Retrospect Review

The Films Reservoir Dogs
21

[quote=“The Pink Floyd”]
I think for people to say stupid shit like “I think one guy messed up a line, it wasn’t as smooth as I’d like it to be” just shows that the other aspects of the film are so good that you have to resort to pointing out even the smallest of errors and one’s which probably aren’t even errors at that.
[/quote]

IMO the line was badly fucking deliverd, it should of been better, what’s with making a big deal out of my opinion? it bothers me that the line wasn’t deliverd the way I pleased, i’m a perfectionist like that, end of fucking story

[quote]“I think you should look at it objectively and not as a fanboy”, [/quote]

I neverd used the word objectively or fanboy, get your quotes straight, all I said was that if there are flaws, recognise em, if you don’t think there are any flaws, great, sit back and enjoy em, but face the ones that are there, feel like ignoring em? great, be that way, I on the otherhand am not, if something bothers me I point it out, I’m pretty sure Quentin would appreciate it if I told him, a little diffrent then all the dicksucking fanboys (yes i used it this time) he gets all the time …

[quote]We can’t go back now and say “oh no, I was wrong to love this film, it’s actually shit, I mean one guy doesn’t say a word as fluently and smoothly as I would have liked and they should have done another take of that one scene, that’s it I’ve made my mind up, this is the worst film ever!!!11one”. Fucking retarded.[/quote]

that was just dumb, wrong to love this film? fuck you, it’s one of the best of all time, stop exagerating all the time, it doesn’t help to prove your point, small errors do not make a film worse, they simply make a certain scene or line a little less enjoyable, obviously every film has flaws, what’s wrong with pointing em out?? IT’S JUST WORDS!! simple, kind words, if they shocked you i’m terribly sorry, send me your hospital bill



what the fuck happend to appreciating critisism? it’s illegal when it comes to QT films? Accept my opinion and get the fuck off MY back

22

Just leave him alone, he doesn’t deserve to fight again and again. You are right to have your opinion about the movie. And in a way, I can tell it without fear, it’s better not to have a fanboy attitude and see the mistake of a movie we love, and appreciate the movie even with the mistakes ! I damned love RD, almost a perfect flick even if now since I have seen City on Fire, something is gone from my admiration for QT, I always love this guy and his work.



And please never stop to say what you wanna say even if some just wanna make trouble and criticise you :-*

23

Johnny: Ok, so youve stated that theres a line where you didnt like the delivery. So thats fine. The question is, was it supposed to be that way in the movie. The answer is YES. Thats the way QT wanted Mr Pink to explain things to Mr White as if he was figuring things out as he went along, hence the studdering and the odd speech pattern.



City On Fire? Not that stupid argument again. That movie was a total piece of shit. Sorry, but it was. QT may have stole from that movie but Dogs was 100 X better than COF anyways. You better rewatch all of QTs films because hes stolen a shitload of stuff from every film hes seen. So, you may not be a big fan anymore after finding that out. lol. Jeeeez.



Lets stop this conversation here. I dont want to get into another mini QT fan war.

24

what he says is “they didn’t make their euh m-move untill mr blonde started shooting everybody”, there’s no way to know if it was scripted or not, i beleive it was not, you beleive it was: consensus :wink:



the fact white doesn’t light his cig bothers me aswell, you might think it’s cute, I think it’s silly, now please flame me for that too, i’m all yours

25

Ive told this to people several times: Mr White goes to light his cigarette and he doesnt light it because hes preoccupied with getting the facts of what happened clear first. Thats not a mistake either.



QT wanted those conversations to seem as realistic as possible, thats why it sounds like it does. Im sure that they did 10 or 11 improv takes for that scene just to see what sounded the best. That take is the scene thats in the movie. You dont edit a film and leave in a bad take in a major dialogue scene. QT wouldnt let that be in there.



I dont know if youre American or not, but thats the way people talk here. That may have something to do with the way you’re hearing it.



This guy who wrote the first review isnt a real fan of the film to me. Tim Roth was miscast? Are you kidding? He was awesome as Mr Orange, fake American accent and all. Man, I dont know where these people come from. Its ridiculous.

26

Pink is a nervous wreck at that time. He stutters and hesitates saying stuff, because white is also questioning him at that time.

So they just got out of a messed up robbery, the cops can be there any second, because they suspect a rat, white is on his case…



So yeah, I dont think he should be delivering the dialogue all smooth, like he is just relaxed…of course someone falls over words in a situation like that…

27

i’m not American no, i’m sure it’s not a mistake, would of been pretty obvious, but still, if he didn’t want it lit, he shouldn’t of attempted to lit it :wink:



i just popped in the dvd and noticed something i didnt before, when white and pink are beating the shit out of the cop and nice guy walks in, you can see blonde (sitting on the coffins) grab for his gun, just for an instance, i love that! always sharp and ready to go 8)

28

[quote=“Johny|Exhale”]
IMO the line was badly fucking deliverd, it should of been better, what’s with making a big deal out of my opinion? it bothers me that the line wasn’t deliverd the way I pleased, i’m a perfectionist like that, end of fucking story
[/quote]

I didn’t mean to make a bid deal of your opinion. This is a forum right? We talk and discuss stuff? Don’t take it personally, here, have a tissue.

[quote]I neverd used the word objectively or fanboy, get your quotes straight, all I said was that if there are flaws, recognise em, if you don’t think there are any flaws, great, sit back and enjoy em, but face the ones that are there, feel like ignoring em? great, be that way, I on the otherhand am not, if something bothers me I point it out, I’m pretty sure Quentin would appreciate it if I told him, a little diffrent then all the dicksucking fanboys (yes i used it this time) he gets all the time …
[/quote]

My post wasn’t just in reply to you. Again, stop taking things personally. I was talking to everyone.



Don’t you dare fucking think I never criticise him. If anything, I criticise him more than anybody. It’s also the case that I praise him a lot too. I am not afraid to say what I dn’t like in his films, it just so happens that I like almost everything in his films. I seem to remember me posting about how I think Volume 2’s dialogue is less great than his other dialogue, and everyone tried to cane me for it. Please don’t assume stuff, you have assumed plenty in that post and got it all wrong.

[quote]obviously every film has flaws, what’s wrong with pointing em out?? IT’S JUST WORDS!! simple, kind words, if they shocked you i’m terribly sorry, send me your hospital bill
[/quote]

It’s wrong to knit-pick, and that’s what you’re doing. Pointing out criticisms is not a problem, but to criticise just because a character stuttered? Now that’s just silly. Funny how you say I’m shocked by your words, when you have just replied to my post basically saying how shocked you are with mine. :-*

29

Seth: Exactly. If you’re panicky and confused you’re speech pattern isnt going to be perfect, especially when you’re trying to think of what happened as you’re talking. This is part of what I love about the movie, its got great dialogue and delivery work. Those guys are brilliant in their roles.



And as far as if that certain line was scripted, it probably was in part, but Steve probably put his own spin on it and thats where you get that studder in the line. They may have even done it as QT wrote it and it didnt sound as good as when Steve added his improv to it.

30

[quote=“WinslowLeach”]


This guy who wrote the first review isnt a real fan of the film to me. Tim Roth was miscast? Are you kidding? He was awesome as Mr Orange, fake American accent and all. Man, I dont know where these people come from. Its ridiculous.
[/quote]

Haha, I’m guessin’ Seb himself wrote that paragraph.



Reservoir Dogs got some goofs, yes. Big fucking deal. Every movie has some flaws, even the biggest epics. Ben Hur’s got them. Motherfuckin’ Citizen Kane got 'em. Hitchcock films got’em. Marvin Nash doesn’t have his legs tied up to the chair in one shot. Big fucking deal. The sound from the radio diminishes drastically after Stuck In The Middle. So what? Should this shit prevent you from enjoying the movie more? Fuck no. If you’re gonna decrase your rating of the movie cause of these trivial things,sorry but you’re stupid. You really are. I’ve never even noticed this supposed “fucked up” delivery line from Mr. Pink, and I’ve watched the film countless times.

31

it never has or never will decrase my rating of the film, all I did was mention it, 'Dogs is God

32

[quote=“Johny|Exhale”]
it never has or never will decrase my rating of the film, all I did was mention it, 'Dogs is God
[/quote]

I wasn’t referring to you, I was referring to the reviewer who gave it a B cause of these “flaws”.

33

who is the reviewer anyway? It’s not Seb is it?

34

[quote]And the last conclusion I drew now was, that I don’t like Tim Roth. I am not saying he is a bad actor, but he’s so miscast, and he is too fake. Not as fake as he was in Four Rooms, but he is overacting and his fake pseudo-american accent makes it even worse.[/quote]

Tim Roth was perfect in Dogs and the fucking best thing in Four Rooms…



Who wrote this anyway?

35

I dunno. He didn’t give a reference from where he got the review, so it could be him.

36

I think the intention of this whole thing was right, I just think it wasn’t properly executed.



It’s not wrong to go back and review a film after 15 years and make light of your new opinions and thoughts. But review something in retrospect doesn’t mean you have to start knit-picking. It also doesn’t mean you can now get all that shit out of your system that you didn’t have bollocks to say before. This is not an opportunity to make retarded criticisms.



You could instead talk about how Tarantino has adapted/improved/progressed his directorial vision and style today. You could discuss how trivial things have made their way into Kill Bill and CSI that were present in RD. You could talk about what RD meant for a future QT, or what it meant for the future of film. You could discuss what aspects QT hasn’t explored from RD in his recent work. NOT shit like whether a guy stuttered and how it pissed you off, or how someone didn’t light a cigarette. This whoe thing is pretty retarded.

37

i also noticed Orange didn’t shine his shoes correctly, missed a spot, very annoying



wow, one reply of me got 20 useless ones, get over it and talk about the things you wanna talk about, the stage is all yours

38

I’m actually lovin’ this topic. It’s been a while since we had a heated argument on QT films; it’s a breath of freash air from the million stupid topics and posts like " omfg I’m listening to Britney Spears - Toxic right now!!!11"

39

OMG!! that song is like so 2004!!!



Christina Aguilera - Genie in a Bottle

40

[quote=“Johny|Exhale”]
i also noticed Orange didn’t shine his shoes correctly, missed a spot, very annoying



wow, one reply of me got 20 useless ones, get over it and talk about the things you wanna talk about, the stage is all yours
[/quote]

Maybe your one usless post made way for 20 appropriate posts? Don’t be like that Jonhy, you know we all love you :-*

[quote=“Scarface”]
I’m actually lovin’ this topic. It’s been a while since we had a heated argument on QT films; it’s a breath of freash air from the million stupid topics and posts like " omfg I’m listening to Britney Spears - Toxic right now!!!11"
[/quote]

hahahahahah