[quote=“Yasmin”]
QT has proved he can’t always get a decent performance out of someone who has little acting experience. Eli Roth and Zoe Bell to name two.
[/quote]
Zoe was great, Eli did good too with what he was given.
Zoe Bell was cringeworthy to the maximum!
[quote=“Crazy Kenneth”]
The way things look right now, Sebby the admin might recieve a phone call over the next days. Yo Seb, if QT asks for one more guy, tell him I can play a mean Nazi with a straight face, no problem. 
[/quote]
Hahahahahahahahaha ;D
[quote=“Kinick”]
Zoe Bell was cringeworthy to the maximum!
[/quote]
imo you just had to fall a little bit in love with her, but OK…to each his own.
You guys didn’t like Zoe because she didn’t look like some A list sexpot like Jolie or Uma. Zoe did a decent job considering she doesn’t really have any acting experience and the critics gave her better reviews than they did the other actresses.
[quote=“Ify”]
I read from the BBC that Simon Pegg may be involved too. I know it shouldn’t but all this news of QT casting his mates is really starting to piss me off. Eli Roth and Simon Pegg in Quentin Tarantino’s WWII epic? Are you fucking kidding me? I really thought this would be the ultimate QT film, but with fucking lame talents like that, I can’t help but to think otherwise. As someone said, IB could be a laughing stock. I mean imagine Saving Private Ryan, Full Metal Jacket, Apocalypse Now or Platoon having those idiots in it. I guess you can make the argument that IB won’t be anything like those great war films, but will it still be credible?
I have to admit, after hearing what a lot of people have said about the script - how Shasanna’s story is the main story and the bastards don’t feature as much, how there is a lot of references to cinema and genre’s of old well - it put me off a bit. I was expecting a “man on a mission” movie just like QT said. A no holds barred, spaghetti western, set in no man’s land… wait, let me just quote his interview with Empire magazine in 2004:
Q. You’ve got the script written for Inglorious Bastards - what’s your take on WWII? Obviously it will be different from anything we’ve seen before.
It’ll have a very epic feel. It’ll be my take on the sociological battlefield at that time with the racism and barbarism - on both sides. On the Nazi side and the American side and the black soldiers and Jewish soldiers and Nazis and the French, because it all takes place in France.
Q. Is it just after D-Day?
Yeah, depending on exactly how I end up finally struturing it but there are sequences that happen before D-Day - I’ll have little things like ‘One Year After Occupation’, and 'Four Months After Occupation. ‘Two years Before Occupation’ - that kind of thing, but the thrust of the story will happen after D-Day.
Q. Are you shooting it in Spain?
I don’t know where I’m going to shoot it. We’ll figure out where I’m going to shoot it when I’m 100 per cent go on it. The other thing about it is, again, it’ll kind of be my spaghetti western too. It’s the one time in the 20th Century where that almost kind of spaghetti western, barren no man’s land, landscape happened with the Nazis taking over countries.
Q. It sounds like Kelly’s Heroes…
Kelly’s Heroes is a real lark. I never felt like it was that much of a spaghetti western, it was more of a caper film. I want it to be more like what The Good, The Bad And The Ugly was to the civil war.
THAT’S what I want. What happened?
[/quote]
That’s what I keep thinking too. QT had this massive screenplay from which he could easily have made 3 movies, and he somehow managed to trim it down to just 120 pages like nothing. The final version of the film looks like it’s gonna be a hugely watered down version of the original epic.
Zoe was cute in Death Proof. Acting wise I cant say she blew me away, but it was a little exploitation film. It wasnt supposed to be some serious thing.
Im thinking of Inglorious Bastards as a fun war film satire. If you stop looking at it as some serious ass puckered downer like Saving Private Ryan, you can see why QTs casting these people.
The script is exactly the way he described it in that Empire interview but with more humor… He just didn’t tell you everything about the script in the interview
It’s quite visible that he lost a lot of the Bastards’ story. The whole:
“A band of US soldiers facing death by firing squad for their misdeeds are given a chance to save themselves - by heading into the perilous no-man’s lands of Nazi-occupied France on a suicide mission for the Allies”
???
Didn’t he say it was going to be in the spirit of the Dirty Dozen and Inglorious Bastards not a remake
[quote=“Kinick”]
It’s quite visible that he lost a lot of the Bastards’ story. The whole:
"A band of US soldiers facing death by firing squad for their misdeeds are given a chance to save themselves - by heading into the perilous no-man’s lands of Nazi-occupied France on a suicide mission for the Allies [/quote]
I dont remember him ever actually saying that.
He has always said that it was inspired by The Dirty Dozen. Nothing else.
[quote=“PutneySwope”]
I dont remember him ever actually saying that.
He has always said that it was inspired by The Dirty Dozen. Nothing else.
[/quote]
Yeah, he said it here in this AICN interview:
“The story line isn’t anything like any of those, not much. It’s a bunch of guys on a mission, but not like a handpicked… a bunch of guys thrown into this situation and having to deal with it.
No, no. No, like the Dirty Dozen. They’re on their way to be executed, all right and they get this reprieve kind of situation. Stuff like that. Not your normal hero types that are thrown into a big deal in World War II”
Whatever. I guess he changed the storyline a bit since that interview.
Does it really matter at this point? Are you gonna not see it because the storyline isnt an exact copy of The Dirty Dozen? So what? The guys are still on a mission but they arent criminals who are getting executed. Wow.
Ive already seen a bunch of those kinds of movies. Id like to see something a little different anyways.
I dont goto QT movies to see the same exact thing Ive already seen.
I wanted to see that, WITH all the craziness and classicness (90’s) of QT… just because it’s a ‘men on a mission’ movie doesn’t mean it’s going to be like the hundreds of others we already have and I’m damn sure you know it wouldn’t be as routine.
I’ll see it even if it’s the biggest disaster of anyone’s career. Doesn’t mean I don’t want it to be one the best experiences of seeing a QT movie… with more and more of this news that seems less and less likely. Hence, why I’m saying, “Where is the stuff that sounded like it would kickass and be classic QT to rival Pulp Fiction and Res Dogs with all the craziness of a WWII setting?”
It also doesnt help that you read the script right away and totally ruined the experience of just seeing it fresh. Now since its not exactly what you expected or wanted youre going to complain for the next 8 months. Great for us!
Noone in here can answer your questions or help your dissapointments. We’re just fans waiting for the movie to come out. We cant do anything about who he casts and what the story is about.
QT never said that every film he makes is going to be Pulp Fiction. Hes just an artist doing what he wants to do. So someday you might lose your interest in his work and move on. Its possible. You may see IB and be surprised at all the negatives you thought about and love the movie.
Of course it’s possible I’l lose interest, I already said this was his last chance after how I was disappointed with DP. I’ll complain (like many others the past two days) or state my opinion if I don’t like a bit of news. Do you expect no-one to complain after hearing the names Eli Roth and Simon Pegg? People are wondering if he’s truely lost it it! If the going’s good I’ll not be complaining…
That’s what I’m hoping for and I’m holding out to see the trailer.
Nothing you say is going to make me stop voicing my opnion, so if you don’t like it best not retort to it. Just ignore it and I’ll have no problem, coz I’m not out to bash anyone else’s. If someone likes something that I don’t I’m not going to complain to them about how they should see things differently…
Kinick: Bitch on!
Seb: Good point!
[quote=“PutneySwope”]
Kinick: Bitch on!
[/quote]
Stop being a miserable prick, will you!
You called me on QT not saying that sypnosis. I showed it to you, then you rant.
Then we have a discussion on what we want to see, but that wont do, you have to end with sly remarks?
You’re while for starting arguments, hi. Sort it out!
Im not really. But dude if youre going to complain for the next 12 months. Its gonna be a problem for alot of people. Noone wants to listen to that constantly. I mean, okay youre not digging the casting or the script. Are you gonna torture us over and over? It sucks.
Ill be happy when you say you actually LIKE something about this movie. It will be a break from the negativity you constantly spew. And you do.
[quote=“PutneySwope”]
Im not really. But dude if youre going to complain for the next 12 months. Its gonna be a problem for alot of people. Noone wants to listen to that constantly. I mean, okay youre not digging the casting or the script. Are you gonna torture us over and over? It sucks.
[/quote]
C’moooon. There’s more than not digging this latest casting news that are definitely voicing their opinion as strong as I have in the past. I haven’t seen you attack them with snide remarks when you don’t agree with them (and how is that torture - it’s my opinion, it’s not going to alter your experience of seeing the movie next year). That’s swinish behaviour dude!