Today’s strip was stripped almost verbatim from a conversation Jared and I had at lunch earlier in the week. He wasn’t as blunt as he is in the punchline, but I could tell he was thinking it!
The strip might give the impression that I’ve grown tired of Samuel L. Jackson’s choice of characters or that I don’t want to see S.W.A.T. this weekend. Nothing could be further from the truth. I actually enjoy his performances a great deal. It’s fun to watch an actor who seems like he’s really enjoying himself.
Still, you can’t deny the observation. There seems to be less carefully crafted character work in his cannon post-Pulp Fiction than there was before it.
Sure there are some interesting stretches like The Red Violin or The Cavemen’s Valentine, but most of his mainstream work stays close to the Jules Winnfield template.
I wonder if a breakout role like that is more of a luxury or a burden? Does the public expect a certain level of outlandishness from Jackson having come to be familiar with him through that signature role? Is he anything like that in real life, or is he more even-tempered?
Either way, I enjoy watching him on screen and find him a fascinating actor. Much like Christopher Walken or Jack Nicholson, we let him get away with so much more because his charisma is more interesting to watch than anything he could craft on screen. It’s rare and a real treat.
I wanted to thank everyone again for keeping Theater Hopper in the Top 10 at TWC. I’m thankful we’ve been able to make it last. The competition has been really stiff the last few days.
I also wanted to thank all the people who sent me congratulations for Theater Hopper’s first year. Stepping back for a minute, it really is an accomplishment. But the thanks should go to you guys for being so supportive.
Brian Carroll from Instant Classic sent me an excellent piece of artwork to commemorate the occasion and it has found a home on the Bonus Materials page. You should really take a look at it. I’m very proud of it – mostly for what it symbolizes: The great friends I’ve made from doing this strip.
There are also three new pieces of fan art, sent in from a week or two ago when I was asking for guest strips. I ran out of spots to display them on the front page, but that’s not a reason to hide this work away from the public! All three strips are quality and appreciate the effort that went into every one of them!
This weekend is shaping up to be mighty fine in the movie department, and I’m chomping at the bit to see Kill Bill.
I came from the era when Pulp Fiction was a revelation and was part of the generation to whom the movie was marketed specifically for. There wasn’t a dorm room in sight that didn’t have a Jules Winnfield poster hanging in it when I went to college. Trust me.
There are rumblings that the first volume of Kill Bill is light on Quentin Tarantino’s trademark dialogue, but that volume two makes up for it in spades.
There’s also talk that the finale of the first installment is outrageously violent. Over the TOP violent. Wile E. Coyote violent. Blood doesn’t seep from wounds, it gushes. And Uma Thurman is finding a hundred and one ways to slice a man to ribbons – probably even inventing some techniques along the way – as Quentin pays homage to all the grind house kung-fu flicks of the 70’s.
I think Kill Bill will prove to be an interesting experience. I mean, when you think of all the watered down copycats that flooded theaters in the wake of Pulp Fiction, what direction can an auteur go when his voice has been co-opted by the masses?
Kill Bill looks like a full-frontal assault on our expectations. A jarring stab to the kidneys to wake us from our slumber and erase and shades of doubt in a sea of red.
By the way, everyone. I’m toying with some new site designs. But before I can implement them, I need to get a couple of other things up and running again. The server movie last week kind of laid me up and I’m still recovering.
At the top of my list is bringing the forum back online. I created a backup right before the switch, but am kind of lost in terms of reinstalling everything. If anyone has experience with this, contact me the usual way.
Well, I made it back from Vegas in one piece.
Today’s comic is part one of a three part arc. I’ve decided to spoil all of you by continuing the arc on Tuesday and finishing on Wednesday. Then, because I’m feeling EXTRA generous, you’ll get an EXTRA comic on Thursday! That’s right y’all! I’m doing 5 comics this week just because I like you so much! Consider it my penance for all the sinnin’ I’ve been doin’!
Actually, my vacation with Cami to Vegas was pretty tame. Stayed away from the casinos and spent more time lounging around the pool. We have the sunburns to prove it! We had a great time, but it’s always good to come home. It was very nice to see that people in the forums actually missed me! Aww…
I know this whole “spoofing the Ten Commandments” thing it a little bit tired, but I thought the device was appropriate considering the timing. What with Easter being yesterday and this sudden interest in all things Holy courtesy of The Passion of The Christ’s success. It pretty much goes without saying that Hollywood follows its own trends until it exhausts them. So expect to see more religious-themed movies and television in the next 6 to 8 months. Might as well jump on the bandwagon now while I can!
I’m gonna close here tonight because it’s almost 2:00 A.M. as I write this. Not a big deal since I’m still on Las Vegas time, but I have to be up in a few hours for work. So best to get my beauty rest!
How happy are you that I’m not doing another comic about the Ten Commandments of Movie Watching? I received positive feedback on the 3-part arc, don’t get me wrong. But after a while it’s like that “knock-knock” joke that goes on forever and ends with the person asking “Aren’t you glad I didn’t say ‘Orange’ again?” Regardless, I hope you’re enjoying today’s bonus comic.
I’m really looking forward to Kill Bill Vol. 2, but I have to admit it kind of snuck up on me. While Cami and I were away in Las Vegas, they started running the television ads for the flick. We’d be sitting in seedy casino bars and one would flash on screen. “Holy crap! Is that coming out next week already?” I would ask myself. And then a drunk transvestite would try to hit on me.
But I kid. I think it’s going to be a great movie. It already has a TON of advance buzz – all of it positive. I mean, c’mon! Was there anyone who saw Vol. 1 who DOESN’T want to know how this thing ends?
In random web comic news, Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal has returned to a regular update schedule. Zach’s comic was one of the very first I read outside of the big names like Penny Arcade and PVP. I always got a kick out of his sense of humor. Check it out and tell ‘im I sentcha!
Oh, did you know we’re taking pre-orders for shirts? Maybe you want to put your money down so you’re not running through the streets naked. Cover up, man!
Who’s going to see KILL BILL tonight? That’s right, me.
My brother Lucas and I are going to get our dose of bloody Bill death this evening, then we will fight all night in an epic katana battle. True story*.
(Portions of these statements may or may not be true.)
Before I started working on today’s strip, buzzComix was apparently having some kind of server glitch. As a result, I thought I didn’t have to prepare an incentive sketch for you guys to check out by voting for Theater Hopper.
Right before I posted today’s comic, it looks like the site came back up, which left me scrambling for something for you guys to check out.
Whoops!
Anyway, I didn’t want to post this image because I didn’t want to jinx it, but my back was against the wall. It’s a t-shirt design I did for a company called OMG Clothing. It’s called “Ask Me How I Became a Pirate” and it’s pretty straight forward. If you want the whole story behind how I was commissioned for the design, you can read all about it in the THorum, here.
Anyway, vote for TH at buzzComix if you want to check it out.
As far as the comic goes – Yes, there is a rumor circulating that Quentin Tarantino might direct the next installment in the Friday the 13th franchise. This after plans for the oft-discussed Freddy Vs. Jason Vs. Ash crossover movie fell through. Apparently Sam Raimi wanted to make his own Evil Dead sequel. Who knew he had time to throw Bruce Campbell a bone between Spider-Man movies?
New Line studio executives are taking preventive measures not to get the horror fanboys too worked up just yet. They confess to taking a meeting with Tarantino, but it hasn’t moved beyond the talking stage.
Still, this is the furthest Tarantino has gotten promoting a cockamamie franchise reboot through the media thus far. His lobbying to direct the next James Bond picture Casino Royale got the thumbs up from Pierce Brosnan before being shot down by producers.
What’s my take on the whole affair? At first glance, it would seem that Tarantino was wildly grasping at straws and potentially putting his career in jeopardy – Especially after the critical success of Kill Bill Vol. 1 and 2.
But then you let the idea marinate for a while, and it starts to sound okay to you. I mean, honestly – Why not? How cool would it be if all sorts of A-list directors started helming Z-level franchises? Personally, I can’t wait to see what Spielberg would do with Hellraiser! He’d probably turn pinhead into a tortured soul with childhood abandonment issues and who regressed into his own world to escape. Of course, that world involves torture and S&M outfits, but you have to stay true to the source material…
I think ever since Pulp Fiction cracked the field wide open for indie fare to make it to a mainstream audience, Tarantino has been riding a wave of publicity where-in he casts himself as the maverick Hollywood outsider. For him, no suggestion is too “out there”. And, who knows? – Some studio might decide to take a chance on his offbeat ideas. After all, “This was the mind that created Pulp Fiction,” the might think to themselves.
Still, I believe it’s only a matter of time before the post-Pulp Fiction blank check that was handed over to Tarantino creatively will expire if he continues to whore himself out to whatever fanboy flight of fancy flutters into his frame.
It’ll be interesting to see where this one goes.
More blogging later today. I want to welcome back an old friend that’s returned to the fold…
For the record, this isn’t the first time Jimmy has changed the name of a movie on the marquee. Being a reformed troublemaker, Jimmy’s moral pendulum has swung a little too far to the other side. In these scenarios, I feel like I am having him channel Ken the NBC page from 30 Rock. Too wholesome for his own good.
If you were to ask me where I came up with the idea whose head is literally composed of feces… I couldn’t tell you. A Pringle fever dream? The by-product of accidentally huffing cleaning fluids while scrubbing the toilet? Hard to say.
Why does he have a eye patch and a scar? Why, because he’s “not-so-nice.” Therefore, layering the impact of the joke by strengthening his offense to Jimmy’s name change.
This joke works on many levels, you see.
Did I mention it’s very late? SUBJECT CHANGE!
Inglourious Basterds comes out this weekend and I find most every Quentin Tarantino – bad or good – a reason to celebrate. I realize that Death Proof was only a few years ago, but at the pace this guy works, it’s amazing we see any product from him at all.
My passion for film really began around the time that Pulp Fiction was making waves, so despite his idiosyncrasies, I still admire him as a filmmaker. Kevin Smith falls into this category as well.
I’m starting to become worried, however, that Tarantino is become a slave to genre and it wasn’t until Grindhouse that this racked into focus for me.
He has his caper movie, his blaxploitation movie, his kung-fu movie, his car chase movie and now his “trapped behind enemy lines” World War II movie. I’m concerned that his interests are focused less on creating memorable characters and whip-smart dialogue. But rather watching obscure genre films and regurgitating them in front of unsuspecting audiences.
I have no doubt that the man loves movies. He’s practically a walking encyclopedia of movie knowledge. But I wonder how long before all of that knowledge starts to bleed together and creativity has been choked from his creations?
I guess we’ll find out this weekend when I catch a matinee of Inglourious Basterds on my own. Cami has no interest in this one. She claims the violence is a turn off and I see where she’s coming from.
But, like I said, I feel like I’ve grown up with Tarantino. So it’s nice to check in with him once in a while to see what he’s up to…
Back in the day, something we used to do in the THorum every Friday was play a game called The Friday Five. The game was introduced to us by the LiveJournal community of the same name and the goal of the game was simple – to learn more about each other.
I was Twittering the other day, and someone who used to frequent the THorum reminded me of the fun they had playing The Friday Five. So I decided to introduce it to the blog.
The way it works is simple. I ask you 5 questions and you answer them! Since this is on the home page, I’ll ask that everyone keep their answers clean of language. But you guys do a really good job of that anyway, so I’m not too worried.
Anyway, since Inglourious Basterds is in theater this weekend, I thought we’d play a Tarantino-themed version of The Friday Five. Here are your questions!
- What’s the first Tarantino movie you ever saw?
- How old were you when you saw this movie?
- Tarantino has a resuscitated the career of several Hollywood actors. What down-and-out actor would you like to see him cast in his next movie?
- What’s your favorite line of Tarantino dialogue? (keep it clean, if you can)
- What’s your favorite Tarantino film?
There you go! Leave your answers in the comments!
Related Posts ¬
Feb 18, 2011 | BECOME AN X-PERT |
Jun 7, 2006 | QUICK NOTE |
Mar 18, 2005 | OUR LITTLE TRADITION |
Seeing how the the visual gag that served as the punch line to Friday’s comic was so far out of left field, I didn’t there would be a reason or an opportunity to use “Mr. Poo Poo Head” a second time in the comic.
I was inspired to bring him back, however, after my friend Adam posted to Twitter that he and I were seeing the movie together and spelled it “Basturds.” For the record, I want to stress that I am not some kind of fecalfeliac.
Of course, who can fault my friend for the misspelling when Tarantino himself refuses to spell either “inglorious” or “bastard” correctly? The director claims the misspelling is an intentional artistic flourish that he will never explain, lest it ruin the motivation behind it.
As I have been forced to write the two words incorrectly over the last few days, I slowly feel like I am unlearning how to spell them correctly. I fear this might ruin ME for ever using these words correctly again. I’m not a strong speller to begin with.
Fundamentally, we’re all taking one step closer to the English language deteriorating into a hybrid of hillbilly, valleygirl, inner-city slang and various grunts just like they described in Idiocracy.
I’m still kind of amazed a film titled Inglourious Basterds is the number one movie in the country right now. I tried talking about the movie with Cami this weekend and had to refer to is as “That Tarantino Movie” when Henry was around.
There’s a quote for your one-sheet! “Inglourious Basterds – The movie with the title you CAN’T say around children!”
Enough bliblity-blather. What did I think of the movie? Well, I liked it! I must confess that it wasn’t the genre wank-off that I thought it would be. Truthfully, I spent most of the weekend thinking about the film in one way or another.
BE FOREWARNED – If you haven’t seen the movie, mild spoilers ahead!
Before I saw the movie, I read Jeffery Wells’s review over at Hollywood Elsewhere and he pointed something out that changed how I approached the film.
In his review, Wells says Basterds “reeks of arrogance and sadism and indifference to the value of human life. It’s a movie in which brutal death happens every which way, and by this I mean stupidly, callously, carelessly, plentifully. I began to hate it early on for the way it takes almost every character down (including ones Tarantino appears to favor) with utter indifference.”
Specifically, Wells cites the scene where Eli Roth (as Sgt. Donny Donowitz) caves in the head of Richard Sammel (as Sgt. Werner Rachtman) with a baseball bat after refusing to give up the position of another group of Germans that the Basterds are trying to flush out of an apple orchard.
“Isn’t this is what men of honor and bravery do in wartime — i.e., refuse to help the enemy kill their fellow soldiers, even if it means their own death,” asks Wells. “Compare this anti-Semitic but nonetheless noble fellow with the smug and vile Pitt, who does everything but twirl this moustache as he contemplates the delicious prospect of seeing blood and brain matter emerge from Rachtman’s head.”
When met with Ractman’s refusal, Pitt (as Lt. Aldo Raine) “We’re all tickled to hear you say that. Quite frankly, watching Donny beat Nazi’s to death is the closest we ever get to going to the movies.” The rest of the Basterds hoot and holler, tease and torment the remaining soldiers as Sgt. Donowitz’s brutality unfolds in front of them.
Reading Wells’s review, I took it with a grain of salt. He’s a contrarian by nature and likes to stir up these kind of debates that have less to do with the story being told on screen and more to do with his personal sensitivities.
However, listening to the audience I was with hoot and holler along with the Basters during this scene, I think Wells was onto something with his criticism. Tarantino takes it for granted that by virtue of simply wearing a uniform, every individual who serves the Third Reich is inherently evil. But he also goes to some length to humanize the Nazi’s in a way that doesn’t seem to warrant the extreme level of punishment and humiliation doled out by the bastards.
After interrogating a German officer for information, they ask him what he plans to do with his uniform when the war is over. He says he’ll burn it, acknowledging the wrong-doing he’s caught up in. That’s not good enough for the Basterds, so they carve a swastika into his forehead to serve as a warning to others.
Later in the film, a young German solider and some of his compatriots are celebrating in a basement bar. The soldier’s wife gave birth to a baby boy 5 hours prior. How he meets his end seems particularly protracted and cruel.
Another Nazi negotiates the condition of his surrender and the Basterds go back on their word before bringing him to justice.
As Lt. Aldo Raine, Pitt sermonizes that “Nazis ain’t got no humanity!” But neither do the Basterds. Their cruelty is justified as righteous by the fact that the entire squad is Jewish and that Nazis are the international shorthand for evil.
I don’t want to give the impression that I am defending the Nazi regime. Certainly Inglourious Basterds takes a stand against the defense of “only following orders” that many German soldiers used to justify their involvement in the war.
I mean, clearly Hitler was a bad guy that needed to be stopped. But more than the “good times Nazi killin'” that I think Tarantino was trying to push over, I felt like I was left with a profound commentary on “An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.”
On the one end of the spectrum, you have Hitler TOTALLY abusing his power and doing unspeakable evil. To counteract that, you have the Basterds who are also WAY over the top in their delivery of justice.
Most likely I wouldn’t have had a problem with the violence Tarantino is promoting against the Nazis, but I think he did too good of a job humanizing them and not enough time developing the Basterds. Truthfully, the Basterds themselves are barely in the movie. Only a couple of them have any speaking lines.
The crux of the film’s conflict is between Christoph Waltz (as the “Jew Hunter” Col. Hans Landa) and Mélanie Laurent (the French-Jewish Shosanna Dreyfus who escapes from Col. Landa in the film’s first chapter). The Basterds are almost incidental in this showdown, drawn into the conflict by a movie premiere being held at Shosanna’s movie theater where Col. Landa has been put in charge of security.
Waltz as Col. Landa completely steals the film. Not only does he perform linguistic gymnastics – delivering his dialogue in German, English, French and Italian – but his acting is enthusiastic and knowing. Col. Landa is written as the smartest character in the film. He is usually three to four moves ahead of everyone else. The conflict between his intelligence and the Basterds’ brutality is brilliant and very satisfying.
Much the same can be said about Tarantino’s script. It’s very sharp, but also very ugly in parts. Tarantino is famous for his dialogue and here he uses it to glorious effect.
The movie is broken into five chapters and the way each chapter is set up, you know things are going to go completely FUBAR by the end. Tarantino uses his dialogue to stretch things out and ratchet up the tension. By the time the hammer is about to fall, you can barely stand it. When violence does occur, it’s made even more effective. A bold punctuation to each chapter.
It might surprise you that Inglourious Basterds really isn’t as violent as you might think it is. Compared to most World War II movies, which can be a flurry of bullets, explosions and images of young men being torn to pieces, Basterds is somewhat light on the gore. The gore you do see is so cartoonishly over the top, it’s hard to take seriously if you looked at it objectively.
But as I said before, the violence feels more impactful by way of Tarantino’s structure and his restrictive rationing of the action.
I’ve had a couple of people tell me that they thing Inglourious Basterds is Tarantino’s best movie since Pulp Fiction. It’s a good film, but I wouldn’t go that far. To me, Jackie Brown takes the number two spot because it features characters that act like real people. Basterds is limited somewhat by the fact that it is very arch, takes extreme liberties with history and really doesn’t give you someone to root for.
Not that every movie needs to toe the line between obvious heroes and villains. All I’m saying is that I think I would have enjoyed – and I can’t believe I’m saying this – if the Nazis were a greater caricature of evil than what Tarantino puts on screen. The Basterds could be as brutal as they like and I would have been along for the ride if the Nazis were a little more one-dimensional.
I’m sure we’ll have a lot more to say about Inglourious Basterds tonight on The Triple Feature. In fact, I believe we’re dedicating the whole show to Tarantino and dusting off some of his older films to talk about. I’m on the fence between watching Reservoir Dogs and True Romance this afternoon so I’ll have something more to discuss tonight.
Yes, I know True Romance was directed by Tony Scott. But the script was Tarantino’s and in some respects I consider it to be the most Tarantino-esque film that exists.
I encourage you to tune in live at 9:00 PM as Gordon, Joe and myself hash things out. It should be a great show and I’m looking forward to it.
What were your impressions of Inglourious Basterds? Leave your comments below!
I don’t know if you heard the good word or not, but both Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown were released on Blu-ray this Tuesday.
Considering how long I’ve waited for both of these films to be released on Blu-ray and considering how integral both films were to the development of my taste in film during my formative high school and college years, I thought it was worth sharing the trailers for the Blu-ray editions here.
Incidentally, if you wanted to pick up either Pulp Fiction or Jackie Brown on Blu-ray for your collection, I’ve provided handy links right there so you can do that…
It’s been a while since I’ve seen Jackie Brown, so I’m eager to revisit it. Pulp Fiction, of course, I can quote backwards and forwards.
What’s your impression of these two seminal Quentin Tarantino films? Leave your comments below!
Related Posts ¬
Apr 16, 2004 | WILLIAM’S DEMISE |