It's almost Halloween. We all know what that means. Now is the time to watch as many cheesy (a.k.a. B-movie) horror flicks. What an interesting genre. You get so much from so little.
Some of the movies I have watched this Halloween season include: Warlock, Fright Night, Phantasm, and Subspecies.
Subspecies is about a couple of vampire brothers. One is really evil looking and drools constantly. The other is half human and cannot believe his older, nasty looking brother killed their father for what is called a bloodstone.
Interestingly enough, the plot lot isn't bad. The bloodstone is a constant flow of blood from saints (don't ask). This way they didn't have to feed from humans. The setting is awesome, shot within ancient Romanian castles. Yes, they are really in Romania. The older brother gets hooked on the bloodstone like it's crack. And he wants more so he goes out and starts to feed on three visiting, female doctoral students. Naturally.
You will enjoy the silly ending as the demons, created from the older brothers Nosforatu fingertips (again...don't ask), take the head (still alive) of the older brother away. Gee, I wonder what is going to happen next. You guessed it. Subspecies Two. You gotta love it. Right?
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Monday, July 5, 2010
Seen Them All
We finished up all of the Academy Award nominees for 2010 Best Picture. This year they went to a 10 film format. I'm not a fan of this format. It broadens what should be an elite group of films for the year. For me, it says that you only have to hit certain categorical marks to make the top 10. I sincerely hope they go back to five nominees next year.
My rankings:
Who should have won? Inglorious Bastards. This movie had it all. The cinematography, dialogue, story, acting, and directing was all superb. I love this movie. And I'm not just saying that because I am a Tarantino fan.
Who actually won? Hurt Locker. Okay...I will put this one in second place. It did win the Academy Award for Best Picture. I can see why. The acting is tremendous. There are some seriously tense moments, and it portrays reality in the world of war. But for me I felt as though I was watching yet another war film.
Up next is Up In the Air. Clooney is magic. The gal from Twighlight (that's what I call her) did pretty good. I just wasn't sold on the characters. It needed a little more heart.
What's the opposite of down? Up. Simply put this animated, instant classic set the premises with an antogonist in an home on air. The storyline does a fantastic job of making you have an emotional attachment to the lead character. After that it is another animated film with lots of funny moments.
Avatars are pretty cool. Ah, Avatar. I watched this in regular 2D. (I'm sick of 3D crap) This was a really fun ride. But it is almost like the ride got stuck at the top. In other words, it was too long. Speed it up and get to the climax. This was way too hyped up by James Cameron. He just thinks his ideas are the best and thinks everyone else should feel the same way.
Precious. Oh my God! I'm depressed. Thank you for making me watch this, but crap! Great for a one-time watch.
Blind Side. Well, I'm not sure about this one. It was extremely cheesy at times. The touching moments "may" have put this one into the nomination round. I don't know. I don't get why it made it. Don't try and sell it to me. You shouldn't have to do that.
Disctict 9. Wow! Shocked! I started out thinking why is this here amongst the best picture nominees? A sci-fi movie (not Avatar). Come on! Then the movie got really serious, and I was impressed. Thank you, Peter Jackson.
An Education. Just so you know I just sighed really heavily and my wife asked me if I was alright. I sighed because I have to write a review for this. What the heck? This movie just pissed me off. You spend the entire movie yelling at a teenager saying, DON'T SCREW UP YOUR LIFE! Then she doesn't. If that ruined it for you, then good. Don't waste your time. I suppose you could watch it for the acting and if you are in the mood for a period piece set in England. Oh, there's a shocker! A period piece set in England. Enough said.
Serious Man. Seriously? What is wrong with this guy? He is a jew in the midwest. That's your first clue. It doesn't exactly roll of the tongue. The Cohen brothers create another movie where somebody gets crapped on the entire time. Be more creative, bros! I really found nothing positive about this movie other than my life rules compared to this chump.
In summation, go with your gut and watch what looks good to you. Don't let critics ruin it for you.
My rankings:
Who should have won? Inglorious Bastards. This movie had it all. The cinematography, dialogue, story, acting, and directing was all superb. I love this movie. And I'm not just saying that because I am a Tarantino fan.
Who actually won? Hurt Locker. Okay...I will put this one in second place. It did win the Academy Award for Best Picture. I can see why. The acting is tremendous. There are some seriously tense moments, and it portrays reality in the world of war. But for me I felt as though I was watching yet another war film.
Up next is Up In the Air. Clooney is magic. The gal from Twighlight (that's what I call her) did pretty good. I just wasn't sold on the characters. It needed a little more heart.
What's the opposite of down? Up. Simply put this animated, instant classic set the premises with an antogonist in an home on air. The storyline does a fantastic job of making you have an emotional attachment to the lead character. After that it is another animated film with lots of funny moments.
Avatars are pretty cool. Ah, Avatar. I watched this in regular 2D. (I'm sick of 3D crap) This was a really fun ride. But it is almost like the ride got stuck at the top. In other words, it was too long. Speed it up and get to the climax. This was way too hyped up by James Cameron. He just thinks his ideas are the best and thinks everyone else should feel the same way.
Precious. Oh my God! I'm depressed. Thank you for making me watch this, but crap! Great for a one-time watch.
Blind Side. Well, I'm not sure about this one. It was extremely cheesy at times. The touching moments "may" have put this one into the nomination round. I don't know. I don't get why it made it. Don't try and sell it to me. You shouldn't have to do that.
Disctict 9. Wow! Shocked! I started out thinking why is this here amongst the best picture nominees? A sci-fi movie (not Avatar). Come on! Then the movie got really serious, and I was impressed. Thank you, Peter Jackson.
An Education. Just so you know I just sighed really heavily and my wife asked me if I was alright. I sighed because I have to write a review for this. What the heck? This movie just pissed me off. You spend the entire movie yelling at a teenager saying, DON'T SCREW UP YOUR LIFE! Then she doesn't. If that ruined it for you, then good. Don't waste your time. I suppose you could watch it for the acting and if you are in the mood for a period piece set in England. Oh, there's a shocker! A period piece set in England. Enough said.
Serious Man. Seriously? What is wrong with this guy? He is a jew in the midwest. That's your first clue. It doesn't exactly roll of the tongue. The Cohen brothers create another movie where somebody gets crapped on the entire time. Be more creative, bros! I really found nothing positive about this movie other than my life rules compared to this chump.
In summation, go with your gut and watch what looks good to you. Don't let critics ruin it for you.
Friday, March 26, 2010
To Tell You the Truth
The Invention of Lying was not good. That is exactly how it would have been reported in the fictional world created by co-writer, co-director, and star Rick Gervais. It's unfortunate that Ricky would lay such an egg. He is such a tremendous talent in the world of comedic acting.
Forget that I am a Christian and believe in God. The part of the movie where he essentially pokes fun at religion isn't what makes the movie bad (although it adds to it). The dialogue in terms of how people tell you precisely what is on their mind. I mean they don't even hold back. It should be called The Invention of Lying and Tolerating Over-Sharing! Seriously? Do they have to say everything? A simple yes or no question turns into an unwanted reasoning behind each answer. Nobody has thoughts or inner monologue. It all barfs its' way onto the scene in this film.
Yes, Ricky is still funny in this but that is only parts of the movie. I loved all the cameos throughout the movie. Here is the deal. I'm really hoping Ricky can be in a better movie next go around. Hopefully, he doesn't start turning out Will Ferrell performances. And I used to really love Will Ferrell. But he has been tanking with his last films that have come out. Probably the last 4 or 5 have not been good. Here is to hoping Ricky turns things around. He is way too funny and brilliant to keep this cycle of horridness going.
That is pretty much all I have to say. I rarely tell people to flat-out not see a movie. I'm doing it this time. My apologies.
Forget that I am a Christian and believe in God. The part of the movie where he essentially pokes fun at religion isn't what makes the movie bad (although it adds to it). The dialogue in terms of how people tell you precisely what is on their mind. I mean they don't even hold back. It should be called The Invention of Lying and Tolerating Over-Sharing! Seriously? Do they have to say everything? A simple yes or no question turns into an unwanted reasoning behind each answer. Nobody has thoughts or inner monologue. It all barfs its' way onto the scene in this film.
Yes, Ricky is still funny in this but that is only parts of the movie. I loved all the cameos throughout the movie. Here is the deal. I'm really hoping Ricky can be in a better movie next go around. Hopefully, he doesn't start turning out Will Ferrell performances. And I used to really love Will Ferrell. But he has been tanking with his last films that have come out. Probably the last 4 or 5 have not been good. Here is to hoping Ricky turns things around. He is way too funny and brilliant to keep this cycle of horridness going.
That is pretty much all I have to say. I rarely tell people to flat-out not see a movie. I'm doing it this time. My apologies.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Award Winner
When you have a 7 month old baby you don't get out much. Therefore, after seeing how well it did at the Academy Awards, my wife and I put The Hurt Locker on the que. It arrived on a Thursday. We watched it on Saturday. And I am just getting around to reviewing it. Again, for those of you with kids you understand.
http://www.thehurtlocker-movie.com/
I'm not sure if it is because we have been in this war for seven years, but I wasn't that impressed with The Hurt Locker. Don't get me wrong. Jeremy Renner turned in a great performance. It is a far cry from SWAT, but it is definitely a step in the right direction for his career. In addition, this was a great opportunity for Anthony Mackie (Half Nelson) and Brian Geraghty (We Are Marshall). These two have been in numerous roles where their character is either secondary or the film didn't do so great in the box office. Kathryn Bigelow (Academy Award for Best Director, The Hurt Locker, 2010) did a fantastic job with these characters.
The tension is there as there should be with any kind of bomb defusion. One can simulate that same tension between soldiers and the people of Iraq. At times the tension truly exists within their own minds.
Overall, it was a movie worth watching. I would consider watching it again so that I could capture the theme for what it is supposed to be. Unfortunately, I went into this movie thinking about all other war movies I have seen including Jarhead, Black Hawk Down, and Full Metal Jacket. The Hurt Locker is much different from those as it delves into one of the worst military occupations. But these guys do more than that. I would tell you, but I guess you will have to see it for yourself.
Hopefully, those who oppose the war see this film so that they can reaffirm their respect for what our men and women in uniform do to help free others from tyranny. It is an eye opener to life in Iraq for American soldiers. Escaping reality is not an option.
http://www.thehurtlocker-movie.com/
I'm not sure if it is because we have been in this war for seven years, but I wasn't that impressed with The Hurt Locker. Don't get me wrong. Jeremy Renner turned in a great performance. It is a far cry from SWAT, but it is definitely a step in the right direction for his career. In addition, this was a great opportunity for Anthony Mackie (Half Nelson) and Brian Geraghty (We Are Marshall). These two have been in numerous roles where their character is either secondary or the film didn't do so great in the box office. Kathryn Bigelow (Academy Award for Best Director, The Hurt Locker, 2010) did a fantastic job with these characters.
The tension is there as there should be with any kind of bomb defusion. One can simulate that same tension between soldiers and the people of Iraq. At times the tension truly exists within their own minds.
Overall, it was a movie worth watching. I would consider watching it again so that I could capture the theme for what it is supposed to be. Unfortunately, I went into this movie thinking about all other war movies I have seen including Jarhead, Black Hawk Down, and Full Metal Jacket. The Hurt Locker is much different from those as it delves into one of the worst military occupations. But these guys do more than that. I would tell you, but I guess you will have to see it for yourself.
Hopefully, those who oppose the war see this film so that they can reaffirm their respect for what our men and women in uniform do to help free others from tyranny. It is an eye opener to life in Iraq for American soldiers. Escaping reality is not an option.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Western Legend
Are you looking for a good western to watch? Do you even like western movies? Maybe you haven't seen a good one. From the director who brought you A Fist Full of Dollars, The Good, The Bad, The Ugly and Duck You Sucker comes probably the best (if not most immulated) western movie of all time.
Once Upon a Time in the West brings you great screen shots, an amazing soundtrack, and great performances (Henry Fonda and Charles Bronson). If you have seen the Kill Bill movies (Tarantino) then you can see where it gets its' influences. You really can't tell that you are watching a 2.5 hour long movie.
Sergio Leone is an amazing director who does special films. The entire opening scene is amazing. The quiet way the actors go about their business. Then their lives are interupted by the very thing they are waiting for. A train bursts onto the scene in all its' loud, locamotive glory. It is such a fantastic shot under the train as it chugs over the camera.
Some people might want more action in their films. I am one of those who prefers great shots, and a ton of build up. (That doesn't mean I am a huge Stanley Kubrick fan. Barry Lyndon SUCKED!) The clip above is only a part of the opening scene. Just rent this movie and watch it if you haven't already. Enjoy!
Once Upon a Time in the West brings you great screen shots, an amazing soundtrack, and great performances (Henry Fonda and Charles Bronson). If you have seen the Kill Bill movies (Tarantino) then you can see where it gets its' influences. You really can't tell that you are watching a 2.5 hour long movie.
Sergio Leone is an amazing director who does special films. The entire opening scene is amazing. The quiet way the actors go about their business. Then their lives are interupted by the very thing they are waiting for. A train bursts onto the scene in all its' loud, locamotive glory. It is such a fantastic shot under the train as it chugs over the camera.
Some people might want more action in their films. I am one of those who prefers great shots, and a ton of build up. (That doesn't mean I am a huge Stanley Kubrick fan. Barry Lyndon SUCKED!) The clip above is only a part of the opening scene. Just rent this movie and watch it if you haven't already. Enjoy!
Friday, March 5, 2010
Matrix Done
It took me seven years since its' release to finally watch The Matrix Revolutions. Why? You ask. I'm going to blame the delayed viewing on other movie critics. I gave in to their criticisms when I know how much I enjoy sci-fi and post-apocolyptic movies.
The verdict: satisfied. What else would you have me say? It wrapped things up nicely. The Matrix was such an amazing film in 1999. Reloaded was action-packed but left a little to be desired (much like the middle film of the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy). Revolutions was able to wrap things up and complete the series with enough action and mystery to satisfy anyone's sci-fi thirst.
People who do not like The Matrix Revolutions need to realize that sci-fi writers are not exactly savvy when it comes to romantic dialogue. For that matter, the dialogue in the second and third installments of most sci-fi trilogies starts to taper off as though the writers are running out of steam. The original idea and concept are still there, and it's exciting. But the back and forth between love interests either lacks because of the writing or the directors would much rather push through that scene and get to the good stuff. If you think about it so would most true sci-fi fans. With that in mind they (the Wachowski brothers) did the right thing by including the romantic/meaningful dialogue in order to erase any plot holes that may have occurred without it.
The Wachowski brothers were not the first to make this dialogue flub by a long shot. I don't want to throw anyone under the bus here. But it is a widely shared view that George Lucas did the same thing in his latest installments to the Star Wars saga. That pains me to say that since I really love Star Wars and George Lucas. But it's true. Again, let's not overlook the real reason those movies are made. They are science fiction/fantasy movies written for the screen. There are sci-fi movies that do well with dialogue because they were a book first. Enough said.
If you have been living under a rock and have not seen any of The Matrix movies, then I suggest you give it a whirl. You will thoroughly enjoy the first one, make it through the second one, and will feel satisfied with the third and final matrix movie. I would say trust me on this, but you may have different film tastes than I do. To each their own.
The verdict: satisfied. What else would you have me say? It wrapped things up nicely. The Matrix was such an amazing film in 1999. Reloaded was action-packed but left a little to be desired (much like the middle film of the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy). Revolutions was able to wrap things up and complete the series with enough action and mystery to satisfy anyone's sci-fi thirst.
People who do not like The Matrix Revolutions need to realize that sci-fi writers are not exactly savvy when it comes to romantic dialogue. For that matter, the dialogue in the second and third installments of most sci-fi trilogies starts to taper off as though the writers are running out of steam. The original idea and concept are still there, and it's exciting. But the back and forth between love interests either lacks because of the writing or the directors would much rather push through that scene and get to the good stuff. If you think about it so would most true sci-fi fans. With that in mind they (the Wachowski brothers) did the right thing by including the romantic/meaningful dialogue in order to erase any plot holes that may have occurred without it.
The Wachowski brothers were not the first to make this dialogue flub by a long shot. I don't want to throw anyone under the bus here. But it is a widely shared view that George Lucas did the same thing in his latest installments to the Star Wars saga. That pains me to say that since I really love Star Wars and George Lucas. But it's true. Again, let's not overlook the real reason those movies are made. They are science fiction/fantasy movies written for the screen. There are sci-fi movies that do well with dialogue because they were a book first. Enough said.
If you have been living under a rock and have not seen any of The Matrix movies, then I suggest you give it a whirl. You will thoroughly enjoy the first one, make it through the second one, and will feel satisfied with the third and final matrix movie. I would say trust me on this, but you may have different film tastes than I do. To each their own.
Remakes In Comparison
They don't make remakes like they used to. Thank God! The remakes we get now are done so after years of its' original being in existance. This wasn't the case twenty years ago.
Recently, I watched Point of No Return with Bridget Fonda. I had seen it before, but it was long time ago. This movie came out in 1993. It is a remake of La Femme Nikita, the French original. The original came out in 1990. So director John Badham (Bird on a Wire, Another Stakeout) waited 3 years to release his remake.
Let me interject with this: a remake should be based on the original but with your own inspiration and creativity put into it. Point of No Return was a carbon copy of La Femme Nikita. I guess Hollywood film makers in the early 90s had the brass to think they could do better than a foreign film. Guess what? They were way off.
Flag on the play! Improper use of film and acting talent.
Honestly, it is a spot-on copy of the original. There are differences. I will give you that much. The major difference is the original is so much better. The acting, the way it is filmed (gritty, dark) all better than the American version. Yeah, I said it. I'm not going to refer to the remake as a "Hollywood" version when someone misses the mark like that.
Here is an example of a remake of an original that stuck to the storyline, but took it's own path: The Amityville Horror. Well done. A) They waited 26 years and B) It was different. As it should be. Twenty-six years had gone by. Therefore, the original can stand on its' own because it came out in 1979. Hello! It should have a different look in 2005.
I'm glad 20 years have passed since Hollywood's days of making carbon copies of foreign films. Now, if a Hollywood version comes out (i.e. The Ring) it looks a little different. Foreign films have improved with time and some are more worth watching than any film released in the U.S.
All of that being said, I recommend La Femme Nikita. That's it. Stick with the original.
Recently, I watched Point of No Return with Bridget Fonda. I had seen it before, but it was long time ago. This movie came out in 1993. It is a remake of La Femme Nikita, the French original. The original came out in 1990. So director John Badham (Bird on a Wire, Another Stakeout) waited 3 years to release his remake.
Let me interject with this: a remake should be based on the original but with your own inspiration and creativity put into it. Point of No Return was a carbon copy of La Femme Nikita. I guess Hollywood film makers in the early 90s had the brass to think they could do better than a foreign film. Guess what? They were way off.
Flag on the play! Improper use of film and acting talent.
Honestly, it is a spot-on copy of the original. There are differences. I will give you that much. The major difference is the original is so much better. The acting, the way it is filmed (gritty, dark) all better than the American version. Yeah, I said it. I'm not going to refer to the remake as a "Hollywood" version when someone misses the mark like that.
Here is an example of a remake of an original that stuck to the storyline, but took it's own path: The Amityville Horror. Well done. A) They waited 26 years and B) It was different. As it should be. Twenty-six years had gone by. Therefore, the original can stand on its' own because it came out in 1979. Hello! It should have a different look in 2005.
I'm glad 20 years have passed since Hollywood's days of making carbon copies of foreign films. Now, if a Hollywood version comes out (i.e. The Ring) it looks a little different. Foreign films have improved with time and some are more worth watching than any film released in the U.S.
All of that being said, I recommend La Femme Nikita. That's it. Stick with the original.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Tarantino's Second Best
Defining a genre will always be a shade more difficult if you are including a Quentin Tarantino movie. One could categorize True Romance under crime or romance. Is there such a thing as a romantic crime drama? Probably not. However, you may have to consider molding different silos together when you are organizing your favorites in comparison to those of the real movie critics.
Personally, I own all but three of Tarantino's movies. The most recent purchase was Inglourious Basterds. It's not a WWII film. Then again, it's not completely a Nazi film. I would consider it a revenge flick. Who doesn't love a great revenge flick (minus the really disturbing ones...Old Boy...don't get me started). If you are thinking of a Tarantino movie tagged with the title of a revenge flick, then you would immediately think of violence.
Quite surprisingly this film wasn't as violent as you would think it was. Instead you are given an amazing dialogue piece peppered with violent revenge. The dialogue in this film is simply magnificent. You hardly even know how long a scene is going on until it is over. Along with the dialogue you are treated to amazing performances that effortlessly flow in German, French, English, and yes a little bit of Italian with a capitol I.
People tend to attach Brad Pitt to the latest Tarantino masterpiece. Might I bring your attention to the masterful performance by Christoph Waltz? Before this movie I had never heard of nor seen any of Waltz's performances before now. Is that saying I don't get out much? Or is that saying I don't care about Austrian-born actors? No! Absolutely not! The fact of the matter is I wish I had known about this talented, versatile actor. Leave it to Tarantino to find the actors he wants and gets. Not too many actors would consider turning down a Tarantino film.
Tarantino's ability to piece together a fantastic, international cast was a feat in and of itself. Then he takes the talent and molds it into his vision. How does he do it? Quentin would tell you it's because he "loves making movies!" That being said Brad Pitt does put on a fantastic (surprisingly physical) performance. The physicality of his character makes you instantly think of a thumb-in-belt loop kind of guy. Well done by the Missouri-born actor.
The most recent installment of Tarantino film fun should be considered his second best film. I still feel as though Pulp Fiction is Tarantino's best film he has made so far. It will be extremely tough to beat such a unique look at the life of crime. Inglourious Basterds comes in second. From that point it depends on what you are looking for in a film. If you want action you turn to Kill Bill Vol. 1. Let's say you are more of a dialogue person. Then you will look at True Romance or Kill Bill Vol. 2. Another great crime film is Reservoir Dogs.
To this day I had thought the ultimate scene for extended dialogue in a Tarantino film or any film for that matter occured in True Romance. Can you recall the scene I am referring to? It's not between Gary Oldman's pimp and Christian Slater's love struck hero. The best scene of dialogue happens in a cramped trailer park home between screen legends Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper. What a powerful cinematic gem! Words cannot describe how I feel about that scene. I wrote a communication research paper based on that scene during my graduate school days. Loved it!
There will come a day when people try to immitate what Tarantino is trying to do with history. Some have tried but haven't come close. To those who succeed I suggest you quit while you're behind. Tarantino is in a league of his own. Do your own thing and leave the master to his work.
Personally, I own all but three of Tarantino's movies. The most recent purchase was Inglourious Basterds. It's not a WWII film. Then again, it's not completely a Nazi film. I would consider it a revenge flick. Who doesn't love a great revenge flick (minus the really disturbing ones...Old Boy...don't get me started). If you are thinking of a Tarantino movie tagged with the title of a revenge flick, then you would immediately think of violence.
Quite surprisingly this film wasn't as violent as you would think it was. Instead you are given an amazing dialogue piece peppered with violent revenge. The dialogue in this film is simply magnificent. You hardly even know how long a scene is going on until it is over. Along with the dialogue you are treated to amazing performances that effortlessly flow in German, French, English, and yes a little bit of Italian with a capitol I.
People tend to attach Brad Pitt to the latest Tarantino masterpiece. Might I bring your attention to the masterful performance by Christoph Waltz? Before this movie I had never heard of nor seen any of Waltz's performances before now. Is that saying I don't get out much? Or is that saying I don't care about Austrian-born actors? No! Absolutely not! The fact of the matter is I wish I had known about this talented, versatile actor. Leave it to Tarantino to find the actors he wants and gets. Not too many actors would consider turning down a Tarantino film.
Tarantino's ability to piece together a fantastic, international cast was a feat in and of itself. Then he takes the talent and molds it into his vision. How does he do it? Quentin would tell you it's because he "loves making movies!" That being said Brad Pitt does put on a fantastic (surprisingly physical) performance. The physicality of his character makes you instantly think of a thumb-in-belt loop kind of guy. Well done by the Missouri-born actor.
The most recent installment of Tarantino film fun should be considered his second best film. I still feel as though Pulp Fiction is Tarantino's best film he has made so far. It will be extremely tough to beat such a unique look at the life of crime. Inglourious Basterds comes in second. From that point it depends on what you are looking for in a film. If you want action you turn to Kill Bill Vol. 1. Let's say you are more of a dialogue person. Then you will look at True Romance or Kill Bill Vol. 2. Another great crime film is Reservoir Dogs.
To this day I had thought the ultimate scene for extended dialogue in a Tarantino film or any film for that matter occured in True Romance. Can you recall the scene I am referring to? It's not between Gary Oldman's pimp and Christian Slater's love struck hero. The best scene of dialogue happens in a cramped trailer park home between screen legends Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper. What a powerful cinematic gem! Words cannot describe how I feel about that scene. I wrote a communication research paper based on that scene during my graduate school days. Loved it!
There will come a day when people try to immitate what Tarantino is trying to do with history. Some have tried but haven't come close. To those who succeed I suggest you quit while you're behind. Tarantino is in a league of his own. Do your own thing and leave the master to his work.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
