criterionforum.org

furbicide wrote: Mon Jul 22, 2019 3:35 am Where do you go if you want spoilers? I'm disturbed by how many people on the review sites are honouring Tarantino's requests not to reveal what happens in the last 20 minutes. God gave us spoiler tags for a reason.

I'm actually very impressed by that very thing. Of course I wont post any spoilers as I've managed to keep away from most of them but I wanted to air some frustration that I inadvertently stumbled upon two spoilers regarding a certain couple of character reveals and actor appearances (thankfully no actual plot spoilers) that came from other cast members (spoken in interview form). One of those people was DiCaprio himself.

swo17 wrote: Mon Jul 22, 2019 3:44 am

furbicide wrote: Mon Jul 22, 2019 3:35 am Where do you go if you want spoilers?

The movie theater?

Waiting for mfunk to chime in

Hi!

I saw the movie tonight and it's an instant classic: Tarantino's least stagey, least plot driven, and (perhaps) least violent film; but also a beautiful little explanation to those who have disliked his last three films for their revisionist histories of why it compels him so much to use movies to put things back in their right place. Has a lot in common with last year's The House That Jack Built, in that it's going to piss off a whole lot of the midnight movie crowd/Manson obsessives who are there to see their most beloved myths pay off in the consequence-free celluloid cruelty and bloodshed that they've fetishized for so long, and that fact only makes the film that much more powerful and beautiful. Might be his best, and I'm sort of surprised that it won't be his last. The film critic Sean Burns accurately tweeted that it's Tarantino's Roma: It would absolutely be an appropriate final film considering how personal it feels.

Oh, and the title format is confirmed!

Good lord. You know I had a gut feeling it would be his least violent. But I enjoyed that post and I am super happy to hear that (for all the right reasons) comparison.

Oh, that comparison could not have made me happier. I can't wait even more for Saturday.

Oh, and it's probably worth mentioning that it's extremely "problematic" in spots. The thinkpiece machine is going to be fed, and then some

mfunk9786 wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2019 3:15 am Might be his best, and I'm sort of surprised that it won't be his last. It would absolutely be an appropriate final film.

Sounds like he's thinking the same way, stating that if he makes this Star Trek project he intends to direct, that'll be his 10th and final film

Agree with mfunk, saw the film on sunday and my thoughts are identical.

Star Trek may not be his last, the rumor mill is kicking today with him recently meeting with Uma Thurman to do Kill Bill 3 which he seems to be excited about again. And since Star Trek isn't technically his film, it's already a script that he's approved - written by Mark L Smith - that he's promised to punch up even if he doesn't get to make it.

That said, a lot of twists and turns and I wouldn't put it past QT to pull a Jay Z and 'retire' and still make content in the form of Novels, Comics, Theater and TV and then surprise us with new Film material in the coming years.

He considers the first two chapters of Kill Bill to be one film, so making a third chapter would likely just bolt-on and not be seen as another project altogether - at the end of the day, I've learned to take Tarantino's words with a grain of salt, it's clear in this picture especially how much he loves doing this.

mfunk, I have but one question:

In certain tv spots Rick is seen getting served a cocktail in what I assume is Musso & Frank. That cocktail doesn't happen to be a salty dog would it? I assume it's ordered aloud.

Not the slightest clue. Will listen for you on Friday if no one can answer you sooner.

A little additional nugget while I'm thinking about it - Tim Roth is in the credits, with "(cut)" next to his name. No Samuel L. Jackson at all, which is a bummer.

black&huge wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2019 5:04 am mfunk, I have but one question:

In certain tv spots Rick is seen getting served a cocktail in what I assume is Musso & Frank. That cocktail doesn't happen to be a salty dog would it? I assume it's ordered aloud.

I haven't seen it yet, but a number of reviewers mention that Rick's drink of choice is a whiskey sour.

He's seen drinking beer, margaritas, and whiskey sours - and I'm sure there are more. I just don't recall well enough to answer what drink he orders at that bar, if it's even made clear in the scene.

mfunk9786 wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2019 5:09 am A little additional nugget while I'm thinking about it - Tim Roth is in the credits, with "(cut)" next to his name. No Samuel L. Jackson at all, which is a bummer.

Spoiler

Is Jack Nicholson in it at all?

No.

mfunk9786 wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2019 3:15 am Hi!

I saw the movie tonight and it's an instant classic:

Which theater did you visit?

Lest this thread become even more repetitive than your usual Tarantino thread:

bearcuborg wrote: Fri Jul 19, 2019 12:37 am Which theaters? I looked around, but couldn’t find much info from the site, and I don’t think Fandango lets you search by format?

I’m toying with the idea of flying to LA to see it Sunday. It appears seats are available.

mfunk9786 wrote: Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:04 am The Roxy is doing 35mm once per day starting Thursday. The advance screening is on Tuesday at the Philadelphia Film Center, but from everything I can gather, it's already been overbooked.

I meant which theater in PFC, the black box or the main theater...

The janitor's closet, actually

Hitler and Goebbel's opera box

Just an update regarding Chicago showings/35mm v 70mm projections.

The Logan Theater is screening in both 35mm and Digital. Apparently, (some? or all?) of their screening rooms have been updated with new chairs and sound (I haven't watched a movie there since "Lady Bird"). Music Box is still doing the 70mm, which Alamo Drafthouse is also doing. Alamo states only 5 theaters in the country are getting 70mm prints, but as a poster pointed out in this thread, it appears to be a blow-up. Therefore, I decided to watch the film on 35 at the Logan this weekend - they have plenty of showtimes for 35mm or digital.

Would be curious to hear from people who end up watching it on 70mm what they thought.

It is a blow up, the movie was shot in 35 - but it's not as though blowing 35 up to 70 results in a degradation of quality

mfunk9786 wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2019 3:55 am It is a blow up, the movie was shot in 35 - but it's not as though blowing 35 up to 70 results in a degradation of quality

I would think QT probably approved it, so the print is probably a, um, good "blow-up" ?
But in weighing the options, seeing it on what it was shot on seems like the best choice in my eyes.