The Hateful Eight Review

I thought that after Reservoir Dogs, Kill Bill 1 and Pulp Fiction this is his next best movie.

Its got to be hard to make a film that you know alot of your fans have already read the script for.

The only criticism i will ever have of Quentin Tarantino is that he massively overuses Samuel L Jackson, sure he was good in Pulp Fiction but he really cant deliver the kind of acting master class associated with the actors that QT chooses to revive the careers of.
 

rhino2k

Distinguished Member
After seeing Bone Tomahawk I have been even more keen to see this film, Russel was fantastic in it!

I had high hopes for this being one of the best films this year, But it sounds like I might be disappointed!

Thanks for the review Cas.
 
This is one of those movies that I have a feeling I know exactly what is going to happen before I see it. .......and I haven't read the script!


3 hours....sounds more a mini tv series
 

golden phoenix

Distinguished Member
thanks for the review Cas, i loved django unchained, and i thought tarantino was going to build on that...was going to see this, but think i'll change it with a repeat viewing of star wars: force awakens instead.
 

bandyka

Well-known Member
I've heard from a bunch of peeps who loved it.
 

Casimir Harlow

Blu-ray Reviewer
I've heard from a bunch of peeps who didn't love it.
 

Ripsnorter

Well-known Member
I'm one of the peeps who didn't love it and, more tellingly, it was an industry screening and afterwards I discovered I had been surrounded by a very large bunch or other peeps who didn't love it either. There is much about Tarantino that can be admired, but should you watch the Japanese revenger Lady Snowblood you'll see just how much he less borrows and lifts entirely wholesale. For all its beautiful photography, The Hateful 8 is, essentially, Agatha Christie transposed and with more violence than she could have ever come up with. In fact, and I happen to love horror films and contextually important violence, even I was repelled by the level of unnecessary misogyny and, when it comes to it, the sheer amount of extreme and gratuitous violence, and the way it is portrayed; close ups, camera lingering etc. Don't be fooled by any of the man's self-publicising either, there is no message here, no anti-racisim stance (Where does his free pass to use the N-word at every opportunity come from?). If anything, it is about time Tarantino was held up to account.
 

JojoPetals2

Active Member
I thought it was his 4th best. After Reservoir Dogs, True Romance and Pulp Fiction. It was to long by about 20 minutes and his interracial cuckold fetish is distracting. The intermission, narration and flashbacks were also unnecessary and the blood and guts could have be reduced. He can still write some compelling dialogue and create believable tension.
 

norliss

Well-known Member
I thought it was his 4th best. After Reservoir Dogs, True Romance and Pulp Fiction. It was to long by about 20 minutes and his interracial cuckold fetish is distracting. The intermission, narration and flashbacks were also unnecessary and the blood and guts could have be reduced. He can still write some compelling dialogue and create believable tension.
Although he wrote the screenplay, True Romance was directed by Tony Scott.
 

groucho marx

Well-known Member
i thought it was about 25-30 minutes to long,by no means in his top 6, a bit over indulgent and the ending was just too long in coming,worth a watch but never sit through it a second time at close to 3 hours, the bluray will need lots of extras to sell it
 

Ripsnorter

Well-known Member
Although he wrote the screenplay, True Romance was directed by Tony Scott.
I've read Tarantino's screenplay: it jumps back and forth in time and, typically, goes to some very dark and very nastily violent places, especially when it comes to women. What Tony Scott did was to take the potential and turn it into a superb film. Tarantino was so offended he removed his name from the credits.
 

bandyka

Well-known Member

Casimir Harlow

Blu-ray Reviewer
I'll go back into my box:rotfl:
As you can tell from my rating, I didn't hate it. As you can tell from my review, though, I certainly didn't love it. I thought it was flawed, and it's certainly had a wide breadth of opinions on here. Tarantino has talent, I personally wonder whether he sometimes lets his ego get in the way of delivering a great film these days. At its heart, for me, this was Dogs revamped in a post-success Tarantino world, where he can indulge in all the things he couldn't have done back in the days when he had that breakthrough hit (and didn't, for example, have the massive success of Django behind him). And everything that was great about his minimalist reworking of Lam's City on Fire appears to have only been diluted here. Which, again in my opinion, is a shame.
 

t bone

Well-known Member
The only criticism i will ever have of Quentin Tarantino is that he massively overuses Samuel L Jackson, sure he was good in Pulp Fiction but he really cant deliver the kind of acting master class associated with the actors that QT chooses to revive the careers of.[/QUOTE]

No worst than spielberg overuses of the incredible boring tom hanks.
 

Ripsnorter

Well-known Member
As of this moment its US cume (industry slang for cumulative take at the box office) is only $42 million. Out of this comes the P&A, or marketing and advertising costs, and the distributor and exhibitors will be taking their cut as well. Ancillary, which is Blu-ray, DVD, TV, VOD etc., will bring in more money but the bottom line is that it has failed in what should be its largest and most important territory.
 

Mercurial

Active Member
A7????? More like a 3! Biggest pile of tat Tarantino has ever made. No story to speak of....dialogue boring at best. I mean, what the hell was the scene with Jackson getting his Johnson blown??? Ridiculously excessive violence which added nothing at all.
Tarantino is disappearing up his own backside. Disney must've laughed their socks off when he was monaning about being kicked back to the new year for the release. Star Wars wasn't much better.
Are we seriously to believe that the youth of today like this rubbish? I feel immensely sorry for them. Whatever happens to quality films? Seems they're a thing of the past or becoming very rare.
The pre film trailers? Marvel Marvel and More Marvel!
God help us all.
 

Zarf2007

Active Member
In fact, and I happen to love horror films and contextually important violence, even I was repelled by the level of unnecessary misogyny and, when it comes to it, the sheer amount of extreme and gratuitous violence, and the way it is portrayed; close ups, camera lingering etc. Don't be fooled by any of the man's self-publicising either, there is no message here, no anti-racisim stance (Where does his free pass to use the N-word at every opportunity come from?). If anything, it is about time Tarantino was held up to account.
Oh please....and what would you prefer, it to be released as a 12A equivalent with massive cuts? Isnt that true of most films today, they cut it down to nothing in order to get it through the rating system for a wider audience = greater ticket sales....at least he can't be accused of that.

how did you think people used to act during that era, all cuddles and marshmallows? Personally I have seen far worse in terms of violence in movies and was not phased at anything in this.....bring back mary whitehouse all is forgiven.

For me, it was average and I think the closest he got to his all time great's (Reservoir Dogs & Pulp Fiction) was Django........the narration was just self indulgent and unnecessary also.
 

lucasisking

Distinguished Member
I agree (once again) with Cas and I came away with many similar observations. This is a lot more like Reservoir Dogs than it is Django- the only real difference being that here we don't know who the 'rat' is in advance. It could also be seen as an absurdly strung out version of the awesome basement scene in Inglorious Basterds. A simmering cauldron of mistrust, hatred and tension waiting to explode in blood & guts. I was pleased that he didn't skimp on that front actually (I was wondering just how violent a film about a few people in a log cabin could be. Well he sure showed me.

I also thought Christoph Waltz could have played Roth's role, although the latter was very entertaining. I thought Goggins and Jennifer Jason Leigh stood out alongside Sam Jackson.

Another thing (literally). Why did Ennio Morricone use tracks from his The Thing soundtrack alongside his original score?
 

lucasisking

Distinguished Member
Star Wars wasn't much better.
Are we seriously to believe that the youth of today like this rubbish? I feel immensely sorry for them. Whatever happens to quality films? Seems they're a thing of the past or becoming very rare.
The pre film trailers? Marvel Marvel and More Marvel!
God help us all.
Oh for god's sake. If you aren't seeing decent films that says more about you than it does the film industry. There's plenty on offer. Alternatively, get a different hobby.

even I was repelled by the level of unnecessary misogyny and, when it comes to it, the sheer amount of extreme and gratuitous violence, and the way it is portrayed; close ups, camera lingering etc. Don't be fooled by any of the man's self-publicising either, there is no message here, no anti-racisim stance (Where does his free pass to use the N-word at every opportunity come from?). If anything, it is about time Tarantino was held up to account.
There wasn't any misogyny. I saw no evidence that suggested Kurt Russell's character wouldn't have treated a male prisoner any differently. The woman was a low life pos, and that's why she was being brutalised, not because they hated women.

However personally, I've had enough of the race thing now. Quentin has done it to death, and I get it already. It's beginning to get obsessive.
 

PC1975

Well-known Member
Are we seriously to believe that the youth of today like this rubbish? I feel immensely sorry for them.
Films aren't just for young uns though are they? Are older people's custom and opinion irrelevant? I haven't seen it yet but that comment seems all the more questionable given it's an ultra violent over 18.

I don't know about anybody else but I'm delighted to see Kurt Russell back on the big screen. Firstly in Bone Tomahawk which I enjoyed although it was a bit grim and now this. Long may it continue (although I did see him in a crappy crime flick with Matt Dillon from a couple of years back). He's very charismatic and has a lot to offer and there's also the nostalgic element of him having been in a couple of classics in Escape from NY and The Thing.
 
Last edited:

Ripsnorter

Well-known Member
Oh for god's sake. If you aren't seeing decent films that says more about you than it does the film industry. There's plenty on offer. Alternatively, get a different hobby.



There wasn't any misogyny. I saw no evidence that suggested Kurt Russell's character wouldn't have treated a male prisoner any differently. The woman was a low life pos, and that's why she was being brutalised, not because they hated women.

However personally, I've had enough of the race thing now. Quentin has done it to death, and I get it already. It's beginning to get obsessive.
If you find Tarantino's treatment of women, how they are constantly subjected to violence, in close up, then good for you.

Here I am talking about the flashback scene in which we are introduced to three women, all of whom are portrayed as kind and sympathetic. We get to know them, albeit briefly as characters. We then get to see the horror on their faces and their realisation they are about to be murdered. One of them is even given a last gasp.

I am not talking about the characters within the film, I am talking about Tarantino's treatment of women in his film and how he portrays violence against them. But yeah, for you, no misogyny there. Re. you comment on misandry, one does not cancel out or relativise the other.
 
Last edited:

Ripsnorter

Well-known Member
Oh please....and what would you prefer, it to be released as a 12A equivalent with massive cuts? Isnt that true of most films today, they cut it down to nothing in order to get it through the rating system for a wider audience = greater ticket sales....at least he can't be accused of that.

how did you think people used to act during that era, all cuddles and marshmallows? Personally I have seen far worse in terms of violence in movies and was not phased at anything in this.....bring back mary whitehouse all is forgiven.

For me, it was average and I think the closest he got to his all time great's (Reservoir Dogs & Pulp Fiction) was Django........the narration was just self indulgent and unnecessary also.
Not in the least. Adult films, with adult certification for adults, not censorship. Besides, I am sure enough young people will sneak their way in regardless, get hold of the download or Blu-ray/DVD when it comes out. It is not just what happens in a film, however, it is how it is portrayed, and that is my beef with this particular one.

Yes, it was a violent period, but this is not a documentary and if you really think close-ups of bullet wounds in 70mm on a big screen is the way to go then I disagree with you. I am not anti-violence and, as I have mentioned, I love horror films, but I do have problems with the gratuitous portrayal or gratuitous violence. Mary Whitehouse can stay where she is, thank you all the same.

I do agree with you, however, that the film is average, the narration self-indulgent and unnecessary, but at least we were spared a guest appearance.
 
Last edited:

lucasisking

Distinguished Member
If you find Tarantino's treatment of women, how they are constantly subjected to violence, in close up, then good for you. With regard to The Hateful 8, you conveniently neglect to mention the flashback sequence, in which
three women are also gratuitously murdered.
I didn't mention it because
those women were gratuitously murdered along with several MEN who were also gratuitously murdered. The women weren't killed for being women, they were killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I'd also advise the use of spoilers, so you don't ruin the film for others.

But yeah, for you, no misogyny there..
Not 'for me'. There is no misogyny of note, unless you also count all the misandry in there too (some pretty horrific things happen to men in close up also).
 

The latest video from AVForums

Panasonic HZ2000 OLED TV Review: The best OLED for movie viewing in 2020

Latest News

Melco anniversary edition N10 library announced
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
What's new on Disney+ UK for November 2020
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Denon, Marantz and Yamaha AV receivers hit by HDMI 2.1 bug
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
McIntosh launches MX100 AV processor and MI347 power amp
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung updates and expands access to Samsung TV Plus
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom