Comments on: Review: Quentin Tarantino’s Gleefully Nasty ‘The Hateful Eight’ With Kurt Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Samuel L. Jackson & More

By: Pinchecookie

Pinchecookie — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

*without saying what happened*

By: Dheep'

Dheep' — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

It’s Dem’ Beeples who Go fram BIG word ta’ BIG word ….. always tryin’ ta’ make demselve de Big Man’s, wit dare Unctuous Proclamations
WHo dey tryin’ ta Foool ? Ha ?

By: Xian

Xian — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

Having seen it in 70mm, this is a spot-on review and letter rating.

By: JT

JT — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

The film takes place in Wyoming, not Colorado. And neither state could really be considered the Southwest.

By: YB

YB — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

Big words for the sake of big words.

By: RP

RP — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

Shot in Colorado, my bad. Thanks JT

By: Dheep\'

Dheep\' — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

It\’s Dem\’ Beeples who Go fram BIG word ta\’ BIG word ….. always tryin\’ ta\’ make demselve de Big Man\’s, wit dare Unctuous Proclamations
WHo dey tryin\’ ta Foool ? Ha ?

By: Kevin

Kevin — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

Free of subtext? What the hell are you talking about? Every one of Tarantino\’s movies are rife with subtextual commentary and theme. Hell, the sight of a black man apong the horse tricks of Gene Autry and Roy Rogers after blowing up a slave plantation mansion speaks volumes about America\’s interpretation of the cowboy hero and its history in narrative all by itself. And that\’s about 10 seconds of the movie. Nice try but maybe do a little more homework sir.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

Free of subtext? What movies are you watching? Tarantino\’s movies are rife with subtextual commentary and theme. Even just the image of a black man aping the horse tricks of Gene Autry and Roy Rogers after exploding the mansion of a slave plantation speaks volumes about the history and perception of the American cowboy myth within our cultural narrative history alone. And that\’s about 10 seconds of that movie.

By: JD

JD — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

That notion is a core element to fascism\’s past success, so I wouldn\’t think too hard on it

By: Pinchecookie

Pinchecookie — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

I found this too telling. In my opinion a review shouldn\’t spoil, so I stopped reading. Try telling me if it was good or not and why without saying me what happened next time…

By: Erick Pulido

Erick Pulido — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

Tarantino is, as in his last two films, using history to establish a psychological distance between ourselves and the intolerant racist villains of the past in order to expose just how little we\’ve changed throughout the years. First he did it with the Jewish, then with the African American and now he gives us in that final frame a black man and a white men united in their hatred of woman. I wouldn\’t be surprised, as a Mexican, if his next movie would be about how intolerant people are with immigrants.

By: Dre

Dre — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

People are not pepper in a peppermill. Tar\’s use of grotesque imagery belie a psyche stuck in child mode. Grand guignol is for debased Otto Dix nightmares surfacing in WWI. Shredding the flesh off the past does not illuminate it. It denies it\’s humanity. Timmy Lee Jones knows how to make westerns.

By: jon

jon — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

In the same way that Scorsese\’s best work is his early raw stuff, Tarantino kind of peaked early. Stylized violence is a one-trick pony… for all the beautiful imagery this approach is wearing thin. \’perhaps our collective prejudices and intolerances can be united and overcome by our mutual hostility for someone even more loathsome\’ – give me a fucking break.

By: Curtis

Curtis — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

One film that springs to mind that HATEFUL seems to be indebted to is Key Largo. The arrival at a place wherein the owners are no place to be found and nobody is who they seem.

By: Rangina

Rangina — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

Terrible film. What a disappointment.

By: Tim Kessler

Tim Kessler — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

I saw the 70mm roadshow version at the ArcLight cinema in La Jolla last night and was bitterly disappointed at how the film was continually out of focus, particularly when the characters across the room became blurred to the point where it caused us all to stop and look at each other in disbelief. Whether the fault of the projectionist or not it was a joke and a waste of time on Christmas Eve.
The fault lies directly on the shoulders of Tarantino; He blew it!

By: Chasr

Chasr — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

How many big words can we cram into every sentence to make me sound like a legit critic.

By: DGI

DGI — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

Fourth chapter is definitely the weakest but I definitely wouldn\’t say it derailed the movie. And yes it was indulgent but Tarantino is always indulgent and it kind of felt like he was just playing to his strengths. I
thought it was amazing

By: Illiterates?

Illiterates? — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

How come people have such problems with English here. Did the not go to school? Hardly any big words here.

By: JEF

JEF — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

As good a review as I have seen.

By: Justine

Justine — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:28:27 +0000

Absolutely agree. The flashback sequence was interesting but I definitely feel as though we could have done without the exposition. Feels easy to say, and it was a bit interesting to see the the original innkeepers and staff, but the plotpoints of how they died, who\’s shooting from the cellar, how they took over the inn and convinced the old man to stay quiet could have been dealt with in dialogue. I\’m not squeamish, the ending wasn\’t all that to me, but certainly I would have liked more of a playout. The death of all characters seemed very theatrical.