to hindered by that here with RD. I'm just curious what you think accounts for the difference?

Or anyone else if they felt the same way.

jagsfans

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
    • Stover's Custom Cakes
1990s US Bracket, Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs
« Reply #45 on: April 16, 2009, 09:31:22 PM »
Also since I just addressed one of my movies I'm embarrased to have never seen "Do the Right Thing". I wonder if Spike doesn't dislike QT more for the theft of "If you shoot me in a dream, you better wake up and apologize" more so than QT's liberal use of  the N-word.

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26251
    • smirnoff's Top 100
1990s US Bracket, Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs
« Reply #46 on: April 16, 2009, 09:33:39 PM »
Worm is too smart and diplomatic to argue with, so I have to agree with her. :)

Awww, thanks smirnoff :). But diplomatic, I don't know!

In the sense of being tactful, I think so.

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
1990s US Bracket, Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs
« Reply #47 on: April 16, 2009, 09:34:14 PM »
RESERVOIR DOGS OWNS ALL!

QT's best film, and easily one of the best of the 90s. ResDogs should fo shizzle win this matchup. What's it up against?
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

FLYmeatwad

  • An Acronym
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28785
  • I am trying to impress myself. I have yet to do it
    • Processed Grass
1990s US Bracket, Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs
« Reply #48 on: April 16, 2009, 09:35:53 PM »
RESERVOIR DOGS OWNS ALL!

QT's best film, and easily one of the best of the 90s. ResDogs should fo shizzle win this matchup. What's it up against?

Some sub par lengthy doc about basketball, or corruption, or poverty, or too many other things that it doesn't give enough attention to in order for some unknown higher purpose.

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
1990s US Bracket, Round 5: Hoop Dreams vs. Reservoir Dogs
« Reply #49 on: April 16, 2009, 09:39:29 PM »
Junior, I remember about Goodfellas you expressed how it was difficult to care about the characters because they were bad people. Is that accurate? But you didn't seem to hindered by that here with RD. I'm just curious what you think accounts for the difference?

Or anyone else if they felt the same way.

That's a good question. One that I'll make up an answer to as I type. I think the biggest difference is that these guys didn't seem so freaking stupid. They were criminals, yes, but they were smart about it (for the most part). We also didn't get much of anybody outside the core group. Part of my problem with Goodfellas was that I felt people that didn't deserve getting hurt got hurt by the main characters. They treated normal people poorly for no real reason and that shit pisses me off. The people that got hurt here were just criminals and people that barely got anything in the way of screentime. Also, these guys weren't explicitly mafia types. I've never had a problem with bad people, per se, my big issue has always been with bad people that were also stupid and mean. AKA Goodfellas. How does that work?
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

 

love