Showing posts with label inglorious basterds. Show all posts
Showing posts with label inglorious basterds. Show all posts

Thursday, 24 December 2015

Before The Hateful Eight: A Quentin Tarantino Retrospective



No director in recent history deserves his name to become an adjective as much as Quentin Tarantino. One of the most controversial figures of modern American film emerged from video store geek to Sundance sensation with his both unique and familiar take on the crime film, and immediately ‘Tarantino-esque’ was coined as an exciting way to describe a slew of (often less than exciting) imitators influenced by the new director. Now Tarantino is back with what promises to be a bit of a return to his roots with The Hateful Eight looking a bit like a Western version of Reservoir Dogs.

Dabbling in genres from samurai and kung-fu flicks to historical war films, Tarantino has a definite style, numerous trademarks and a love of cult cinema that shines through in every screenplay. A writer and director often criticised for the levels of violence in his films, he is an auteur unafraid to court controversy. From sadistic bank robbers to sadistic Nazis, Tarantino’s movie worlds are littered with low-life scumbags that make life miserable for other characters.

Tarantino has been known to divide critics, filmmakers and audiences with his vicious violence, repeated racial epithets and the odd accusation of style over substance. Spike Lee called him ‘infatuated’ with the ‘N’ word after its regular use in Jackie Brown (1997) and notable uses in his previous two films. The BBFC decided to pass Reservoir Dogs (1992) uncut but only after much debate over an infamous torture scene. His later films like Death Proof (2007) and Inglourious Basterds (2009) have received somewhat less critical adulation than his earlier, more startling and fiercely independent works.

Reservoir Dogs, released in 1992 is the genre defying debut of an ambitious young video store geek burning to show his skills as both writer and director. It features a cool cast including Harvey Keitel, Tim Roth and Steve Buscemi, buckets of blood and in the middle of it all; joker Michael Madsen dancing, ear slicing and ensuring the film a place in cinematic history. Inspired by the likes of The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974) and its colour coded criminal names, Kubrick’s The Killing (1956) and its fractured narrative structure and from further afield Ringo Lam’s City of Fire (1987), whose final act it virtually steals wholesale; it breaks the fundamental convention of a heist film. By barely showing the actual robbery and only the fallout, it focuses on characters including Tim Roth’s undercover cop and Madsen’s cold blooded psychopath and fizzes with energy, wit and bloody sadistic violence.


Only two years later, Tarantino returned with Pulp Fiction (1994), his undisputed masterpiece. Borrowing liberally from French New Wave influences such as the films of Godard and Truffaut and telling three stories linked only by gangster Marcellus Wallace, it is a tour de force of film making; stylish, sexy, swear-y and sickening. Samuel L. Jackson makes his first appearance in a Tarantino film beginning a long collaboration that continues today. Never has Tarantino’s dialogue flowed as richly as between the similarly clad gangsters to Reservoir Dogs' characters, Jules and Vincent. And never have Tarantino’s monologues been so juicily delivered as Samuel L. Jackson’s iconic delivery of Ezekiel 25:17. The non-linear narrative, brutal violence and chapter titles crystallised, confirming Tarantino as a unique director, borrowing continually from his cinematic heroes and creating memorable and original works of crime fiction.


He then adapted Elmore Leonard’s novel Jackie Brown into an infinitely more mature, but less stylish and snappily scripted homage to Blaxploitation films of the 70s. It bears all the marks of a director comfortable in his new shoes as the king of independent cinema, constantly imitated but never bettered. There is less showing off here; no memorable monologues, a mostly linear structure and a move away from the regular appearances of Tim Roth, Harvey Keitel, and Steve Buscemi that had featured in Tarantino’s films so far. Pam Grier, Robert Forster and Robert De Niro all appear with Samuel L. Jackson returning as another ruthless criminal. It may bear less of the Tarantino-esque trademarks but it still stands as a classic crime caper, clever and assured filmmaking, and a wonderful homage to films that influenced Tarantino.


Kill Bill Volumes 1&2 (2003 and 2004) are the first of Tarantino's foolishly split double bills. Originally meant to be one film, a decision was made by Tarantino with most likely a great deal of input from Harvey Weinstein to cut the film down the middle and unfortunately turned one roaring rampage of revenge into two volumes that decreased in quality as a result. Kill Bill Vol. 3 might be alive and possible according to the most recent reports, no doubt due to the original films having a lot of fans with their samurai-flavoured, Shaw brothers inspired bloodletting. Owing a considerable debt to Lady Snowblood (1973) which provides a template for The Bride’s story of vengeance, it is filled with references to little known kung-fu films and proved that Tarantino was a director as comfortable with fight scenes as with dialogue. The pair of films also marked his second collaboration with his muse Uma Thurman after her iconic part as Marcellus Wallace’s moll in Pulp Fiction.


If Tarantino’s career could be divided up into chapters like one of his films, there would certainly be a chapter called “The Rodriguez Situation”. Best buddies Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez joined forces on iffy anthology Four Rooms (1995), directing separate episodes in the odd collection of stories centring on Tim Roth’s hotel bellhop. Tarantino later guest directed a scene in Rodriguez’s Sin City (2005) before the pair officially collaborated on their Grindhouse (2007) double feature, directing one film each to be marketed and screened as one cinematic experience.

Tarantino’s Death Proof suffered in comparison next to the gloriously gory thrills of Rodriguez’s Planet Terror but still has Kurt Russell as a stunt driving psycho and a fierce car chase that puts stunt woman Zoe Bell (Uma’s stunt double in Kill Bill) right where she belongs; wriggling around on the bonnet of a speeding car being slammed by Kurt Russell's death machine. Death Proof deserves the style over substance accusation of many of Tarantino’s films but the physically scratched image is wonderfully grimy and though it is completely chronological, it still features plenty of typically Tarantino-esque dialogue. Americans got to see the double bill as intended complete with fake trailers in the middle. However Britain got shafted again by the money men with another terrible decision to release both films separately.


Inglourious Basterds was a serious return to form for Tarantino. It is another blood thirsty tale of revenge and the first of what could potentially become his historical trilogy. Mixing biggest-star-in-the-world Brad Pitt with up-and-coming actors like Michael Fassbender and introducing English speaking audiences to the majesty of Christoph Waltz, it is possibly Tarantino’s most brutal and bonkers creation. Waltz’s Colonel Landa is another of Tarantino’s ingenious creations, a smooth-talking sadist who is as comic as he is hideous, almost as over the top as the astonishingly violent cinema-set climax. Nazi’s hunt Jews, Jews hunt Nazi’s and Hitler appears only long enough for Tarantino to completely rewrite the history books.


Django Unchained is a typically brutal and sadistic look at slavery in the South. Samuel L. Jackson reappears, Tarantino takes another small role as in many of his previous films, and Leonardo DiCaprio joins Tarantino’s memorable list of sick and twisted nasty bastards. It's a tough watch; both funny, cathartic and occasionally unbearable.

Untouchable Tarantino can work with anybody he chooses. From the moment he caught Keitel for Reservoir Dogs to snatching John Travolta and Bruce Willis (at career low points) in Pulp Fiction, Tarantino has a knack for canny casting. His collaborations with Samuel L. Jackson, Uma Thurman and most recently Christoph Waltz have proved that he is a dream director to work for, despite apparently strangling Diane Kruger on the set of Inglourious Basterds. Ticking off two of the biggest and best males stars in Pitt and DiCaprio, he has confirmed that he and Johnny Depp wish to work together one day in the future. Promising to retire at 60 after a couple more films, we must savour every drop of Tarantino that he has to offer, with or without Depp.

So what is Tarantino-esque and why has it become such a commonly used word for cool characters, cooler dialogue and quality filmmaking; both cult-inspired and mainstream-influencing? His soundtracks are slick hand-picked play lists; his casts revive the careers of has-beens and introduce bright new stars and his ripping off of obscure cult cinema creates fitting homage to little seen movies. His worlds are filled with furious revenge fantasies, sadistic violence and shot through with distinctive style. From out-of-the-trunk-of-car shots, non-linear narratives, occasional uses of black and white to his foot fetish and corpse eye view shots, Tarantino is recognizable from his films' stylistic flourishes as much as his monologues and often dazzling dialogue. His influences are many; he is a cinematic magpie, taking from what he pleases, unchained by genre conventions and creating something new from the old. His impending retirement is just another reason to revisit his cinematic oeuvre ahead of The Hateful Eight’s UK release on 8th January 2016.

Thursday, 17 January 2013

Director Retrospectives: Part 1 Quentin Tarantino

Ahead of the some of the biggest and best film releases of 2013, Filmoria have decided to do a retrospective of each director's work. We all got to choose six directors who have films being released this year and the idea is that in the week leading up to the new film, we will write and publish a retrospective look at that director's body of work.

I got to pick six fantastic directors, some of my very favourites and others who have enough significant films to make their body of work worth revisiting for me. I take tasks like this very seriously and would like to get through all the films of each particular director before I write the pieces. Fortunately and unfortunately I got Quentin Tarantino as my first director. Fortunately because I've seen and own nearly all of his films and am looking forward to Django Unchained but unfortunately because I had just over a week to prepare my piece for Filmoria and re-watch the films.


I wanted to re-watch all his films before writing but couldn't get hold of Reservoir Dogs or Death Proof in time. I ended up buying Natural Born Killers and True Romance instead as Tarantino wrote the screenplays but am not including them in my feature. I haven't seen either for a very long time and am looking forward to catching them again.

Anyway I don't want to give away the other directors I am doing in this series suffice to say that I am really looking forward to writing more pieces on some very exciting and interesting directors. I will add links as the year goes on and I write more of the director retrospectives. The next one I am doing will be in March is one of my absolute favourite directors. I'm going to start re-watching his films this week in preparation.


For now, here is my look at the career of director Quentin Tarantino so far. It took a lot of time and a lot of research so please give it a read if you're a fan of his work... or even if you're not!

Other Filmoria writers have recently tackled:

Steven Soderbergh
Walter Hill
Kathryn Bigelow
Judd Apatow
Robert Zemeckis

Your comments are always welcome... what do you think of Tarantino?

Saturday, 10 March 2012

Universal Pictures VS LOVEFiLM: A Call to Arms

************ *********** PLEASE SEE MY UPDATE HERE ************** **********

Film fans, Lovefilm subscribers, the 'good' people at Universal Pictures.... what the flying f*ck is going on here?  I'm seriously pissed off and I'm not sure why it's taken me this long to explode but here it is: 

Since 2009 there has been a dispute between Lovefilm and Universal Pictures.  Lovefilm can't rent out any post-2009 Universal Pictures films.  This means just this month I cannot put Safe House, Wanderlust, Contraband or The Greatest Movie Ever Sold on my rental list.  I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!

Here's a list from Wikipedia of just some of the biggest and best releases that all us Lovefilm subscribers are unable to watch unless we fork out more for cinema tickets or buy the films on DVD or Blu-ray:

2009

Fast & Furious
The Soloist
Land of the Lost
Public Enemies
Brüno
Funny People
Inglourious Basterds
The Invention of Lying
Couples Retreat

2010

The Wolfman
Kick-Ass
Green Zone
Repo Men
Robin Hood
MacGruber
Get Him to the Greek
Despicable Me
Charlie St. Cloud
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World
Devil

2011

The Dilemma
Sanctum
The Adjustment Bureau
Paul
Hop
Fast Five
Bridesmaids
The Change-Up
Dream House
The Thing
Johnny English Reborn
Tower Heist

And here's five more to be concerned about in 2012!

American Reunion
Battleship
Snow White & the Huntsman
Ted
The Bourne Legacy  

Am I wrong or is that pretty serious?  It's f*cking ridiculous is what it is.  I don't want to move to Netflix or Blockbuster as I really like Lovefilm.  If you want to read a great write up of the similarities and differences between Lovefilm and Netflix, head to this article on Front Room Cinema.  If you want to see why Lovefilm are rated the number one online rental service in the UK, head here.

I still think Lovefilm have a brilliant service and apart from this dispute I have no complaints about them.  They have arranged some amazing free screenings and Q&A's with the likes of Joe Cornish, Paddy Considine, Anna Faris, Danny Boyle and many others.  I think they are excellent value for money and the website is easy to use and filled with great news, features and competitions.   But this dispute pisses me off.




I phoned up Lovefilm to put my investigative journalism skills to the test and the guy from customer services said he couldn't tell me when the dispute would end.  He did say that it was either to do with licensing deals and Universal having an exclusive deal with another rental company OR it might be to do with the prohibitive cost of rental copies from Universal.  But he said he didn't know.  I should have pushed him and demanded he put me on the phone with someone who could tell me otherwise I'd cancel then and there but really I'm a pussy cat and I guess my hard-ass journalistic technique isn't quite there yet.

Anyway I'm sure this is more Universal's fault than Lovefilm's.  Every other film company lets their films be rented out by Lovefilm, so why not Universal?  I remember when I worked at Blockbuster and there was a dispute with Warner Bros that lead to Blockbuster not stocking several of their releases including Training Day.  It got resolved in the end.  Don't know how.  Don't care how.  But it did.


So now I have sent an email to Universal Pictures and this is where you all come in!  Are any of you fine readers and my new 'brothers and sisters in arms' with Lovefilm?  If so, have you noticed this stupid, ridiculous dispute?  Of course you have, and though I'm sure most of us can afford the odd cinema visit or purchase of a DVD or Blu-ray, that's not the frigging point.  The point is that we're being screwed!  We should have access to Universal's films on Lovefilm and something needs to be done!

Here is the email I sent Universal:
....................................................................................................................................
Dear Sir/Madam

I would like to know why Universal Pictures films are not available through the Lovefilm online rental service.

Do you make your films prohibitively expensive compared to all the other studios whose films are available on Lovefilm?

OR

Are you binded by contracts with other rental services that rent Universal films?

OR is it neither of the above and if so what is the problem?

I pretty much watch all films through my Lovefilm subscription (approximately 20-25 per month) and have missed out on a huge number of your titles due to this.  I have still yet to see Robin Hood, Get Him to the Greek, Inglorious Basterds and countless others due to this problem.  I pay enough for my subscription to Lovefilm and therefore will not fork out more to go see your films at the cinema or buy them on DVD/Blu-ray.  I've noticed recently that I will also miss Contraband, The Greatest Movie Ever Sold and Safe House.

In an age where piracy is so very easy and tempting for many a film fan, is it not desirable for you to convince us to pay for your films somehow.  I don't want to illegally download films and I haven't done so but why should I pay extra for your films when I pay £13.27 a month to Lovefilm?


I would greatly appreciate a response and an end to this dispute.

Kind regards

(your name here!)
................................................................................................................................
Now it's your turn!  Copy and paste this email, change whatever you want to make it your own personal email and send it to enquiriesuk@nbcuni.com  Let's bombard them and get a response!  I'm not going to let this drop.  Let's put some people power in action!  Let me know if you're with me on this.  Even if you're not with Lovefilm.  Join us!

************ *********** PLEASE SEE MY UPDATE HERE ************** **********

Friday, 24 June 2011

Inglorious Basterds (Tarantino, 2009) Review

Synopsis: Jewish-American soldiers, the titular ‘Basterds’ hunt, kill and scalp Nazis in WW2. Massacre survivor Shosanna makes her own plans to bring down the Third Reich.


Thank God Tarantino’s back on track! After the double whammy of disappointments, Kill Bill Vol.2 and Death Proof, the director returns with this blistering, uber-violent, very funny ‘masterpiece (his words!).

The cast handle the script brilliantly with standouts being Pitt and Waltz. Pitt’s accent and jutting jaw are hilariously OTT and Waltz’s ‘Jew Hunter’ is another deliciously watch-able villainous and charismatic bastard that makes the audience wait in suspense for the bouts of (often) vicious violence.

Tarantino unfolds the story with trademark chapter headings and makes it plain from the opening title that this is a fairytale fantasy (though set in a very real, very sad time of world history). The script crackles with dark humour and cool characters, flying high above the (frequently) boring dialogue of Tarantino’s last couple of efforts. Building to a bloodthirsty climax in a cinema, the setting is fitting for a film that is all about film; filmy film where cinematic references are plentiful and the film-lovers in the audience are in on the jokes.

The opening scene is classic Tarantino and sets the tone for the rest of the movie with its promise of violence, a cracking villain and another Tarantino heroine out for revenge. If you were losing patience with the masterful cinematic magpie, give Inglorious Basterds a spin and then settle in for the long wait till ‘Django Unchained’.