Retrospect Review

Talk dogs! The cult-gangster flick. Everything about Reservoir Dogs, when the KBILLY Supersounds of the 70s continue...
Toothpick_Vic_Vega

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Toothpick_Vic_Vega » Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:22 pm

Good for you Seb, you're REALLY cool. I could give a shit about political science to be honest. Its the last thing I'd want to do.

I dont watch only Fox News, I watch a little bit of everything actually. Stop trying to pigeonhole me as some right wing redneck. Im not. Its called being an American, something you'll never be.

User avatar
Sebastian
Inglourious Basterd
Posts: 7836
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Sebastian » Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:36 pm

WinslowLeach wrote: Stop trying to pigeonhole me as some right wing redneck. Im not. Its called being an American, something you'll never be.
you were actually the one trying to pigeonhole me as some left wing liberal. and i know i am not an american, and actually i could care less about national identity, because borders, nations and all that i think is antiquated....

so what now? are you done bashing me for giving reservoir dogs a b+? you wanna do a survey of how many on this forum consider reservoir dogs less than an A? will you then bash everyone of them? that's gonna be fun

Toothpick_Vic_Vega

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Toothpick_Vic_Vega » Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:50 pm

Seb, you ARE a left winger, unless youve changed your mind about it. Last I heard you were the biggest Michael Moore fan in Germany. Isnt he the leader of the left winger Anti-Bush liberals?

I'd actually like to know how many Tarantino Archives members consider Dogs a B+ movie now. Personally, Ive never changed my opinion of it. Its still one of my favorite QT films. I've always given it an A+. Theres nothing I should have to explain about it, I've said tons of times why I love it. Read some of my old posts.

I'm waiting for your Pulp Fiction retrospect review. I'm sure you'll nitpick that one too and say its not a great film either. B- maybe?

Ridiculous!

User avatar
Sebastian
Inglourious Basterd
Posts: 7836
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Sebastian » Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:55 pm

WinslowLeach wrote: Seb, you ARE a left winger, unless youve changed your mind about it. Last I heard you were the biggest Michael Moore fan in Germany. Isnt he the leader of the left winger Anti-Bush liberals?
I am maybe a left-winger from the american politics standpoint. and i am not the biggest michael moore fan anywhere. i only like michael moore because he's funny and every nation should have a guy like him to raise some questions. as a student and policial scientist however i am completely beyond that guy in terms of facts and all that.
I'd actually like to know how many Tarantino Archives members consider Dogs a B+ movie now. Personally, Ive never changed my opinion of it. Its still one of my favorite QT films. I've always given it an A+. Theres nothing I should have to explain about it, I've said tons of times why I love it. Read some of my old posts.
fine, nobody is trying to take your A+ away from you, don#t you get it? you're the one who's trying to persuade me away from MY b+
I'm waiting for your Pulp Fiction retrospect review. I'm sure you'll nitpick that one too and say its not a great film either. B- maybe?
i am not sure when i will be able to watch it next, but those who know me know that i adore the film beyond belief and you can trust me it's gonna be an A+ ;-)
Ridiculous!
who/what's ridiculous? take a minute and reflect... all that is happening in this topic is me defending MY OPINION against your allegations in trying to persuade me away from MY OPINION. THAT is ridiculous


now can we get over this and get back to some friendly discussing? thank you

User avatar
Scarface
Fucking Professional
Posts: 4042
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 12:05 am

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Scarface » Wed Jun 28, 2006 3:16 pm

Seb all I wanna know is why you found the movie to be an "amateur" attempt. Was it the script, the directing, the acting which was amateur? I personally think the film is outstanding in all three categories, it comes quite clearly that the film is the work of a man who knows CLEARLY what he's doing. The fact that it was his debut feature doesn't mean anything, it's still the work of a professional in my eyes. I dunno, maybe you found it "amateur" because  the majority of it was filmed in only one place? I'm just guessing here, but to be honest I can't find a single reason why this movie should be labeled as being amateur.

Also, since when is this topic about fucking politics? Enough of that boring shit already.

User avatar
Sebastian
Inglourious Basterd
Posts: 7836
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Sebastian » Wed Jun 28, 2006 3:21 pm

saying "amateur" was aimed more at the filmographic standing, and it was tarantino's first real movie and I am of the opinion that if there were mistakes in the film as some where mentioned by others then i think its due to that fact. i think there are some flaws in camera handling and also in the acting. i am not saying the film is amateurish, but that it is in fact basically an excellent amateur movie. not in the original sense but from a retrospective standpoint...

well, maybe it's just the contrast from his early work to his contemporary work... but then again, let me emphasize that the review i posted, are my personal impressions after seeing it again after a very long time, which makes a very distanced opinion I guess, but i am not a shrink

Toothpick_Vic_Vega

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Toothpick_Vic_Vega » Wed Jun 28, 2006 5:36 pm

Ive watched it at least 100 times and Ive never once thought QT did a less than stellar job with the story he WROTE. IT WAS HIS FIRST FUCKING FILM!! Whats the difference between an excellent amateur movie and an excellent movie? If it was amateur, why the hell did it become a huge cult film? Why was QT seen as a cinematic genius after it come out? Why did it spawn thousands of QT rip off wannabes? An amateur film doesnt do that. Every film has some flaws, but so what? 

Again, your new opinions of the film are a complete load of shit. I think even you know it. 

User avatar
Scarface
Fucking Professional
Posts: 4042
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 12:05 am

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Scarface » Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:03 pm

The Seb wrote: About 90 percent of the movie are outstanding but there are a couple of moments where as a viewer I felt uncomfortable knowing what Tarantino and the actors do today and seeing what they’re doing on screen there, which is now over 15 years ago.
Can you please expand on this sentence? I did not understand what you're saying at all.

User avatar
Ify
Fucking Professional
Posts: 5485
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:51 am
Location: The Dark Side of the Moon

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Ify » Wed Jun 28, 2006 11:57 pm

The Seb wrote: i dont have to justify my opinion, that's why it's called opinion. i am not claiming anything that someone will repudiate, this isn't a college term paper.

so pete gives it an A+, do I ask him to justify and back up his arguments?

* this is basically an amateur movie with lots of improvisation and low budget: well, there's nothing wrong about that.
* there are a couple of moments where as a viewer I felt uncomfortable knowing what Tarantino and the actors do today and seeing what they’re doing on screen there, which is now over 15 years ago: Well, that's my impression
* ... 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: well, he has a fake pseudo-american accent and in my OPINION I think he's overacting...
* B+: that's MY rating. deal with it
I never said it was a college term paper, please don't put words into my mouth. Basically, you said some shit about Reservoir Dogs and I want to know why you said it. What made you think it was an amateur film? How exactly was Tim Roth bad? How is he fake? When you say e was overacting, do you mean at the start in the car when he was shot? "There are a couple of moments where as a viewer I felt uncomfortable knowing what Tarantino and the actors do today and seeing what they’re doing on screen there, which is now over 15 years ago" Are you trying to say that QT and the other guys are so big and so good now, that you can't believe they were so poor in RD? If you're not saying that then please explain, because it doesn't make much sense.

You are entitled to your opinion. You don't have to explain or justify them if you don't want to, but that won't help your cause nor get anybody on your side.

Haha, Jesus Christ, finally the forum members are THINKING about stuff instead of talking about what fucking shoes they bought or what song they just heard. I'm loving this. It makes for very interesting reading.
Image

"Movies are my religion and God is my patron. I'm lucky enough to be in the position where I don't make movies to pay for my pool. When I make a movie, I want it to be everything to me; like I would die for it." - QT

User avatar
Sebastian
Inglourious Basterd
Posts: 7836
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Sebastian » Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:16 am

The Pink Floyd wrote: You are entitled to your opinion. You don't have to explain or justify them if you don't want to, but that won't help your cause nor get anybody on your side.
since i dont want to get anyone on my side i wont explain or justify myself either since i dont have to ;-) thank you

User avatar
Ify
Fucking Professional
Posts: 5485
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:51 am
Location: The Dark Side of the Moon

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Ify » Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:51 am

You're welcome  :D
Image

"Movies are my religion and God is my patron. I'm lucky enough to be in the position where I don't make movies to pay for my pool. When I make a movie, I want it to be everything to me; like I would die for it." - QT

User avatar
Scarface
Fucking Professional
Posts: 4042
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 12:05 am

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Scarface » Fri Jun 30, 2006 6:38 am

The Seb wrote: since i dont want to get anyone on my side i wont explain or justify myself either since i dont have to ;-) thank you
I'm not asking you to justify yourself. I'm asking you to translate your incoherent bullshit into simple, understandable sentences. Thank you.

User avatar
Sebastian
Inglourious Basterd
Posts: 7836
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Sebastian » Fri Jun 30, 2006 12:09 pm

why dont you write your own review

User avatar
Ify
Fucking Professional
Posts: 5485
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:51 am
Location: The Dark Side of the Moon

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Ify » Fri Jun 30, 2006 12:12 pm

Can I write reviews for you Seb? So you can place them on your site?
Image

"Movies are my religion and God is my patron. I'm lucky enough to be in the position where I don't make movies to pay for my pool. When I make a movie, I want it to be everything to me; like I would die for it." - QT

User avatar
Scarface
Fucking Professional
Posts: 4042
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 12:05 am

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Scarface » Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:59 pm

The Seb wrote: why dont you write your own review
Don't change the subject please. Dude if you want your "review" to be taken seriously the least you can do is write your opinion coherently. If you don't wanna answer my query, fuck it. It would only enforce the fact that this is a fucking dumb topic.

User avatar
Sebastian
Inglourious Basterd
Posts: 7836
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Sebastian » Fri Jun 30, 2006 7:17 pm

oh yeah rite, it is dumb to post OPINIONS about reservoir dogs in the reservoir dogs section of this forum. okay man, i give up, you're a genius
Last edited by Anonymous on Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Toothpick_Vic_Vega

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Toothpick_Vic_Vega » Fri Jun 30, 2006 7:21 pm

Ok guys, Seb has fought everyone about this including me. Lets just let it go now. We've stated our opinions and thoughts enough. We cant change his mind.

User avatar
Scarface
Fucking Professional
Posts: 4042
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 12:05 am

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Scarface » Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:53 pm

I ain't fighting. I honestly wanted to know what Seb meant by this sentence I quoted:

About 90 percent of the movie are outstanding but there are a couple of moments where as a viewer I felt uncomfortable knowing what Tarantino and the actors do today and seeing what they’re doing on screen there, which is now over 15 years ago.
And I never was given an answer. But just for the record, here's what the actors were doing recently:

Madsen - Bloodrayne
Keitel -  Be Cool
Buscemi -The Island
Tim Roth - Dark Water
Chris Penn (God bless him) - Corky Romano

Yeah, I guess they've all been in their golden age just recently. They'll soon gonna regret they acted in this "amateur" indie film called Reservoir Dogs 15 years ago. ::)

Hans

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Hans » Sat Jul 01, 2006 12:08 pm

That's not very fair. Madsen was in Kill Bill only two years ago, Buscemi's been in various acclaimed films over the past years, Keitel and Roth were in some decent flicks, and Chris Penn...well, he's Chris Penn so forget about him. I'm not disputing that RD is a good film, but that doesn't mean that it's one of the best movies ever just because Yours Truly directed it.

Reservoir Dogs is a great little flick, but it IS amateurish. RD did have a low budget, and some of the shots in it come off as looking very cheaply done (the slo-mo shot looks like something a High School Drama class might do if they were making a short film). It also feels like it takes a little too long for everything to start happening (the first 45 minutes makes it look like a stage play- not a bad thing, but it does drag a bit), and then everything feels pretty much rushed after we find out who the mole is and the film heads towards its conclusion. RD is a very entertaining movie, but isn't nearly as magnificent as everyone claims it to be. Seb was getting overly defensive and everyone else overly offensive, but I pretty much agree that RD does have its flaws which detract from it being a perfect film. And Tim Roth's accent was irritating as shit.

Toothpick_Vic_Vega

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Toothpick_Vic_Vega » Sat Jul 01, 2006 12:42 pm

I dont think any of the "flaws" in the film make it bad. Actually those things you claim are amateurish are part of the reason I love it. Tim Roths accent isnt spot on, but its different and I liked it, still do.

I dont agree with anything anyones said regarding it being amateurish. It was made in 1992 and after people saw it, it became a cult classic and spawned a bunch of rip offs. Now we have a guy saying the opening slow motion shot was bad. Are you fucking kidding me? I never once thought that was bad, its still one of the most iconic opening credits sequences ever put on film. There is no going back and saying its anything but what it was. You could do that with any film out there.

Reservoir Dogs: A+

User avatar
cyber-lili
Fucking Professional
Posts: 5446
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:13 am
Location: France

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by cyber-lili » Sat Jul 01, 2006 1:07 pm

Scarface wrote: But just for the record, here's what the actors were doing recently:

Madsen - Bloodrayne
Keitel -  Be Cool
Buscemi -The Island
Tim Roth - Dark Water
Chris Penn (God bless him) - Corky Romano

Yeah, I guess they've all been in their golden age just recently. They'll soon gonna regret they acted in this "amateur" indie film called Reservoir Dogs 15 years ago. ::)
You got a point there  :P
WinslowLeach wrote: Reservoir Dogs: A+
A++  :P
Image

User avatar
Seth_Gecko
Fucking Professional
Posts: 3749
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:54 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Seth_Gecko » Sat Jul 01, 2006 1:38 pm

Of course RD is a low budget movie. It has some draw backs because of that. But in my eyes those just add to the charm of it.
You aint gonna be like: ow blair witch project looked amateurisch either...

Dogs is what it is. A low budget movie filled with great talented people and love for making movies. With some of the coolest scenes, lines and shots ever brought to cinema.

A+
Image
Hey Paul! *Wields axe* Try getting a reservation at Dorsia now you fucking stupid bastard!

Toothpick_Vic_Vega

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Toothpick_Vic_Vega » Sat Jul 01, 2006 2:28 pm

Amen!!

Hans

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Hans » Sun Jul 02, 2006 2:45 pm

WinslowLeach wrote: I dont think any of the "flaws" in the film make it bad. Actually those things you claim are amateurish are part of the reason I love it. Tim Roths accent isnt spot on, but its different and I liked it, still do.

I dont agree with anything anyones said regarding it being amateurish. It was made in 1992 and after people saw it, it became a cult classic and spawned a bunch of rip offs. Now we have a guy saying the opening slow motion shot was bad. Are you fucking kidding me? I never once thought that was bad, its still one of the most iconic opening credits sequences ever put on film. There is no going back and saying its anything but what it was. You could do that with any film out there.

Reservoir Dogs: A+
Maybe I should have clarified, but I never meant to say that the Technical aspects of the film made it bad in any way; I was just pointing out that it was indeed amateurish in parts. My main problem was the pacing, which had nothing to do with the quality of it technically speaking, and for other reasons that I didn't specify. In my eyes, RD is far from being as great as everyone's made it out to be (it seems to lack a soul like QT's other films and didn't seem to have any real message), but it is still very entertaining and definitely a classic, but I wouldn't go as far to call it a masterpiece. I find it more of a "fun" movie than anything; I just don't get that feeling after watching Dogs like I do with films like The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly or Kill Bill.

I probably would add Dogs to my favorites list if it wasn't for the raving fanboys which act like it's the greatest thing ever (and I have nothing against fanboys; I'm pretty much a Kill Bill fanboy myself). But still.....especially compared to Tarantino's other films, I think Dogs gets more credit than it deserves. Reservoir Dogs is like A Fistful of Dollars- a good film, but pales in comparison to the director's later work (For a Few Dollars More, GBU, Once Upon a Time in the West in Leone's case).
Last edited by Hans on Sun Jul 02, 2006 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Scarface
Fucking Professional
Posts: 4042
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 12:05 am

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Scarface » Sun Jul 02, 2006 7:15 pm

Hans wrote: In my eyes, RD is far from being as great as everyone's made it out to be (it seems to lack a soul like QT's other films and didn't seem to have any real message),
Jesus, again with this "message" crap argument. Go watch some Olive Stone films if you wanna find some real messages man. Tarantino's not that type of director, deal with it. Sorry but you're searching for the wrong things. I take it you love For A Few Dollars More and GBU from your argument. What's the "real message" in those films? And may I ask what the real "message" behind Jackie Brown and Kill Bill was? Help me cause I can't really find 'em.
I probably would add Dogs to my favorites list if it wasn't for the raving fanboys which act like it's the greatest thing ever
Judging and rating a film by that logic is pure ignorance, plain and simple.
Last edited by Scarface on Sun Jul 02, 2006 7:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Toothpick_Vic_Vega

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Toothpick_Vic_Vega » Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:23 pm

QT definitely isnt a "message" director, if you're coming to the film wanting to be enlightened on some higher plain of thinking, you're going to be dissapointed. QT is like a pulp novelist who makes movies, hes not aspiring to be anything else. My interest in his films comes from his direction/writing and what he does with mixing genres and all the cool pop culture/movie nods he throws in. Its not from wanting to hear political-social statements.

User avatar
Jack Wolfgang
Real McCoy
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 6:44 am
Location: Finland

Re: Retrospect Review

Post by Jack Wolfgang » Tue Apr 07, 2009 5:02 am

Bump!

Goddamned I love this movie. It may have actually become my favorite Tarantino movie in the recent years. It's this or Jackie Brown.

There are some movies you love that you wanna watch over and over again and you love them for their familiarity. Stand by Me and Clerks for example are those kinda movies for me. Then there's another kind of movie you love which you don't want to overwatch so it stays fresh everytime you watch it. The Usual Suspects comes to mind. But I must have seen Reservoir Dogs 15 times which is a lot for me. Dr. Strangelove is one of my favorites of all time and I've only seen that motherfucker twice. But no matter how many times I watch RD, it still feels fresh to me. It's just so raw, original, energetic and full of piss and vinegar, yet totally deserving of its rowdy attitiude because of the brilliance of it all, especially the screenplay and the cast. It could very well be my desert island movie.
And now I wanna cut my hair just like Marky Ramone
It's gonna look dumb but it's gonna be fun cause I know I'm not alone
It don't bother me that I can't see, I'll look so fuckin' mean
My mum won't care, my dad will swear but baby, we'll make a killer team.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest