Id say in the USA people def arent into the epic films anymore (unless its on TV). Not everyone is a film geek like we are. It depends on what kind of movie it is too I think. If its some family friendly movie, people might be willing to sit longer, but as we saw with Grindhouse, the 3+ hour adult movies dont fly anymore. People have ADD these days and some might be patient but the majority want to catch a quick movie and go grab a bite to eat. I think QT and RR were sorta delusional when they made the choice to do a double feature. It sucks it didnt work out, but at least they wont make that mistake again.
If its gotta be long, then sure, two or more films.
Damn, I’m not in favour of this at all. My feelings are 100% in agreement with what Sebastian said in his second post and of cousre Ify after that. I felt the exact same way when the news broke of the Kill Bill split.
And over the last few weeks of news arriving… I was secretly hoping of an interview saying “I’ve got it down to about just over 3 hours now and there’s still a bit to cut down, so I can get my 2:30 - 2:45 epic”, haha or something like that.
For me it’s not about waiting, it’s just I want it all together. None of this Volume 1, Volume 2 nonsense again. I want it to be viewed as a whole, reviewed as a whole and gain credibility as a whole. This was my worse fears from the beginning; I was never happy with hearing how big it was, the smaller sounding the better. Imagine if Pulp Fiction was two 90 minute movies! I don’t want his eyes to be bigger than his war path and certainly with the whole Grindhouse fiasco as well, get back to one big movie just QT.
And as for whoever said QT is making the smartest move for audiences today, I always thought he made movies that would play 5 years from now, 10 years from now, not the weekend they open?
Kill Bill was a bit too much. I’d hate for it to take the same toll on Bastards. I know for me (and I’m sure other have the same thinking pattern) if it’s two movies, that alone renders it less epic in peoples’ minds and makes it not as special as the next big QT event. I need to see it as a whole to get my masterpiece. ONE MOVIE!!!
And guys, Grindhouse was TWO movies.
Go see the fuckin movies or dont. Stop whining! Kill Bill being split in half “took its toll” on you? WTF? its just two movies, its not fuckin Yellow Fever.
The guys been writing this script for over 10 years. Hes got who knows how much to condense down. How the FUCK can he throw all that away and make it a 2 hour film? Get real.
Stop talking. Stop the whining. Just stop posting in this topic if youre gonna keep talking out yer ass. Its gonna be 2 halves accept it, move on. Dont go see the damn movies. But dont keep complaining about it. Its not going to change anything.
He should’ve filmed it a long time ago with less pages of script and/ or less versions to chose from. This way it would’ve been a more powerful movie. But this isn’t the case. Now, having spent this much time and getting so much material he will at least splitt it in half. I am sure QT will make the right decision which will suit the material.
In the end we get more movies/ more QT…so I aint complaining! 
I love Kill BIll the way it is and would want nothing cut out. THat said I do wish it could be one just so it could be taken as one really amazing film. Like others have said I think the split def hurt it’s standing since people are judging it as two films. (I still judge it as one.)
I wantBastards to be the undisputed masterpiece it could be as one film, but I also want all the cool stuff he can do even if it takes two films! So I’m really torn.
Preferably it would be one really long film, but as has been said, I don’t think that’s gonna fly.
[quote=“PutneySwope”]
Go see the fuckin movies or dont. Stop whining! Kill Bill being split in half “took its toll” on you? WTF? its just two movies, its not fuckin Yellow Fever.
The guys been writing this script for over 10 years. Hes got who knows how much to condense down. How the FUCK can he throw all that away and make it a 2 hour film? Get real.
Stop talking. Stop the whining. Just stop posting in this topic if youre gonna keep talking out yer ass. Its gonna be 2 halves accept it, move on. Dont go see the damn movies. But dont keep complaining about it. Its not going to change anything.
[/quote]
Hey, watch your mouth! I’m entitled to my fuckin’ opinion and I’m certainly not entitled to like everything I hear. I’m a fan, if I don’t like smething he does, I’ll say it. The same as people have stated above and you didn’t jump on their shit. This was my first post in this thread!
If I wanna say I’d prefer a 3-hour movie, I’ll say it. It’s all specualtion anyway. It has nothing to do with whether I’ll see the movie or not. Of course I’m gonna see it, I’m just stating what I’d prefer to see.
Of course it’s just two movies, but I’d rather it be one movie. And you don’t know for certain it’s gonna be two halves, so don’t go running your mouth when people “talk back” about certain things.
We all wish things were perfect for us, but they arent. This is just another thing we’ll have to overcome. Oh the humanity!
(violins playing)
People complaining about things like this is ridiculous to me. Like they’ll die if they have to see 2 separate movies or buy 2 DVDs (GASP!). Cmon guys.
whew… it’s heating up in here. everyeone go outside and get some fresh air.
I agree with Kinick though. as much as I’ll probably love whatever QT does, because he does it well, I’d still prefer something as one entity over something that’s spread. The Mona Lisa wouldn’t be famous if it were a series of pictures 
For me Id much rather get a 4 hour film split in half than 1 2 hour movie. Not with the history and epic quality behind it.
It would be like watching half The Good The Bad and The Ugly. Its not right.
To me, two-parters etc. are for television and are better suited as such. What I think is not right is sitting watching a movie that you know you’re not getting all of. I wanna fell like I’ve been taking on a journey, not half of one. Just like Kill Bill, it was filmed as one entire bohemouth but instead of getting the full epic experience we got two separate movies. I want it all in one go, not coming to the end of the first part where you know that’s not the entire impact / experience.
There’s obviously two different camps when it comes things like this, so the least you can do respect peoples’ opinions and thoughts on the matter. I’m not going to die if I have to see two separate movies, but it’s just the fact that if it’s broken up it just kills the experience and epic-ness in my view. And it’s the fact that it IS going to be looked upon as two different movies when it’s released (if it’s anything like Kill Bill).
I’m just thinking about it in the long run - I’d rather it be its own thing, as opposed to it being a part of another thing. If it is the “greatest material” he’s got in store, then that’s all the better. I’m just in the camp of people that view it as say, lets watch Inglorious Bastards part 1 - where we get half of the filmmaker’s journey in a 2-hour movie. And then another night, decide to watch part 2 where it’s the continuation and conclusion of that same journey.
It’s not like the Godfather where after the first one, you have to wacth the second to get the full experience - each one is its own thing, not the case here. Or it’s not like a sequel that comes immediately after it, it’s the fact that it’s split in the middle, but has to be viewed as a whole. And we’re not even talking a 2-hour. It could even be 3-hour plus - hey it’s an epic war movie. Imagine if every epic movie was capped in the middle…just my opinion (and I know I’m not alone). 
Lets not drag this out anymore ok? I understand what you guys are saying. Lets just discuss the movie itself and leave the split thing behind. Noone can change it. So lets move on. If you want to complain, send a letter to Harvey and QT. Dont waste your time arguing and bitching about it to people in here. We all know its just going to cause problems and bring bad feelings to everyone involved. Its not worth it. Trust me.
But isn’t the possibility of a split what the topics about?
It’s all about how you do it though. Kill Bill was meant to be ONE. Grindhouse is back to back, but sorta ONE. At least the intention was complementary.
But if you aim for a two-piece or trilogy than you will have a product that is exactly that. It is meant to be this. In all ways you look at it, its not meant to be ONE, but its meant to be split up. The Mona Lisa is meant to be one, so it would be silly to split it up. But something like ‘The Garden Of Earthly Delights’ by Hieronymus Bosch which is meant to be split in 3 would look silly crammed up in one painting. There simply is too much to put into one…By sacrifising what should’ve made the piece you will take away from the power of the work.
So I think if you start with the right intentions you won’t have to compromise anything and make what you have in mind. Aiming for one movie will be impossible (we all know the compromises QT has made in the past) so he should aim for something bigger. If the material isn’t fit for one movie, find another way. And opting for a two-piece sounds logical.
[quote=“helu”]
But isn’t the possibility of a split what the topics about?
[/quote]
I thought so myself. Considering nothing is set in stone and there’s an alternative thread about the shooting of the movie…
[quote=“Seth_Gecko”]
It’s all about how you do it though. Kill Bill was meant to be ONE. Grindhouse is back to back, but sorta ONE. At least the intention was complementary.
But if you aim for a two-piece or trilogy than you will have a product that is exactly that. It is meant to be this. In all ways you look at it, its not meant to be ONE, but its meant to be split up. The Mona Lisa is meant to be one, so it would be silly to split it up. But something like ‘The Garden Of Earthly Delights’ by Hieronymus Bosch which is meant to be split in 3 would look silly crammed up in one painting. There simply is too much to put into one…By sacrifising what should’ve made the piece you will take away from the power of the work.
So I think if you start with the right intentions you won’t have to compromise anything and make what you have in mind. Aiming for one movie will be impossible (we all know the compromises QT has made in the past) so he should aim for something bigger. If the material isn’t fit for one movie, find another way. And opting for a two-piece sounds logical.
[/quote]
You said it well Seth. Paintings are one thing, movies are another. QT is a novelist that directs. So cramming his epic story into a 2 hour movie just isnt right. I say he should edit the three scripts down as much as possible without losing the most important parts and shoot it.
I’m not against the idea of a trilogy for IB. I would LOVE to go to the theater 10 times for each movie.
You know that excited feeling you get on a Friday when a QT movie is coming out at the theater, and you’re waiting all day to get out of work, so you can head straight out to the cinema and watch it for the first time!
I would love to get that first viewing feeling 3 times for IB. It’s like a bonus!
I really wouldn’t mind in what form it was released - I’m just psyched at the prospect of this getting underway. Personally I’d like one movie but I would take anything from the man right now!
So far, we have been looking at this from one direction. Ok, Kill Bill was ONE story. The decision was made to split that story into 2 volumes. This may have hurt it’s status as a masterpiece. Although Volume 1 had a perfectly good ending, you still had to watch Volume 2 to get to the end of the story. You never quite get that feeling of completeness after watching either of the volumes.
With Inglorious Bastards, who is to say that it is one story? It might be that QT can split the three scripts he has into three seperate stories. Now, if this were to be the case, it would be rather fitting for IB to be released as a trilogy. 3 films, 3 stories - you don’t have to watch all three, you can watch any of them in any order even if they were in chronological order (1 then 2 then 3). What I’m getting at is, it may very well be 3 seperate films, with three stories but which are a continuation onto each other. So the three stories are part of one big mythology. This way, the viewer will have experienced a whole film after watching one part. The second part will be another film and so on. There is no neccessity beyond one’s own desires to watch all parts of IB.
Another way to look at it is if he did what Eastwood did with his recent war epic. Create companion pieces. One part of IB would be centred around one entity, the other part centred around another entity, with both entitis being linked. This could pave the way for his signature “intertwining” of scenes. Again, there would be no neccessity to watch both parts. And one part would still be a whole story.
I don’t think it would be in QT’s interest to do what he did with Kill Bill. There was and indeed still is some confusion regarding them. Is it one film? Is it 2 films? Is Volume 2 a sequel or just a continuation? etc etc. One film should be a complete and satisfying movie-going experience for the viewers regardless of the number of IB films released.
Touching on what Pete said about how QT knows what to do (in the interview with Seb), well I recall Seb also mentioning the idea of a Band of Brothers type mini-series to which QT replied that he wouldn’t be surprised if IB was to be released that way. There is either a contradiction here or it will actually be a mini-series. I guess we will just have to see.
For the mean time, we can discuss this all we want, we won’t be sure till we are told. Even then, things could still change.
Just a few ending points -
Firstly, personally, I don’t want a mini-series or for IB to be a story split up into halves. No animes either ;D I just want a good old fashioned “whole” film or films.
Secondly, I would like to quote a section from a book which struck a chord in me the moment Inglorious Bastards was announced:
… Meanwhile, Quentin and his mini-army of GI Joes fought on in the deepest Alhambra and poor Connie spent much of her son’s early childhood on her hands and knees, trying to put the little black plastic combat boots back on his toy soldiers. Her other task was to keep reassembling the dolls after Quentin had torn them limb from limb during particularly gruesome battle scenes. Connie still remembers how agravated she would get because she and Quentin could never find the tiny black plastic bayonets that were forever going AWOL.
Quentin would set up vicious hand-to-hand combat scenes all over the house, usually after he had seen that evening’s television news containign harrowing footage of the real fighting in South-East Asia. The little boy’s voice could often be heard directing entire battle dramas, making sure that each scene worked in relation to the next. - Quentin Tarantino: The Man, the Myths and his Movies by Wensley Clarkson
QT has been working on IB almost his whole life. I just know it will be something special.
word.
plus let me get that Grindhouse business outa here. whoever compares this to Grindhouse forgets that Grindhouse is two absolutely separate movies, connected by MAYBE 2 or so references and some same actors. that’s it. so the comparison is totally wrong in that respect.
and I agree with most of what’s been said so far. I just hope we hear some more reliable news soon, and by that i’m not even talking about the actual interview that AICN is talking about, because talking about something is one thing, I wanna see this baby in production, and when qt goes in front of the cameras and sais, “seriously, we’re doing two movies here” then I’ll buy that. so far, it’s all speculation to me, and i’ll treat it as such until i know know, not think believe/wish