The Hateful Eight

Over the last twenty years or so, Quentin Tarantino has been a popular name to numerous moviegoers. Of course, the violent aspect of his films (as well as certain choices of word uses) tend to bring controversy. Though sometimes it's because of said controversy that makes it easier to discuss his films.

His latest work The Hateful Eight isn't immune to controversy either but again it helps with discussing it. Yes, there's gratuitous bloodshed. Yes, there's outdated language that your elders might've used. But there's a certain style to all of it.

There's an ambiance to The Hateful Eight that's reminiscent of some of Sergio Leone's films, right down to the score by Ennio Morricone. But there's an element more reminiscent of Sam Peckinpah's The Wild Bunch. (Doesn't take a genius to figure out what that element is.)

Tarantino recruits a number of actors he's worked with before and a few he hasn't. All of them pull their weight with Tarantino's sometimes overindulgent script, especially Jennifer Jason Leigh and Walter Goggins. (Also Tim Roth is a riot during his early scenes.)

The Hateful Eight isn't Tarantino's best film but it isn't his worst either. There are several moments where it feels like as he's getting off on the gruesome violence. (And that's saying a lot considering his other films.) If it was just a touch shorter, maybe it might be held in better regard.

My Rating: ****

Django Unchained

There's some sort of demented genius in the form of Quentin Tarantino. Sure, he depicts violence that rivals Peckinpah and Scorsese (and there's the whole foot fetish thing), but his films are clever, especially when compared to other filmmakers who try to do the same.

His new film Django Unchained, much like Inglourious Basterds, is willing to re-write history. In this case, it's a western. (Or a "southern", as Tarantino calls it.) Tarantino, no stranger to controversy, depicts the horrible side of slavery. (Seems like a strange film to release not long after Lincoln.)

Knowing Tarantino, it comes as no surprise that the expected bloodshed is on full display. But knowing the subject matter, said blood being spilled is somewhat justified. After all, there are many accounts of owners abusing their slaves to a severe degree. (That time period is definitely one of the darkest times in the history of humanity.)

And the actors Tarantino got for this film give their all. Jamie Foxx shows a badass side that I don't think he had shown before. Christoph Waltz, the scene stealer of Inglourious Basterds, also very much holds his own here. (I suspect another collaboration between him and Tarantino is imminent.) And where to begin with Leonardo DiCaprio (who initially seems like an odd choice for a Tarantino film)? Well, for starters, he needs to play evil more often. (Wonder if he'll get that elusive Oscar for this?) Oh, and the various cameos were awesome.

Like the other Tarantino films I saw, Django Unchained was straight up awesome. It may be more violent than his earlier work (I was looking away a few times), but it has even more (albeit dark) humor than said films. ("Did anyone bring any extra bags?") I certainly had fun with it. I'm sure you will too.

My Rating: *****

Reservoir Dogs

Quentin Tarantino has definitely made a name for himself in the last twenty years. Once a video store clerk, now an Academy Award winner.

Oh, to imagine the reaction back in 1992 when his directing debut Reservoir Dogs was released. Now we're pretty much used to the gore and profanity in his work, but Lord knows what everyone thought of his vision when he first showed up. (Hell, people probably didn't feel this way since Peckinpah.)

Naturally the response was a mix between amazement and shock. Amazement because not many filmmakers prior to Tarantino could effortlessly blend sporadic manner of speaking with violence, shock because of, well, basically the same things. What? The guy's a pioneer.

Sure, Tarantino "borrowed" some of the main ideas from the likes of The Taking of Pelham One Two Three and The Killing, but you've got to admire those allusions. Some would call them ripoffs; I call them homages, better yet tributes.

Reservoir Dogs might grow on me more if I watch it a few more times, but it did stick on the first viewing. (That ear slicing scene is the stuff of nightmares, man.) Hey, just watching this makes it clear how he made it big. Seriously.

My Rating: *****

Jackie Brown

There are certain people I watch in moderation. One of them is Quentin Tarantino. His movies may be well-scripted, but damn, they're bloody. (And sweary.) That doesn't mean I don't like his movies however.

I think the reason for why I like Jackie Brown more is because it's more under control. I say that because it's based on a book by Elmore Leonard. It still has that Tarantino attitude within the dialogue. (Believe me, it's quite easy to pick up on.)

Tarantino is noted for restarting the careers of once-big names and in Jackie Brown, he does that for Pam Grier and Robert Forster. Both are at their A-game in this. I personally love the look on Forster's face when he first sees Grier. (On an ironic note, Jackie Brown co-stars Bridget Fonda and Michael Keaton, two actors Hollywood has lost interest in.)

To some, Jackie Brown feels out of place among Tarantino's work because, as I stated earlier, it's more under control than Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs. Here's a tip: don't believe what they say. Jackie Brown is just as good as Tarantino's other work. If don't believe me, watch it for yourself.

My Rating: *****

Inglourious Basterds

I've been a little iffy when it came to Quentin Tarantino. Blood-soaked scripts and foot fetishes aside, I think he's a good director. It's just I need to watch his movies in moderation.

I love how the trailers showed that Inglourious Basterds was going to be all about Brad Pitt. In reality, however, it's an ensemble piece. Each actor plays their role excellently. I personally like Christoph Waltz's work, where one review said this: "As Colonel Hans Landa, he runs the gamut of cinematic Nazi-ness, from the cold menace of Ralph Fiennes in Schindler's List to the high camp of Dick Shawn in The Producers."

Back to Tarantino for a moment. Again, I think he's a good director. However, I'm not entirely won over by him. Then again, I've only seen two of his movies. Maybe once I see a few more of his movies my opinion will change.

Man, Inglourious Basterds is one crazy movie. I mean, what do you expect if the title is purposely misspelled? It's a well-acted action movie, which, let's face it, is a rarity by today's standards.

My Rating: *****

Pulp Fiction

When the 1960's rolled around, a new genre was created: the neo-noir. It's similar to film noir, but the themes are a little more updated.

Now one of the more popular examples of this genre is Quentin Tarantino's Pulp Fiction. Being a "Tarantino virgin" (I'll admit it), all I really knew about his stuff was that they were not for, um, innocent souls, so to speak.

Pulp Fiction follows hit men Vincent Vega (John Travolta) and Jules Winnfield (Samuel L. Jackson), boxer Butch Coolidge (Bruce Willis) and gangster wife Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman). They all have different lives, so how are they all connected? Simple: Marsellus Wallace (Ving Rhames).

The highlight of Pulp Fiction is clearly Tarantino's writing, which rightfully earned an Oscar. Some of the dialogue gets up there with Hammett and Chandler for noirish feel and memorability. Some is typical Tarantino (f-bombs galore, anyone?), but if it wasn't for the dialogue the movie would been crap.

Now I know that everyone has Pulp Fiction wedged somewhere in their top 100, but probably not for me. I mean, I liked it very much but I didn't love it like everyone else (a re-watch is in my future as some of you may say). Still, it's awesome nonetheless.

My Rating: *****