Tag: Quentin Tarantino

KILLING ZOE (1993)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Written & Directed By: Roger Avary 
Cinematography: Tom Richmond 
Editor: Kathryn Himoff 

Cast: Eric Stoltz, Julie Delpy, Jean-Hughes Angalade, Gary Kemp, Salvator Xuereb, Bruce Ramsey, Tai Thai, Kario Salem, Cecilia Peak, Ron Jeremy

Zed has only just arrived in beautiful Paris and already he’s up to no good. Having just slept with a call girl, he spends a night on the town with his dangerous friends. They all decide to rob a bank the following day. There’s only one problem: Zed’s call girl, Zoe, just happens to work at the bank which is to be robbed!

This film had all the makings of a good movie. While it has a typical bank robber film premise, only set in France. It is noteworthy for being the feature writing and directing debut of Roger Avary. Co-writer of PULP FICTION with Quentin Tarantino (Who executive produced this film) 

Here the film is about Zed, an American safecracker. How many are there anymore or have they all become hackers? He comes to France to help his friend rob a bank. He is a heroin user and is waiting for a job. He hires a hooker who the next day we actually find out is a bank teller at the bank.

This is a very strange film. The bank robbers are a multi-ethnic crew but all look grungy and dress like fabulous 1980s & 90’s archetypes. They all come off as euro trash.

The film is more dialogue-based, but when there is action. It is swift, grotesque, and merciless. 

There are scenes of just sitting around while different revelry goes on around them And the conversation feels more rambling.

The first half of the film is subdued with weird women wanting to go home with the men. So they can abuse them. Then there is a revelation from his friend that takes hold to maybe the nihilistic attitude he takes throughout. 

Then there is the drunken distorted sex scene in a bathroom. Where we can’t tell if it’s male on male. 

It starts to get a bit more exciting in the second half of the film with the bank robbery. Where just going in is a massacre. Then when they are stuck in a stand-off situation. It gets a lot worse with Zed, down in the basement not knowing what is going on upstairs and his friend going further and further off the deep end. Trying to plan an escape and each idea continuously fails. Zed has his own drama with a guard burned alive and half dead, begging for him to end his suffering. 

The ending is remarkable as everything comes to a head with Zed finding out what is really going on. His confrontation with his friend Eric. The discovery of Zoe in the bank and the cops coming in to end the standoff.

Other than having some cliches in the film. It also offered things that movies rarely Depict or bother giving any Credence or screen time to. It was also one of the few films that showed a female character could be more than one thing. One didn’t necessarily define the other. Female Characters could be complex and multifaceted. Keep in mind I was 15 When i first saw the film 

While the ending is a little curious. The film as a whole is just strange and while it can easily be lumped in with the 90’s crime movie genre or even a Tarantino knockoff. It is original in many aspects and might be disappointing for audience members looking for a more typical cops and robbers heist film. 

I remember being very excited to see this film in Theaters. As I was a huge Tarantino. Fan and knew of the controversy surrounding Tarantino and Roger Avery. It seems like Tarantino is producing. This was a favor for pulp fiction, so Avery having to manage things on his own in this film could be seen as daunting for a first-time filmmaker as I watched this in the theater. I could see some influences, and how he maybe wanted the film to be different from the cliché 

In doing so the film now seems really cliché as most bank robbery films do the same and try to seem like they have an original voice and really don’t as they try to humanize more of the side characters, who would normally never be the center of attention. Even though this at the time was one of the first. 

While this film has some sharp dialogue after watching this even though one was thrown off balance, and scratching my head,  like what just happened it will definitely keep you on your toes and I will say it’s an interesting rental, but don’t hold your breath for greatness. Even though it does have its fans, Roger Avery made a sequel to the film unofficially.

Grade: B-

SLEEP WITH ME (1994)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Rory Kelly 
Written By: Duane Dell’Amico, Roger Hedden, Neal Jimenez, Joe Keenan, Rory Kelly and Michael Steinberg  Cinematography: Andrzej Sekula
Editor: David Moritz 

Cast: Eric Stoltz, Meg Tilly, Craig Sheffer, Lewis Arquette, Todd Field, Parker Posey, Vanessa Angel, Susan Traylor, Dean Cameron, Thomas Gibson, Joey Lauren Adams, June Lockhart, Adrienne Shelly, Alexandra Hedison, Quentin Tarantino 

Sarah, Joseph, and Frank are BFFs. Joseph and Sarah get married but the evening before she tells Frank with a kiss that it could’ve been him. Frank continues to have a thing for Sarah.

Six different writers wrote a scene each of this romantic comedy featuring the marriage and turbulent relationship of Joseph and Sarah, with Joseph’s best friend Frank trying hard to cope with letting the love of his life marry his best friend. An interesting experiment though it might also explain why it

Seems like a bit of a mess. That seems endless and single-focused. After a while it feels like small talk, about a lot of things said but nothing of any depth that can be called interesting. It might have worked better as a play. 

A 1990’s relationship drama with some very little comedy thrown in. It seemed dated even when it came out. It feels like a dramatic episode of the television show FRIENDS.

The film involves a group of friends who are all married and/or in serious relationships and only seem to hang out with each other. They are still young and hip with no kids in sight. 

So, of course, they have only one friend who is single and this film Explores all the different couplings in relationships. The one that gets the most attention is Meg Tilly who is usually a joy to see on screen. As she is rather obscure. Whose character is engaged to Eric Stoltz’s character. Who is kind of a ladies’ man whose best friend, played by Craig Sheffer with some Ill-advised facial hair and even worse hippie wardrobe is in love with Tilly’s character and she knows it.

She comes across as cruel because she knows yet every time he brings a date to their get-together. She interrogates and then insults them. 

When she suspects her fiancé of cheating she sleeps with Sheffer’s character out of spite and when he thinks they have started a relationship she begins to feel bad and have feelings. When Eric finds out and informs her he didn’t cheat. So now the two guys are competing for her. 

Imagine the Andrew McCarthy-Ally Sheedy-Judd Nelson love triangle from ST ELMO’S FIRE. Only if Nelson didn’t cheat and it was the main part of the movie, only more dramatic and you are on the same page as this film. 

The film tries to be a broad comedy type of movie played subtly seriously. It comes across as a bunch of self-important characters. Who think they are cool but aren’t coming to grips with growing up and making it seem more dramatic and meaningful than it actually is.

It’s a shame as the film has a good cast and could have really been good under better circumstances. 

Somehow here the direction just seems to drain all the fun and interest out of not only the scenes but the characters. The script seems fine if not indulgent and self-important. 

One only wishes for a more skilled director. Who could have better handled the material and made the scenes a little more vivid and exciting. At least give it a kind of sense of humor about itself. 

Maybe also allowing the film to be more of an ensemble and not focus so much on the leads and give the side characters more nuance and more to do. So the love triangle could have been more of a side caper or we see how it affects the dynamics of everyone in the group. 

After a while though it seems Like every woman throws themselves at Stoktz’s character. This is easy to see when Sheffer’s Comes off more as creepy and he is the single available one. Who seems to mess up any chance he has with other women. While Stoltz’s Character is already married has nothing to lose. As he already has a wife. So he can talk to these women without seeming like he wants to bed them Or looking for something. Which in turn seems to make him a challenge for them 

The only true noteworthy scene is the cameo by writer-director Quentin Tarantino giving a rant or his theory on how the movie TOP GUN is really a movie about a man’s struggle with his homosexuality. (This was before the internet introduced many people’s wild outlandish film and television theories)

In fact, that is one of the only reasons I watched it. The other is Eric Stoltz and Parker Posey, actors I am a huge fan of. 

GRADE: D+

INGLORIOUS BASTERDS (2009)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Written & Directed By: Quentin Tarantino
Cinematography By: Robert Richardson
Editor: Sally Menke

CAST: Brad Pitt, Melanie Laurent, Diane Kruger, Christoph Waltz, Daniel Bruhl, Eli Roth, Samm Levine, B.J. Novak, Paul Rust, Omar Doom, Til Schweiger, Michael Fassbender, Mike Myers, Michael Bacall, Rod Taylor, Jacky Ido, Julie Dreyfus

I am going to start off by saying this is not Tarantino’s best film. it is good but not his best. Then again it could just not be my favorite so far of his films.


It breaks him out a little paying attention a little more to history which of course he re-writes for his own purposes. The film shows that Tarantino is a man in love with dialogue and words particularly his own. Like DEATH PROOF there are tons of scenes of dialogue. The dialogue is great but he needs to learn to edit it down.

The film is long and unfortunately feels the same way. Having read the script I knew what I was getting into but still a few times the film managed to surprise me. Though I will warn you it is advertised as an espionage action-oriented war film but knowing Tarantino you should know it’s not exactly like that and almost half the film is in various foreign languages so there is a lot of subtitles. But if you are a true film fan you shouldn’t mind that. 

Many scenes feel too long but they are understandable as each scene seems to be Tarantino taking glee in having each scene begin innocently that as it goes on it slowly switches gears into a thriller with impending doom. Then towards the end, the tables turn and show that a certain character has been in control the whole time without letting any other person knowing it. 
 
Christoph Waltz steals the movie as a nazi, who is nicknamed the jew hunter his character is the best written and the actor has fun and truly inhabits the role with steely determination and certain happiness. His mastering and fluency of many languages and dialects is amazing. 

Brad Pitt seems to be having fun with his role but it delves into the more ridiculous aspects of the movie and seems more like a character than a real person. Which is the problem with the third act. The third act excites and speeds up the action that had been in the film before but feels more movie action than the real war film finale. 

Also considering you filmed in Europe with beautiful buildings interesting locales and beautiful nature you would figure a filmmaker with an eye would use these locations to their fullest. But just as Tarantino has a talent with dialogue and an eye for visuals. He has always seemed a perfect Indie director as he makes his scenes and camerawork feel claustrophobic. This is a tale that needed to be more open it looks like it was shot on a set or soundstage instead of on location in Europe.
 
 I also wish the Basterds had more time to prove themselves and let us get to know them I know his original ideas were much longer so it feels almost like this is a condensed version. 

not that impressed by Melanie Laurent she didn’t do anything wrong but she didn’t impress or engage me either and the less said about Director Eli Roth the better it seemed like a natural fit of a character for him but he goes for a ridiculous accent and is way too over the top. He also directed the film within a film NATION’S PRIDE. 

 I guess I feel the movie had a great bunch of elements and memorable scenes but they don’t merge to make a great movie. This is a mild disappointment. 

It is in the Tarantino mold of KILL BILL VOL. 2 AND DEATH PROOF where it is tons of dialogue and a few scenes of extreme shocking violence and action mixed in to keep the audience awake and interested in what is happening. Almost like a gift or payoff for sitting through the previous scenes. Trust me it still isn’t a film that will be easily forgotten. 

 Plus I wonder if the reason for the last line in the film “This may be my masterpiece” is what Quentin Tarantino really believes about this film. 
 Now don’t get me wrong I respect Tarantino and get excited when he has a new film out. He is one of my favorite Auteurs, it’s just I hold him to a certain high standard that this one approaches but doesn’t quite rise to that level. 

It is a movie best seen on the big screen but you could wait for home video 

 GRADE: B