Theater Experience | Kill Bill Volume 1

Another year begins, and with it another round of Temeku Cinema’s Flashback showings.  The manager selected an excellent way to begin with the first half of Quentin Tarantino’s martial arts epic, Kill Bill Volume 1.  While it wasn’t the first of Tarantino’s older films I managed to see on the big screen---that honor goes to my favorite QT film, Pulp Fiction—the number two spot is fitting considering this was the film that introduced me to Tarantino. 

                I caught the Saturday showing.  I originally planned on seeing it Friday after work, but opted out after careful deliberation (I’m still dealing with the last effects of a cold).  I showed up over an hour prior to show time, as arriving late is a pet peeve of mine—it gives me high anxiety—and I didn’t want the show to sell out.  This second worry was misplaced, as this was the smallest audience I’ve seen since I’ve attended Temeku’s showings.  Maybe it’s another symptom of January.  The ticket was free, as I used one of the two I won during trivia back in October when I saw Halloween. 

                Like always, Trvia was fun.  Most of the questions were obvious to film buffs—release date, assassin code names, etc.—but it helped set the mood.  I did attempt to answer the last question and raised my hand before the manager finished speaking, but sitting in the back row played against me.  I didn’t notice if I raised my hand before the person who was called on, but if seated closer I probably would have been noticed better (for those wondering, the question was what film was Tarantino filming when the inspiration for Kill Bill struck). 

                While I agree with one of my contemporary’s assertion that a great film you can watch and enjoy anywhere, there is something about watching a film you enjoy on the big screen that home viewing cannot replicate.   It allows one to further appreciate the technical aspects.  Like Pulp Fiction before it, this viewing did just that.  Giddiness welled up inside me as the film played.  From the anime depiction of O-Ren’s origin to Hanzo’s argument with his assistant—which drew forth the most noticeable rise from my fellow movie goers—I savored each moment as they rolled out onto the screen.  I admired the cinematography, choreography and practical effects work of the end battle already, but seeing it unfold on a larger screen amplified said enjoyment.  It was also exciting to hear the score emanating from a louder source. 

                If this viewing had any negative, it was my fellow movie goers.  Like I mentioned before, the crowd was small compared to past viewings.  While not necessarily bad, they hardly gave an audible reaction.  At times, I felt like I was the only one laughing at Tarantino’s one-liners.  Maybe it was because I sat in the last row, or those in attendance were too spread out for noise to carry well.  Either way, it did negatively impact the experience, even if only slightly.

                Despite this one negative, I toughly enjoyed myself and clicked another film off the Theater Experience list.  Hopefully next January Temeku shows Volume 2, as it’d be a shame to watch one half but not the other.  If not, I’ll have to wait for New Beverly to show The Whole Bloody Affair again.  As for Temeku, February’s film is John Carpenter’s The Thing.  I’ve missed several past showings over scheduling conflicts, but this is one I won’t be passing up.

Movie Review | The Hateful Eight

There’s not many contemporary directors that haven’t made a bad film.  While I enjoy the later works of Ridley Scott and Tim Burton, they are shadows when compared to Alien and Beetlejuice.  Quintin Tarantino is my one exception.  Some of his films are better than others, but I wouldn’t call any terrible.

                I was first introduced to Tarantino by Kill Bill.  Before then, I’d heard his name only in passing.  His love letter to 70’s martial arts exploitation films created a fan, and my adoration grew with each subsequent film.  Django Unchained was the first I saw in theaters.  While a little overlong in places, I didn’t have major issues.  When I heard about his next film, my interested was more than peaked, especially when I heard it was another period piece.  Sadly, I didn’t get to watch it in theaters—a fact I retroactively kick myself for—but when I did finally watch, I savored.

                Released in 2015, The Hateful Eight is a western thriller, and Tarantino’s eighth film (yes, Kill Bill only counts as one).  Set in Wyoming a decade following the Civil War, the film revolves around a group of strangers stranded in a haberdashery by a blizzard.  Two of the strangers are famous bounty hunters, with one bringing in an infamous outlaw to hang.  As the film progresses, The Hangman begins to suspect that not everyone there is trustworthy.  The tension and paranoia build, leading to a gory climax.

                The first time I watched the film, I noticed a vague similarity to John Carpenter’s The Thing.  Both films revolve around a group of strangers isolated by nature who are slowly gripped by mistrust and paranoia.  Kurt Russell stars in both, and at one point disarms several characters out of self-preservation.  Ennio Morricone also scored both films, with his compositions completing each one’s tone.  According to Tarantino, this similarity is intentional, as it was his way of deconstructing how he felt when first watching The Thing, albeit with his usual flair. 

                The acting is great all around.  The supporting cast perform well, even though most of the characters are nothing.  Samuel L Jackson, Kurt Russell and Michael Madsen give performances we’ve come to expect, especially in a Tarantino film.  Bruce Dern is alright as Col Smithers, and Damián Bichir is intentionally awkward as Senor Bob, leading to chuckle worthy moments.  Tim Roth steals his scenes as the delightfully foppish Oswaldo Mobray.  Although subtle by comparison, Jennifer Jason Leigh gives the best performance as Daisy, ranging from sympathetic to detestable.  Russell means to see her hang, but they have an interesting relationship, backed by the pairs chemistry.  It’s not romantic, but at times borders on an old married couple.  Quintin cast Leigh because he needed a great actress in the role; he made the perfect choice. 

                Daisy plays a guitar in one scene, which was loaned to the production by the Martin Guitar Museum.  Six stunt replicas were built for the ending moment, but none were used.  Due to a misunderstanding, Kurt Russell grabbed and destroyed the antique before he could be stopped.  Leighs shocked reaction in the final film is from this take, explaining its authenticity.  The Martin Museum no longer loans guitars to film shoots. 

                While the film is long, Fred Raskin’s editing paces it well.  The opening credits and a later drive scene drag, but they allow the audience to take in the setting and its accompanying isolation.  We know our characters are snowbound, and if anything goes awry there’s no help coming.  It’s all on them.  Morricone’s score compliments this feeling, allowing the tension to build as the plot progresses.  Tarantino claimed some of the compositions are unused compositions from The Thing; if so, it was wise for Morricone to use them here, as they fit. 

                Courtney Hoffman handled wardrobe.  Having worked on Django Unchained, she was the obvious choice for another period piece, allowing a sense of aesthetic continuity.  The costumes feel like a natural forward progression from Django. 

                If there’s any aspect I’m not a fan of, it’s Major Warren’s story.  While it serves a purpose in allowing the Major to kill Col Smithers—even though he baited him—it undermines the preceding moment.  Tarantino had stoked tension between the two, built on animosity from the Civil War.  They were close to blows, but dinner conversation and a shared history brought the pair together.  They had a tender moment of brotherhood, and it deteriorated into typical Tarantino fodder.  While the resulting scene is entertaining, it could have been more, although Tarantino would have had to alter one following plot element. 

                The film contains Tarantino’s usual tropes:  long-takes, language, explicit violence—effects handled by The Walking Dead’s Greg Nicotero—Red Apple Tobacco, and non-linier story telling.  This last aspect is especially important, as the third act contains a twist that necessitates a flashback.  Knowing Tarantino, I should have seen part of this twist coming, but it surprised me during my first viewing.  It leads to a tense, gory ending.  While it might not please everyone, not all endings should be happy.  It’s the ending the film deserved and earned.

                While not my favorite entry in his filmography—that honor currently goes to Pulp Fiction—The Hateful Eight is close.  While made more for entertainment, it’s a great example of how the elements of mis-en-scene blend together to form an excellent film.  4 cups of well water coffee out of 5.

Setting the Tone of 1858

“They ain't never seen no nigga on no horse before.” That line perfectly sets the tone for the historical setting—pre-Civil War America—of Quentin Tarantino's 2012 film, Django Unchained. While the film does not contain any historical figures, it does an excellent job of portraying the time period. For example, throughout the film whites—with the exception Christoph Waltz's bounty hunter character—look down on Django because he is black. Though this does change somewhat when Django assumes the black slaver character, it is still subtly there. During the films time period a majority of whites in the south would have looked at blacks the same way, just as the previous generations had. The film does not touch on racism being taught; it might have felt out of place considering the plot.

One controversy the film has gathered is the repeated use of the word nigger. Film director Spike Lee is one of this aspects biggest critics, even though he admitted to not personally seeing the film. His criticism seems to come down to the fact that Tarantino is white; sadly, I feel that if Tarantino were black, Mr Lee would not have this problem. Personally, I feel the repeated use of the word fits the context of the period. Though I am sure not all of them used it, I find it hard to believe that plantation owners who figured themselves superior to their black slaves would not address them with the word nigger. To not even use the word once would be an insult to history.

I was surprised to see the study of Phrenology make in appearance in the film. Like the language, I felt it fit the context of not only the period, but of the character who brought it up. Calvin Candy is the archetypical southern plantation owner without being too stereotypical—partially due to Leonardo Dicaprio's outstanding performance. Calvin's monologue about Phrenology shows not only how twisted his mind is, but how far slave owners would go to justify their system. It is one thing to think hate, but it goes to another level when you try to justify it with biological science. I feel pity for the people who believed in Phrenology, and even more for those who still do.

Another controversy surrounds Samuel L Jackson's character, Stephen. In the context of the film he is the head house slave. Acting wise, the character comes off like the old happy slave, Uncle Toms Cabin stereotype. On the outside this might be offense, but after watching the film twice I noticed something about the character: the Uncle Tom routine is a facade. Twice during the film Stephen drops the act: once when he's talking to Calvin Candy in private, and once during the climax when only Django and himself are left in the house. From this, my interpretation is that Stephen is the evilest character in the film. He acts all joyous and over-the-top in front of the other slaves and plantation workers, but behind closed doors the real Stephen—one molded by his position and the slave system—emerges. Racism is bad, but self racism can be just as bad.