H8ful Eight

[CrazyChuckCarbo]

My son and I saw this over the weekend at Quail in the 70mm format. The movie had a good plot but it's not for young kids or many women IMO. It is a typical QT movie in that it's extremely violent and graphic. There's a part in the movie that is similar to the ipecac episode from Family Guy except you won't be laughing and there's no tasty slice of pie in the fridge. Has anyone else seen this?

 

[Been Jammin]

Haven't had a chance to see it yet but want to. Do you recommend the 70 mm version or regular format?

 

[CrazyChuckCarbo]

I thought they could have used the wide screen shots more. The first of the movie was shot in the outdoors but 3/4's of the movie was inside of a cantina.

 

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

The indoor scenes take place in a haberdashery. I agree that weren't t many outdoor scenes, which is sort of unusual when QT went to such lengths to get it released in 70 MM.

I thought it was good overall, not great. There were parts of it that were really well done. I know you go into a QT movie expecting a high level of blood and guts. Some of the scenes in this just seemed a little over the top. It didn't offend me or gross me out. I just felt like it didn't really add anything. I felt the same about the last part of Django.

 

[CowboyJD]

See the 70 mm version if you can. 30 minutes of extra story, overture, intermission. The 70 mm is noticeable even in the interior scenes. Wider screen, better focus,etc. Tim Roth talked about having to actually act throughout every scene because he was still seen in every frame when he would be off screen in normal films.

 

[Been Jammin]

Saw it last night in 70 mm. Overall, I liked it, but this was not QT's best work. I would rank it clearly behind RD, PF, IB and DU, and not clearly ahead of his other movies.

IMO, one of the best things about QT is his character dialogue. For example, conversations between Travolta and Jackson in PF...many of those lines are classic and unforgettable. Similarly, Harvey Keitel and Steve Buscemi had some extremely well written dialogue in RD. There are a lot of examples of what I am referring to in all of his movies. In this one, there was a little bit, but very little. There were times that I could tell he was trying to go in that direction, but it just felt forced and fell short of the mark. Part of the problem may have had to do with bad acting. I felt like Kurt Russell was a caricature throughout the movie. Walt Goggins and Samuel L. Jackson had good and bad moments. Madsen is not a good actor, IMO. I thought JJL, Tim Robbins, Dern, and the guy who played "Bob", were great throughout the movie.

One thing that I am confused about....Who are the "Hateful Eight"? Throughout the majority of the film, there were 9 people in the cantina.

1). Kurt Russell
2) Jackson
3) Dern
4) JJL
5). Tim Robbins
6) Madsen
7) "Bob"
8) Goggins
9) "O.B." (the stage-coach driver)

Other characters are in the movie (I am purposely trying to avoid spoilers here) who could be considered "Hateful", but it is a bit ambiguous. My guess is that "O.B." is considered a completely benign character and is not hateful, but I don't think it is completely clear who the "Eight" are (especially because there is 1 more character who should be labeled as "hateful").

I am probably coming across as overly critical. I really did enjoy the movie and will probably watch it again at some point. It was a fun ride for sure. I really liked what was done with the narration coming right out of the intermission. Different, but clever. I also thought the piano scene was really well done. In an above post, MJD mentioned over the top blood and guts. I really didn't think it was that bad. I feel like Django, Inglorious Bastards and Kill Bill were significantly worse, in that regard. I would probably include the ear scene in RD also.

 

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

The Blood and Guts in Inglorious Basterds was MORE than Hateful Eight? You're insane.

 

[Been Jammin]

The Blood and Guts in Inglorious Basterds was MORE than Hateful Eight? You're insane.

Thinking specifically of the baseball bat scene. Maybe not more blood, but more uncomfortable to watch...by far.

 

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

Thinking specifically of the baseball bat scene. Maybe not more blood, but more uncomfortable to watch...by far.

My points above were not about the discomfort of any particular scene, but about the gratuitousness or lack of necessity and borderline silliness of the level of blood and guts at times in this film (and in Django towards the end) .

 

[Been Jammin]

My points above were not about the discomfort of any particular scene, but about the gratuitousness or lack of necessity and borderline silliness of the level of blood and guts at times in this film (and in Django towards the end) .

I understand. In that respect, I would put Django and Kill Bill on a level above Hateful Eight. All in all, I agree that QT goes way over the top, at times, and it detracts from, rather than adding to, his movies.

I much prefer that he go over the top with creatively making the viewer uncomfortable (like the RD ear scene and the IB bat scene). The over the top blood can be a distraction. Pulp Fiction may well be his best work, and it has very little of that.

 

[CrazyChuckCarbo]

I saw a movie trailer or ad for the movie that had the 8 characters pictured and I believe they were the above except for O.B., the stagecoach driver.

 

[osutater]

Anyone know of a theater in OKC or Tulsa that's still showing the 70mm format this weekend? Quail Springs last showing is tomorrow and I can't make it. I think I'm screwed because the Revenant is opening everywhere Friday.

 

[CowboyJD]

Anyone know of a theater in OKC or Tulsa that's still showing the 70mm format this weekend? Quail Springs last showing is tomorrow and I can't make it. I think I'm screwed because the Revenant is opening everywhere Friday.

Not in OKC....I think AMC had the exclusive rights to the 70mm Road Show here.

 

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

None in Tulsa

 

[osutater]

Damnit. I was afraid of that.

 

[Rulz]

QT goes over the top because that's his gig. Not defending him, just pointing it out. He's all into 70s exploitation, whether it be blaxploitation or anything else. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. His gig has lasted longer than M. night Symalongadingdongs bit with the big reveal though. That crap stopped working after Sixth Sense lol.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

I thought it could be a play as easily as a movie.

It's my least favorite of his movies, I think.... his movies have gotten formulaic, if not cliched, specifically the endings. Django, one of the kill bills and this one end with gallons of blood that really don't add much.

Glad to hear I'm not the only one that wasn't overly impressed.

 

[shortbus]

I thought it could be a play as easily as a movie.

It's my least favorite of his movies, I think.... his movies have gotten formulaic, if not cliched, specifically the endings. Django, one of the kill bills and this one end with gallons of blood that really don't add much.

Glad to hear I'm not the only one that wasn't overly impressed.

I agree with sys. Don't tell anyone. I'm going to go cry in the shower.

 

[FMPoke]

Interesting. I saw it last week and thought it was his best since Pulp Fiction. Maybe that's because I grew up on westerns and always like the spaghetti western. Thought it was far less over the top then his recent work and the dialogue was much better. It had a reality to it that Django Unchained, The Kill Bills and certainly Inglorious Bastards did not. I give him major props for just not killing multiple spares in slow motion for once. Although thought the cast was much better then some of his recent work.