The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Although I had low expectations when going to see this last night, I can however say that despite these misgivings, I still thought it was utter unadulterated toss.
I love his previous films as much as anybody, but what we have here is massive hype all because it’s from Tarantino, the man who’s brain has been sweating in it’s own pop culture loving juices ever since Jackie Brown, and for me it delivered very little. Despite the ravings from all the beardy wannabe film studies students about all the amazing qualities of the cinematography and the style he created, it still sucks big time *in my opinion*.
The script wasn’t anything amazing. A few cool lines here and there but not the barrage of cool and quotable lines we know and love from his previous films, and overall it just wasn’t a patch on his other things. There wasn’t even really a decent story created.
The fragmented chronology loved by QT and used so effectively in his previous films just didn’t work, seemed utterly pointless and even confusing as to why he bothered.
The movie as a whole was too bitty, and played out like a load of scenes cobbled together rather than a proper flowing movie, and it just lacked something.
Most of the film just played out in too much of a clichéd ham-fisted manner, whether this is intentional I don’t really care. The characters were totally 2 dimensional and also highly clichéd. The Bride goes to Japanese sword maker, two minutes later she has a mighty blade to vanquish the evil-doers. There was no real build up to that, she just went there, got the sword and that was it. No epic journey to find an amazing sword, it was just given to her.
The last battle of vol. 1 was also a big disappointment, we had The Bride battling through hoards of Yakuza minions, and the scene is set for an excellent grand finale. We enter the highly clichéd Japanese winter garden, where an epic duel should amaze and delight the filmgoers. But the fight was naff. Hardly the epic and amazing duel we should have expected from two so-called amazing warriors. Wolf from Gladiators had better fights when he bashed the hell out of plebs with his pugil-stick.
I love kung fu, I like on-screen violence, and I liked the atmosphere Tarantino created/stole, but the whole time I just felt he was lurking behind the camera, nodding and winking to fellow film nerds when he pays homage/rips off various old school kung fu bits, all the while believing he was the greatest kung fu director in history, when he clearly isn’t. The fight scenes were ok, nothing amazing though, especially if you’re used to watching many a kung fu film. Was the violence so OTT that it was done to make up for the lack of a decent movie? I think so.
QT has tried to do something different; he’s taken his maverick style and applied it to old kung fu genre and the crossover just failed. The characters were boring, the plot simple and uninspiring, the script disappointing and the action was nothing special. It’s just lazy filmmaking; take loads of classic ideas from the Kung Fu genre and stick them all together and serve it up to the masses. But because it’s from Tarantino we shouldn’t question it, we should just say, ”it’s cool”. I don’t agree.
The anime flashback bit was pretty good, though just because Tarantino likes a bit of anime doesn’t mean he should stick a 5-minute section slap bang into the middle of his film. It’s an interesting idea, but was just out of place and reeks of self-indulgence.
If you want to watch a decent kung fu film, there’s plenty on offer, from cheesy ones to ultra violent ones, and if you want to watch a decent revenge flick, then watch Point Blank or, heck, even Commando.
I’m sure the movie-going masses enjoyed it, as they tend to lap up everything thrown at them nowadays, especially if it has any type of kung fu in it, but this viewer was disappointed he’d wasted £6 and had to bother venturing out on a cold Sunday evening for two hours of overrated pap. My brother went with an open mind, and he hated it too, and he’d wasted £6 and some petrol.
Style over substance, self-indulgence from a director, lots of blood and limbs being chopped off doesn’t make a film great, and how people could call this the best film of the year is insulting to the other great films released this year.
I’ll still go and see volume 2, purely because Michael Madsen will feature, and may be good in it, and there’s the hope that it surely can't be worse than volume 1.
I love his previous films as much as anybody, but what we have here is massive hype all because it’s from Tarantino, the man who’s brain has been sweating in it’s own pop culture loving juices ever since Jackie Brown, and for me it delivered very little. Despite the ravings from all the beardy wannabe film studies students about all the amazing qualities of the cinematography and the style he created, it still sucks big time *in my opinion*.
The script wasn’t anything amazing. A few cool lines here and there but not the barrage of cool and quotable lines we know and love from his previous films, and overall it just wasn’t a patch on his other things. There wasn’t even really a decent story created.
The fragmented chronology loved by QT and used so effectively in his previous films just didn’t work, seemed utterly pointless and even confusing as to why he bothered.
The movie as a whole was too bitty, and played out like a load of scenes cobbled together rather than a proper flowing movie, and it just lacked something.
Most of the film just played out in too much of a clichéd ham-fisted manner, whether this is intentional I don’t really care. The characters were totally 2 dimensional and also highly clichéd. The Bride goes to Japanese sword maker, two minutes later she has a mighty blade to vanquish the evil-doers. There was no real build up to that, she just went there, got the sword and that was it. No epic journey to find an amazing sword, it was just given to her.
The last battle of vol. 1 was also a big disappointment, we had The Bride battling through hoards of Yakuza minions, and the scene is set for an excellent grand finale. We enter the highly clichéd Japanese winter garden, where an epic duel should amaze and delight the filmgoers. But the fight was naff. Hardly the epic and amazing duel we should have expected from two so-called amazing warriors. Wolf from Gladiators had better fights when he bashed the hell out of plebs with his pugil-stick.
I love kung fu, I like on-screen violence, and I liked the atmosphere Tarantino created/stole, but the whole time I just felt he was lurking behind the camera, nodding and winking to fellow film nerds when he pays homage/rips off various old school kung fu bits, all the while believing he was the greatest kung fu director in history, when he clearly isn’t. The fight scenes were ok, nothing amazing though, especially if you’re used to watching many a kung fu film. Was the violence so OTT that it was done to make up for the lack of a decent movie? I think so.
QT has tried to do something different; he’s taken his maverick style and applied it to old kung fu genre and the crossover just failed. The characters were boring, the plot simple and uninspiring, the script disappointing and the action was nothing special. It’s just lazy filmmaking; take loads of classic ideas from the Kung Fu genre and stick them all together and serve it up to the masses. But because it’s from Tarantino we shouldn’t question it, we should just say, ”it’s cool”. I don’t agree.
The anime flashback bit was pretty good, though just because Tarantino likes a bit of anime doesn’t mean he should stick a 5-minute section slap bang into the middle of his film. It’s an interesting idea, but was just out of place and reeks of self-indulgence.
If you want to watch a decent kung fu film, there’s plenty on offer, from cheesy ones to ultra violent ones, and if you want to watch a decent revenge flick, then watch Point Blank or, heck, even Commando.
I’m sure the movie-going masses enjoyed it, as they tend to lap up everything thrown at them nowadays, especially if it has any type of kung fu in it, but this viewer was disappointed he’d wasted £6 and had to bother venturing out on a cold Sunday evening for two hours of overrated pap. My brother went with an open mind, and he hated it too, and he’d wasted £6 and some petrol.
Style over substance, self-indulgence from a director, lots of blood and limbs being chopped off doesn’t make a film great, and how people could call this the best film of the year is insulting to the other great films released this year.
I’ll still go and see volume 2, purely because Michael Madsen will feature, and may be good in it, and there’s the hope that it surely can't be worse than volume 1.
Page:
But that's my point - you said you *did* get them.
I didn't believe you and thought you were attempting to score "cool points" or whatever the hell, so checked the first and most obvious place to look at film references. And voila...
Of course you know whether you like or don't like a film, I wasn't commenting on that.
It was the "loads of references, culture points" etc, and then criticising "the masses", as though you were above that.
Saying "I didn't like it" - fine, I'm not going to argue about that. There are certain films I detest for no other reason than I don't like them.
I don't criticise Lord of The Rings movies for being unfaithful to the books, because I don't know enough about the books etc. So instead I say what I didn't/did like, I don't try and come off as Mr Cinema by pretending I understood all the in-jokes.
Hate Kill Bill - it's your opinion. But don't make like you know stuff you don't, what's the point?
I didn't believe you and thought you were attempting to score "cool points" or whatever the hell, so checked the first and most obvious place to look at film references. And voila...
Of course you know whether you like or don't like a film, I wasn't commenting on that.
It was the "loads of references, culture points" etc, and then criticising "the masses", as though you were above that.
Saying "I didn't like it" - fine, I'm not going to argue about that. There are certain films I detest for no other reason than I don't like them.
I don't criticise Lord of The Rings movies for being unfaithful to the books, because I don't know enough about the books etc. So instead I say what I didn't/did like, I don't try and come off as Mr Cinema by pretending I understood all the in-jokes.
Hate Kill Bill - it's your opinion. But don't make like you know stuff you don't, what's the point?
I guess to watch, appreciate and have an opinion of a film I’ll have to take film school lessons and become a film historian like yourself.
Did I get every obscure film reference Tarantino was using, no, but I still know the difference between good films and bad.
Did I get every obscure film reference Tarantino was using, no, but I still know the difference between good films and bad.
Not at all.
I've been raised on grindhouse revenge movies. I don't attempt to sneer at "the masses", yet completely fail to understand most of the references.
You didn't like it, fair enough. Just don't posture and try to appear like it's beneath you. It's not even a kung-fu film, it's a revenge flick with a section set in Japan.
Shawscope, Golden Harvest, Bernard Hermann, Blue Leaves etc etc. These are the "cool" bits.
Not liking it is one thing, trying to say "Well I appreciate proper cinema, not like the masses" is laughable.
I've been raised on grindhouse revenge movies. I don't attempt to sneer at "the masses", yet completely fail to understand most of the references.
You didn't like it, fair enough. Just don't posture and try to appear like it's beneath you. It's not even a kung-fu film, it's a revenge flick with a section set in Japan.
Shawscope, Golden Harvest, Bernard Hermann, Blue Leaves etc etc. These are the "cool" bits.
Not liking it is one thing, trying to say "Well I appreciate proper cinema, not like the masses" is laughable.
Great, so we both read the Internet Movie Database to get our movie trivia.
Totoro wrote:
> Goatboy wrote:
>
> The Crazy 88 reference was? The masks they wear are a hommage to Kato
> from The Green Hornet.
>
> The tune from Daryl Hannah was? From the film Twisted Nerve, a film
> Tarantino showed at a film festival.
>
> Hattori Hanzo is good because? He was played by Sonny Chiba, star of
> many a classic kung fu flick.
--
Nice try Dogmeat
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266697/trivia
If you "got" the references, as you claim, you'll tell me why Twisted Nerve is relevant to the movie, and it's nowt to do with it being shown at a festival some years earlier.
Hell, you could've mentioned Hanzo being the descendant if you wanted to appear like you *did* get it.
Tsk tsk, try harder Totoro-san
Stick to cartoon and The Matrix
> Goatboy wrote:
>
> The Crazy 88 reference was? The masks they wear are a hommage to Kato
> from The Green Hornet.
>
> The tune from Daryl Hannah was? From the film Twisted Nerve, a film
> Tarantino showed at a film festival.
>
> Hattori Hanzo is good because? He was played by Sonny Chiba, star of
> many a classic kung fu flick.
--
Nice try Dogmeat
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266697/trivia
If you "got" the references, as you claim, you'll tell me why Twisted Nerve is relevant to the movie, and it's nowt to do with it being shown at a festival some years earlier.
Hell, you could've mentioned Hanzo being the descendant if you wanted to appear like you *did* get it.
Tsk tsk, try harder Totoro-san
Stick to cartoon and The Matrix
Why do people spend so long analysing films?
Why don't you just watch and enjoy it?
Why don't you just watch and enjoy it?
I liked it, yet I didn't get half the references to Shaw Bros movies, didn't really know who Sonny Chiba or Hattori Hanzo was etc. It's a great movie in its own right.
Goatboy wrote:
> The Crazy 88 reference was? The masks they wear are a hommage to Kato from The Green Hornet.
> The tune from Daryl Hannah was? From the film Twisted Nerve, a film Tarantino showed at a film festival.
> Hattori Hanzo is good because? He was played by Sonny Chiba, star of many a classic kung fu flick.
> The Crazy 88 reference was? The masks they wear are a hommage to Kato from The Green Hornet.
> The tune from Daryl Hannah was? From the film Twisted Nerve, a film Tarantino showed at a film festival.
> Hattori Hanzo is good because? He was played by Sonny Chiba, star of many a classic kung fu flick.
Shouldn't take that long to use google...
Fair enough.
So the examples I provided, that you got, are?
So the examples I provided, that you got, are?
Page: