Tarantino in N-word controversy

[Shaggin Wagon]

The language was the least disturbing thing about this movie. There were a few scenes that were chilling. I have never seen so many speechless people after a movie but I don't get out much. Very good movie. Tarantino is a master story teller and only makes movies that he would appreciate. Christopher Waltz was amazing again.

Spike Lee is entitled to his opinion. But the fact that Jamie Foxx and Samuel L Jackson were in it and John Legend allowed his music to be used, means some people of that race felt this is a story that should be allowed to be told.

[Joborule]

Watched the movie (which is good) and really don't see the great use of the word being out of place or overdone at all.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by moon

I found Malcolm X too long and fairly boring overall.

Do the Right Thing was just flat out boring and poorly written.

I understand that I am not the target demographic for Spike Lee movies but I guess my opinion doesn't matter because I don't agree with someone on something so definitive as movie likes and dislikes.

Its good to know that they have perfected that scientific formula to determine which movies every person had to like.

Check out The 25th Hour or Inside Man. I thought both were really good Spike Lee films.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by moon

I found Malcolm X too long and fairly boring overall.

Do the Right Thing was just flat out boring and poorly written.

I understand that I am not the target demographic for Spike Lee movies but I guess my opinion doesn't matter because I don't agree with someone on something so definitive as movie likes and dislikes.

Its good to know that they have perfected that scientific formula to determine which movies every person had to like.

Poorly written yet nominated for best picture and one of AFI's top 100 films of all time. Hilarious. Oh and this "Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen Spike Lee" I am not one to think the Oscars are end all be all by any means, but they don't nominate poorly written films for best screenplay.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Check out The 25th Hour or Inside Man. I thought both were really good Spike Lee films.

I did like inside man forgot that was him.

25th Hour was decent but did drag on for me.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

That's just Spike Lee being Spike Lee. Racial causes and racial-issue focused film making is what he's all about.

Morgan Freeman famously said: "So how do we end racism? Stop talking about it." ie: - if you want to end racism, stop making everything about race.

Spike Lee sees it the other way around and takes it to the other extreme.

Morgan Freeman also famously called the Tea Party Racist. So maybe he is just an hypocritical asshat?

[moon]

Originally Posted by FlamingLonghorn

Poorly written yet nominated for best picture and one of AFI's top 100 films of all time. Hilarious. Oh and this "Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen Spike Lee" I am not one to think the Oscars are end all be all by any means, but they don't nominate poorly written films for best screenplay.

Have taken a long enough look to see if they do or don't nominate poorly written films but since I don't have a vote for the Oscars not sure why them nominating it has anything to do with me thinking it was poorly written or not or whether I enjoyed it or not. Unless they changed the rules when I wasn't looking whether or not I thought it was good was not a criteria for them to base their decisions on.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by FlamingLonghorn

Poorly written yet nominated for best picture and one of AFI's top 100 films of all time. Hilarious. Oh and this "Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen Spike Lee" I am not one to think the Oscars are end all be all by any means, but they don't nominate poorly written films for best screenplay.

Gladiator won best picture and O Brother Where Art Thou? wasn't even nominated. The Academy Awards, like all televised awards shows, are an unfunny circlejerk.

Also, for every good Spike Lee film there is 1 mediocre one and 1 terrible one. On top of that, he's remaking Oldboy for crap sakes. Why the hell would a movie that is virtually perfect and only 10 years old need to be remade?

He's a hack.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Gladiator won best picture and O Brother Where Art Thou? wasn't even nominated. The Academy Awards, like all televised awards shows, are an unfunny circlejerk.

Also, for every good Spike Lee film there is 1 mediocre one and 1 terrible one. On top of that, he's remaking Oldboy for crap sakes. Why the hell would a movie that is virtually perfect and only 10 years old need to be remade?

He's a hack.

I could say the same about Tarantino. He has 3 good films. His fans just think he poops gold. Also Spike Lee is making a movie based on the Old Boy manga comic. It is not a remake of the first film. That would be like calling Dredd a remake of Stallones Judge Dredd. My guess is you didn't even know the comic existed. Also Spielberg also tried to do this film but couldn't come to an agreement with the license holder. I guess he's a hack too?

Just to add Django Unchained is a remake of a movie called Django, which also just got remade 5 years ago by Takashi Miike. Pretty much every one of his movies is a "tribute" to other films. Does that make him a hack too?

[Regulator75]

Originally Posted by FlamingLonghorn

He has 3 good films.

I disagree.

Reservoir Dogs
Pulp Fiction
Jackie Brown
Kill Bill 1/2
Natural Born Killers (Written by)
True Romance (Written by)

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Regulator75

I disagree.

Reservoir Dogs
Pulp Fiction
Jackie Brown
Kill Bill 1/2
Natural Born Killers (Written by)
True Romance (Written by)

I didn't like Kill Bill vol. 1 so I never saw 2. I heard 2 was better than 1 so I might need to give it a chance. I forgot about Natural Born Killers. Jackie Brown and Pulp Fiction were very meh to me. Tarantino is very much a one trick pony. He does that trick well, but all his movies are pretty much the same thing.

His insistence on putting himself in every movie is also ridiculous as he is a very very very bad actor.

[JD]

Originally Posted by FlamingLonghorn

His insistence on putting himself in every movie is also ridiculous as he is a very very very bad actor.

Proving you don't get Tarantino's film-making. His appearances are all very tongue-in-cheek. But that's fine if you don't get it, his movies are definitely not for everyone. Pulp Fiction was "meh"? haha, okay then.

I would add Inglourious Basterds to that list of good Tarantino flicks.

[HPLovecraft]

Can not stand Tarantino's self-masturbation films.

I will probably end up seeing Django, though, at some point.

[afc wimbledon]

Ironically I put both Lee and Tarantino in a similer catagory, both have made brilliant movies, Pulp Fiction and Do The Right Thing and Jungle Fever would all be in my all time top 25 or so, neither have, in my opinion really gone on to equal those movies.

Maybe it is Samual Jacksons fault, he was in all three

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

Can not stand Tarantino's self-masturbation films.

I will probably end up seeing Django, though, at some point.

Doubt it will change your mind them, django for me proved Tarentino doesn't rearrly understand slavery, both lead black characters were treated by Tarentino as acting as equals of the whites, it showed an absoloute misunderstanding of the period.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by JD

But that's fine if you don't get it, his movies are definitely not for everyone.

Ah, the condescending "if you don't like it you clearly didn't understand it" argument. Always fun.

[moon]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

Ah, the condescending "if you don't like it you clearly didn't understand it" argument. Always fun.

To be fair to JD he is just repeating the argument that Flaminglonghorn used earlier in the thread himself.

[Magnum PEI]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Doubt it will change your mind them, django for me proved Tarentino doesn't rearrly understand slavery, both lead black characters were treated by Tarentino as acting as equals of the whites, it showed an absoloute misunderstanding of the period.

Samuel L. jackson plays a house slave so he would have had a bit more freedom than the other slaves. He had a close relationship with Candie, but it definitely wasn't an equal one. It was quite clear that he was supposed to represent an 'Uncle Tom'.
Django was really the only black character that acts as an equal. Though he is the only one outside the slave system.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by JD

Proving you don't get Tarantino's film-making. His appearances are all very tongue-in-cheek. But that's fine if you don't get it, his movies are definitely not for everyone. Pulp Fiction was "meh"? haha, okay then.

I would add Inglourious Basterds to that list of good Tarantino flicks.

I don't get his film-making? Don't flatter him. His films aren't hard to get. It's violent schlock with good dialogue. It's tongue in cheek when Marvel puts Stan Lee into their films, but he is a legend and it's a sign of respect. Tarantino has starred in larger roles in some of his films. He loves himself.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by moon

To be fair to JD he is just repeating the argument that Flaminglonghorn used earlier in the thread himself.

Whoops. My apologies. Missed that.