Jonathan Rosenbaum gave Quentin Tarantino's debut a qualified rave after seeing it at the Chicago International Film Festival back in 1992, with reservations that would become a common refrain when discussing his films:
"Our grasp of what’s going on is always in flux, and Tarantino’s skill with actors, dialogue, ‘Scope framing, and offbeat construction is kaleidoscopic. More questionable are the show-offy celebrations of brutality: buckets of blood, racist and homophobic invective, and an excruciating sequence of sadistic torture and (offscreen) mutilation that’s clearly meant to awe us with its sheer unpleasantness. It’s unclear whether this macho thriller does anything to improve the state of the world or our understanding of it, but it certainly sets off enough rockets to hold and shake us for every one of its 99 minutes."
Roger Ebert, however, disagreed, arguing that the screenplay was inadequate:
"I know the story behind the movie - Tarantino promoted the project from scratch, on talent and nerve - and I think it's quite an achievement for a first-timer. It was made on a low budget. But the part that needs work didn't cost money. It's the screenplay. Having created the characters and fashioned the outline, Tarantino doesn't do much with his characters except to let them talk too much, especially when they should be unconscious from shock and loss of blood."
But more enlightened than either of those is this 30 second reenactment of Reservoir Dogs by bunnies. Warning, language for grownups!
No comments:
Post a Comment