Finally watched this after the thread on here last night. Very good movie. Funny how its much better than anything QT's ever done.
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Finally watched this after the thread on here last night. Very good movie.
Tarantino wrote it frickwit
Tarantino wrote the original script, which Stone and producers thankfully butchered.
i re-read [scanned] the original QT script earlier today, basically everything good about it is in the final movie. it's the opening diner scene and then all the stuff in prison. the only cool little tidbit that"s been left in the QT script is a tiny donut subplot. I don't get the people who say the original script is so much better. for some reason the warden character is split in two in the original draft, and the long backstory done via american maniacs interviews would have had no momentum if it had been done as it was.
>I don't get the people who say the original script is so much better.
Tarantino has a lot of dickriders. There's a lot of mainstream artists like that, in every medium, where people act like its sacrilege if you say anything negative about them. I thought QT was cool when I was a kid just getting into serious film but I'm lot less impressed by his shtick now. Kill Bill is one of the worst movies I've ever seen and Death Proof was nonsense. Even with some of his dialogue and scenes left in I feel like NBK has more in common with Wild at Heart, Heavy Metal, and T2 stylistically than any of Tarantino's work.
>. I thought QT was cool when I was a kid just getting into serious film but I'm lot less impressed by his shtick now
Same but for David Fincher.
>David Fincher
I haven't seen anything he's done except Fight Club (which wasn't that bad actually) but I've never been a fan of his style. Can't stand his imitators (Reeves and Villeneuve).
I'll stand up for Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. The rest are highly overrated. Though NBK and True Romance are both great movies, and I often think the world would largely be a better place if he'd just been a screenwriter.
I thought Jackie Brown was also great, but it didn't get a lot of hype for QT at the time, it feels like he went back to his safe little sandbox after.
Jackie Brown just never clicked for me. I won't say it was a bad movie, it's just not one I loved.
Yeah, it's a sleeper movie. What I like about it in particular is that it feels like it takes place in the real world in 1997, there's no other movie that captures the feeling of hanging out in a mall like Jackie Brown (haven't seen mallrats). The love story between Forster and Grier is also really well-done and soulful.
LEWISSSSSSS
>What I like about it in particular is that it feels like it takes place in the real world in 1997
I'll give you this. Oddly that's part of the reason I love The Duellists so much. I've never seen another movie that made me feel like I was actually living the Napoleonic era.
Haven't seen The Duellists but I get a similar immersion from Barry Lyndon.
By the way I agree with almost everything else you said ITT that I almost think you're my doppelganger or stealing my thoughts but it would redundant to say "same" each time.
Kek
Well, we're either the great minds of our time, or mindless normies.
I still haven't seen Reservoir Dogs but if I ever watch a Tarantino movie again it'll be that one.
>and I often think the world would largely be a better place if he'd just been a screenwriter.
Probably. He's obviously not the worst filmmaker in the world but his taste is questionable and it really does feel like he's more interested in writing than directing overall. Dude could've been a playwright. There's a drawn out dialogue scene in the second half of Death Proof that actually makes you feel like you're reading a screenplay instead of watching a movie.
I'd say give it a try. It's a bit different from his later movies, and not just an hour and a half of Tarantino tropes.
Because the fricking thing would've been great if they just shot the script pages on celluloid with wide angle lenses. But instead Stone had to go full fricking wacko with the canted angles, color scheme and flashbacks. Also the whole Rodney Dangerfield segment was just disgusting and unnecessary.
Sounds like you want to take out everything that makes the movie good.
The story and characters make the movie good. Stone's direction just drives the obvious point home over and over in the most annoying way possible.
And yet it still goes over most people's heads on this board.
>Also the whole Rodney Dangerfield segment was just disgusting and unnecessary.
I thought it was hot.
You got filtered hard
It's just a dogshit job of direction that ruined what could've been an all time classic. Let's take an already abrasive story and overdirect it with moronic angles, colors and phrenetic editing to make the viewing experience like a bad acid trip on coke instead of what it should have been, just a great black comedy thriller.
It would've been so ass if it was shot straight. have a nice day.
Based on fricking what? The story on the page was a biting black comedy like none other. The casting was perfect. It didn't need any of Stone's coked out homosexualry to make it work.
Based on the fact I have good taste and you obviously have horrible taste. Are you the same anon that made the comparison to Scorese's After Hours? That movie was shit.
You're a fricking moron. After Hours sucked too. There was nothing wrong with the original script or the casting, so why is the movie remembered as a disappointing hunk of shit flop? Gee, I wonder if it could be the fricking director who changed the script and did a mountain of mushrooms and coke while he was shooting it.
>so why is the movie remembered as a disappointing hunk of shit flop?
>the movie would've made $300m+
>If he directed NBK it would've been gangbusters
>Then how the frick did it bomb?
the mix of cinematography has an intent, a very fascinating one. It's to expose the inner thoughts and desires of the characters. Scenes in B/W are more in tune with what the character really thinks, while the swift editing clips of the characters as demons all demonstrate the true self of the character (RDJ being on the same level as the Woody). Same with the Dangerfield-scene, it tries to provoke emotion and thought among the audience, to consider that this happens daily IRL but is often laughed about or ignored (take Wayne Gacy as an example that they mention in the movie). What Stone did not consider was that the general audience aren't as educated/experienced in the different mediums of film, how angles and perspectives shape the mood of the viewer, how colors are aligned with emotions from our primal nature (red, green, etc), and so on. The audience simply hadn't the required comptence to fully grasp the different levels of the film. Stone underestimated the will and desire among his audience. Most of them just wanted an entertaining QT-flick. Some got what they wanted - the violence and coolness. Others didn't - the easy breeze, the smooth dialogue-driven scenes.
Yeah, so what I said. Overdirected. If QT would've directed it like Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction, the movie would've made $300m+ and still be fondly remembered today.
yeah that's right just keep sucking QT's dick you tremendous fricking homosexual
Lmao the cope. You know I'm right, but your edgelord boner for irrationally hating Quentin won't let you admit it. If he directed NBK it would've been gangbusters and the new Bonnie and Clyde for this generation, like it was supposed to be. Seems like you need a good smack in the mouth like Don Murphy got.
You're not even responding to the same anon. Not everybody likes Tarantino, get over it. The movie is perfect as is.
>The movie is perfect as is.
Then how the frick did it bomb? The movie has a great premise and an outstanding cast, but it ate shit at the box office. It should've been a cultural phenomenon but it wasn't.
If you wanna talk about how much money a movie makes then I'll kindly director you to the capeshit threads. Leave, child.
It's a classic example of a director who can't write wanting to put his stamp on a film, so he changes the script and makes horrible cinematography choices, just to make it "his own vision." Stone's ego was too big just to shoot the script as it was written, and it would've been a classic film if he had, but instead we got the whacked out cokehead psychedelic version with Rodney Dangerfield the rapist.
It's a camp classic buddy.
One of the few movies that just didn't click for me.
the main difference is that NBK they actually changed the florescent lights to green, which made it infinitely more kino
Yeah, but it's still a cool reference. It was seeing the screenshots from the drug store scene in the last thread that made me want to watch it, cause I recognized it immediately.
>zoomer discovers Oliver Stone
He's been consistently kino since the hand
What hand?
>don't be put off by the 3.5
Too late, I am very put off. NBK was a little long for me too though.
then split it in half like it's 2 movies, it's arguably a more interesting movie than NBK, and I love NBK
More interesting how? I haven't watched a trailer yet but I get the sense its rather dramatic and I'm not into stiff dramas, or politics. But I'm definitely down to watch another Stone movie after this and if JFK is the best one, I'll go for it.
are you familiar with the JFK assassination conspiracy theories? the movie is really a primer to the whole case.
the movie dumps a lot of info into a short time, but it's not dry and there's some fascinating sequences extremely well-edited.
>are you familiar with the JFK assassination conspiracy theories?
Not at all. So I guess I won't find it too boring. I'll download it but I'm not sure when I'll get to it. Will probably try to do the whole thing in one sitting.
Whatch it whenever you want, but the JFK assassination still has repercussions today 50+ years later so i don't think you can go wrong watching it.
Don't force yourself to watch it in one setting, take a break every hour, you need them to digest all the info.
I just started watching Mad Men so maybe I'll actually try to watch around the time I get to S3.
>Don't force yourself to watch it in one setting, take a break every hour, you need them to digest all the info.
Noted.
>Almost more of a thriller in some ways, and does a lot of the same mixed format stuff and weird editing that NBK does, although not quite as extreme.
Alright, I'm definitely interested now. Thanks for letting me know.
it's def not a stiff or political drama.
Almost more of a thriller in some ways, and does a lot of the same mixed format stuff and weird editing that NBK does, although not quite as extreme.
kino soundtrack too
now watch JFK
don't be put off by the 3.5 hour runtime, it flies by
before the internet, getting to hear a kaleidoscope of rare wild music like this was a godsend
spent years collecting a bunch of tracks that weren't in the official soundtrack album
>Wild at Heart
And also Lost Highway.
>Lost Highway
was a direct response to Natural Born Killers
lynch still seething about this to this day as evident with twin peaks the return
Seething for having made a better movie?
>there's a character lit on Fire in this movie
>there's also a character lit on fire in this other movie
I think I've watched this video a few months ago, can't be bothered to watch again but I didn't buy into the general theory, I think these different authors are inspired by Americana in general more than inspired on commenting on each other directly. obviously they treat similar subjects in different ways.
Seething about what? I enjoyed NBK but I still prefer Lost Highway. Going to see the 4k restoration in theaters this weekend.
sounds like a stretch
Couldn't stand Juliette Lewis in Strange Days but she was so fricking sexy in this.
strange, for me it was the opposite. she was good in NBK but i wasn't attracted to her in any way or didn't feel she was supposed to be, but the POV sequence in strange days turned me on even though she's got a weird face and gaze (and voice).
I actually can't remember if I found her attractive in Strange Days or not. I just know that her performance annoyed the frick out of me and made me want to never watch anything she was in ever again. With NBK I was hard three minutes in.
HOW SEXY AM I NOW FLIRTY BOY
HOW SEXY AM I NOW
I like when she killed the gas station boy for not eating her pussy right.
Prime Juliette
I have mixed feelings on both Stone and QT. Stone is often labeled a hack and I'm honestly suspicious of JFK (a movie with JFK truth would never be allowed in hwood). Natural Born Killers are often derided as a "failed art house" flick in many ways, yet isn't that the style of both Stone and QT to an extent yet it still works (see Salvador and Jackie Brown). I've never seen NBK because of the reputation it has for gratuitous violence and stupidity but I think it's not as simple as it's been portrayed.
Just my 2 cents.
additionally I think both Stone and QT are actually some of the last serious American directors, along with Lumet, Woody Allen, Coen bros. American directors in general, even if they are good, have always had a bit of a 'hackish' element (call it Hollywood commercialism, idk).
>Pass user since 2021
>free (you)
works errytime
so you have an opinion on a movie you haven"t seen?
edgy nonsense and the writing isn't very good for tarantino. fun to watch at 15 with your bros.
For some reason the first movie that comes to mind when I hear Oliver Stone is "Casualties of War".
is this fanart or legit?
gotta ask because they often badly frick up promo art for no reason in reissues (i would assume the 60 minutes extra refers to extra material and not a 3 hours NBK cut).
it's one of my first memes. back in the ancientgay days of 2016.
oh shit i missed the title
natural born killers is cringe. its so incredibly childish and i dont understand how anyone can get anything out of it
It's fun and cool and nuanced.
is it nuanced? its like watching something written by sorkin. i get that nbk was pretty neato when it came out but i didnt see when it came out.
i saw it now and oh boy its a turd.
I don't think I've watched anything written by Sorkin but yeah, I'd say its nuanced. At least compared to Tarantino's work. It seems like a lot people seem to think it doesn't do enough to condemn Mickey and Mallory and romanticizes them too much but I think that's fricking stupid. They kill random innocent people. Anyone who would romanticize that is a dumbass to begin with and because they kill random innocent people they're obviously not heroes we're supposed to root for. The movie is sympathetic towards them while also acknowledging that they're terrible people. They get away with it in the end not because they deserved it but because no one really cared enough to stop them in the first place.
I've also seen people call it "pretentious" which I don't get either because its all fairly straightforward and obvious.
You would think but with the amount of people that ritualistically miss the point of characters like Patrick Bateman your standards for peoples comprehension kind of drops substantially.
>Patrick Bateman
literally me btw
I mean, Mickey literally rapes a woman like 30 minutes in. If anybody finds themselves rooting for these characters or viewing them as anti-heroes, that's on them, not Oliver Stone. So what if they're hot or charming? That's the point. They movie isn't "making" them look good, they do look good. But they're still horrible.
Two scenes really stood out to me. The one when they're interviewing the teens on American Maniacs and one of them says "It's not like we have no respect for human life, but if we were killers we'd be Mickey and Mallory". And the one where it's RDJ's character interviewing the psychiatrist that shows absolutely no remorse for them and entirely dismisses the notion that they could've been sexually abused in childhood, when we know the opposite is true. Mickey and Mallory's actions are horrifying but so is the complete lack of concern, from everybody. Tom Sizemore is a perverted freak that just wants to frick and own Mallory and Wayne Gale is a complete fraud that only cares about ratings.
The obvious comparison is Bonnie & Clyde but what it really reminded me of was Sid and Nancy. I just found out about those two last weekend. They did horrible things (Sid moreso) and seemed to have a general disregard for life. But I was reading through comments on a YouTube video about their lives and there were so many boomers talking about how much they used to idealize them, those hideously horrible people. And that's why I think NBK works. Mickey and Mallory wouldn't have gotten away in real life though, they probably should've died in the end. It also reminded me a lot of current day "True Crime" culture.
>Anyone who would romanticize that is a dumbass to begin with
Somebody, tell him about Columbine shooters and how panties were literally dropped for them afterwards.
Man, it's the only way an incel like me could find someone who would find me sexually desirable.. Haha.
By the way, i condemn gun violence, guys. I hate guns. Hear me?
>By the way, i condemn gun violence, guys. I hate guns. Hear me?
We understand completely
So i'll see you over in /k/ later then?
I liked it when I was like 18. Rewatched it recently and it was so cringe. It has this odd vibe that is almost ironically (read: Rick and Morty tier) edgy. It's as if it's a parody of a parody of a violent film. Just odd.
It's parodying the media of the '90s, so yes, that's exactly what it's going for. I guess Zoomers wouldn't get it.
That's exactly the kind of le ironic movie that zooms would love.
Zoomers only like irony when it's spelled out to the point where using irony is unnecessary in the first place.
Holy kino
Ah yes, Tom Sizemore used to have a career
What do you use to take screenshots?
VLC
Okay. I was just curious as to whether or not you meant to have those subtitles in your screenshots or not.
Quentin is a hack
Agreed. It's funny as hell seeing his mouth breather fans claim this movie is a rip-off of his work (visually) when its far superior to anything Quentin has ever made.
Its kino and peak /edgecore/. Love it
This movie filters plebs like no other.
I admit it filtered me when I first watched it. Took me a couple of years to appreciate it. It can be a hard movie to love.
Pretty sure I saw some of it on TV as a kid and it confused and freaked me out. It stuck with me though, and after watching it a few times it became easily one of my favourite films, and I've seen a lot.
Oliver Stone has one good movie
>Salvador
>Funny how its much better than anything QT's ever done.
Sure you didn't accidentally watch True Romance instead?
>Sure you didn't accidentally watch True Romance instead?
I didn't, but should I watch that next? Is it gonna make me want to frick Patricia Arquette?
Yes and Yes. NBK is a better film though.
Alright, I will. I was a little curious after watching this anyway. It'll be interesting to go back and rewatch Wild at Heart after.
Daily reminder.
I'm actually very surprised Siskel & Ebert loved this.
..I frankly cannot believe those two cucks enjoyed this movie
Yeah, considering how they acted about slasher films its very hard to believe. Maybe because the violence in NBK was more implied than overt?
White trash Julia Lewis was almost as good as white trash Fairuza Balk. Has she made anymore bawdkino?