Hey there. This is an old post but after an hour reading reviews by "professional critics" for this one,I really have to agree with you so much that the movies don´t exist in the same world.Good taste film,you have.
When main criticism at time of the films release was that it jumped on the wannabe-Tarantino train and wanted to be a Tarantino film,I nor felt it or saw it.Since this one was released the year after Pulp Fiction,I understand the complaint,gangsters involved and all...but only chronologically.
The extremely ironic thing here is that not only was this screenplay written before Pulp Fiction...it was written before RESERVOIR DOGS,meaning atleast 1990! (I will post this little detail,I think) The whole wannabe-thing then becomes a point that makes very little sense.If referring to 5 guys doing a job that goes bad....well,that´s not limited to Tarantino,the same year as this one,5 guys got handed a job and then got picked off one by one...The usual suspects.
Although the latter ends on my nr.4 spot and this one nr.15,both are masterpieces.This is just an easier film to understand.And unlike the other two,it´s linear,goes from point A to B.
The depiction of gangsters here is slightly cartoonish and well aware of that,where as in Pulp,Ving Rhames Gangster has to be screwed in the butt to completely get out of the cliche,which might been a bit drastic.
When I said it doesn´t exist in the same universe as Tarantino,I mean that with some extremely bizarre characters with weird names(Francis Chyser being Franchise?Love that) and a whole lingo created only for this film(Give it a name,boat drinks,buckwheats...)and never heard again,TDIDWYD is as original as they come as a final product...it plays with cliches,we´ve seen it but not heard it and this film in the end has a heart unlike the other,albeit it being sentimental.But how often does Gangstermovies get sentimental?Bonuspoint.
Technically,concidering when it was written,one could call Tarantino the unknowing copycat.Reservoir Dogs was great but PF....decent film oozing of "Isn´t this so selfconciously cool and new?" and beyond pretentious.While this one has some pretentions,it combines it with a cool and at times corny and then gory comic book feeling.
I will always prefer the great Andy Garcia(This is his real tour de force performance),Christopher Walken and underrated actors William Forsythe,Steve Buscemi,Gabrielle Anwar,Christopher Lloyd and Treat Williams to Bruce Willis in a very serious role,Ving Rhames,Eric Stoltz,Rosanna Arquette,17 years later,what was impressive work by Jackson,then did we not know was his moviepersona and a performance set on autopilot for years to come.
Walken of course and Travolta is excused,though an Oscarnom for best LEADING actor is beyond retarded.Glorifying heroine was a nice touch of Quentin BTW.
The number of votes for some films from the 90´s are nuts.Two somewhat similar films for instance,from the same year,very fittingly 1995,Rob roy and Braveheart has 17,000 votes compared to 292,000.
This one is maybe to a lesser degree the victim of too few votes,100% a victim of mistenterpretation and misunderstanding the director and writers ambition.6.7 is pretty damn messed up.Fleder was just going for great entertainment.Keep in mind how many young people haven´t seen this one and won´t.
It also doesn´t make completely unecessary,hip jumps in time and mess with the chronology in something I best can refer to as posturing,which it didn´t feel like in Reservoir D,there it was a few jumps and they fit,served a purpose.But I guess we are wrong with the rating and the world is right....be well.
PS:Thor,Captain america and The Island has a higher rating...scary right?But keep in mind all kids who were at the movies,enjoyed it,comes here and gives a film with cool effects a 10 or 9.
reply
share