This film perfectly acts as a pleb filter

bullshit. I liked bad times at el royale and they're pretty much the same

i havent seen that movie so i dont know how similar that and this one are

It’s fairly original which is incredibly rare these days. If it starred shitty actors and had a shitty director, no I wouldn’t have seen it. It also wouldn’t have been as good

if the best thing you can say about a movie is that its original thats a fucking problem.
>i never said shitty actors or a shitty director in this alternate universe the performance in all departments are to the exact t of what we saw.
>all im saying is that this movie would have been a flop if it didn't have tarantinos name on it
honestly i think this comment proves my pleb theory you add merit simply because it is original.
i could make a indie short film about a guy sitting in a white room shitting himself telling his life story crying inbetween telling the story of how he hit this much of a low.
thats a fairly a original idea however probably not a fucking good one

It's a 3 hour long rather slow but enjoyable movie. Telling the story of a struggling yet successful actor. Most of the movie is just time fillers but it's closer to real life than any movie I've seen, especially the overally long conversation scenes, nothing like the quick cut, quick to the point bullshit scenes in most movies. Then there's the ridiculous 20 minute period at the end of the movie that just caps off 3 hours of beautiful acting . It's truly a movie for movie lovers. If you're into fast paced action or capeshit movies you'll hate this. In other words if you're under 20 years old you'll hate it.

What is really original about it? The film core is "muh cinema is beautiful and wonderful". What a fucking waste of time

It's true. If the movie was completely different in literally every possible aspect, I probably would have a different take on it.

I bet you only saw this one because it's a Tarantino movie. Poser OP.

What is this God complex where people think only their own opinion is genuine and everyone else is just pretending to be different?

Attached: 1565335756930.jpg (882x439, 90K)

you know you dont have to force yourself to like stuff to look smart.
tell me was it close to real life when it was fucking stupid?
like when the dog was biting the dudes balls or when gun shots were literally going off and rick couldnt hear shit but he did when the glass broke or how about his first reaction to seeing a screaming banshee in his pool is to go to the shed and take a fucking flame thrower and murder her.
you cant act like this movie is some slow paced dramatic shit when the whole movie really just culminates in a juvenile poorly thought out action scene, which is fucking anti climatic because the villains are less intimidating than the fucking wet bandits.

Attached: DONACDUM.png (288x288, 3K)

You write like a 12-year old

t. someone who lacks confidence in there own opinions

i write like someone who can express there opinions something you have trouble doing autismo

Boring as fuck piece of shit movie that everyone will shit on once they come to their fucking senses.

Logic in film isn't important. You can nitpick any fucking movie everyway you want. This movie is shit, but not because of his technical mistakes

>there

You fucking retard

A major motion picture not based on a pre-established universe is rare enough

"THEN THERES THE RIDICULOUS 20 MINUTE PERIOD AT THE END"

Not only are you opinionated, you also can't read. Makes sense that morons like you force your opinions onto others and make these threads.

Whoops

logic is kind of important if your creating something realistic.
i cant just make a gritty cop movie and then half way through just say "oops god turned gravity off dont worry business as usual"
my favorite Tarantino movies would be like reservoir dogs, hateful eight or inglorious basterds because the characters are constantly in a game of cat and mouse and the suspense makes me the audience member more interested.
the only suspense this movie had was when brad got stabbed but it didnt even matter really it was just kind of a artificial suspense.
what i mean by that is it could have never happened and the narrative would be the same.

if thats what irks you
you're miles ahead of understanding the point of the film
and this is tarantino's most literal movie in terms of its message and intention

have sex

Yeah I'm sure shutting down and remodeling a portion of the Hollywood strip was real cheap.

>first do you understand what irks me?
>second maybe im retarded and i have poor reading comprehension but what are you trying to say with this message?

the suspense is muted, it's more about "what is Cliff going to do if Rick retires" than "gee I hope these guys don't die"

rare, but not original.

i didnt really care about the characters though.
i did find Leo and Brads acting to be very entertaining but i just wasn't all that interested in the scenarios they actually were in.
basically chad thundercock is a entertaining charcter but other than that there is no substance.
we wont be saying in a hundred years from now that virgin and chad were incredible story's from our era

yeah ok, you must be 12 and new then
that's not how greentext works

don't you think its more than just a lucky coincidence that there's a suspension of disbelief from the very carefully crafted period depiction in the exact moment the plot departs from the events that inspired it?
its a rather straight forward movie
what if the events that put an end to the golden age of hollwood never happened? what if his favourite decade never ended?
what if the fading star instead of dying, along with his genre, ascends into movie heaven, invited by the angel that never really gets killed?
ok, we cant change history, but in movies magic is real, so lets give life a happy ending. agolden age of hollwyood happy ending
the movie is a love letter not only to the period, but to the entire medium, from a hollywood perspective

It didn't have to be Brad and Leo killing those hippies.

(ofc, since its a tarantino movie, the happy ending involves a revenge fantasy with gruesome and very graphical violence)

A composition is based on build, climax and resolution. There really wasn't any build as all the side plots went absolutely nowhere. The climax was fun but had no value due to the lack of build for it, the resolution felt out of place because there was no emphasis on it as the driving goal.

I enjoyed watching it, but as a piece it didn't accomplish anything or make me feel anything besides disgust for Quentins foot fetish

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think those rules matter if the emotion is taking control of the editing.
Take for example the scene where
Brad fights Bruce.
They clearly are surrounded by the crew, but the moment that the wife of the producer goes in, everyone is magically gone.
You could call that a mistake, something that pulls me off of the experience, but I see it as a dramatic justification of the editing.

there's an implied build through out the entire movie, assuming youre aware of how the events turned out in real life

The highlights for me were:
-the hippy ranch side plot, which went nowhere really. Even though they attacked at the end it was a mere coincidence, nothing was accomplished besides "oh hey I know you"
- Bruce Lee fight was funny
- the little actor girl and decaprios relationship was cute

I honestly can't remember what else happened in the whole movie

I just like it for Braddu Pittu posting

Please explain.
What the hell is implied build.

i mean im okay with generally inconsistencies in scenes or just general unreal-ism im more irked at the fact that someone claims this movie is realistic when its clearly not.

If the movie was just as good, I would have liked it just the same. Go back to your capeshit threads and leave kino to the adults

can someone spell insecurity?

the people in the ranch is going to kill sharon tate
you imbecile

BTAER had a plotline and setup and payoff, and didn't require a working understanding of the history of some celebrity murders for the audience to give a shit about any of it.

>can someone spell insecurity?
We can but we won't do it for you, you need to learn how to spell words if you want to shill Star Wars here

how do these what if questions make up for this boring fucking movie?
seriously seeing some bimbo no one would have even remembered in 30 years not die make up for the fact this 3 hour movie could of been a single hour

Don't forget Julia Butters

if you were true fan of kino you would know the last jedi is a great star wars movie

Well it wasn't implied hard enough to create a sense of drama or danger. I'm pretty sure they didn't bring that up at all until they showed up on the street ready to go. I could be misremembering but I believe all that happened with the hippies for the first 80% of the movie was them using the senile guy to live at his ranch.
Build implies expectation towards a climax, if no expectation is clearly implied then I have no build. Implied build means that I'm not reading into it hard enough??

I expected to dislike it and I loved it.

>the last jedi is a great star wars movie
LMAO good one

Attached: 1560115349372.jpg (840x839, 171K)

Nigger

the movie didnt really build anything.
it was trying to create tension by juxtaposing Sharon Tate with the fact that the Manson family existed

What a retarded fucking argument
>If this ice cream wasn't ice cream you wouldn't be eating ice cream
sick dissection of pop culture, professor

you cant prove its not :0

I see. So if I'm not cued in on what it's referencing then I've missed the whole point of the movie.

Why yes I can, what gave it away?

1. The plot was a modern corporate “set-piece” showcase that made up “cool scenes” and wrote a story around them instead of creating a plot that could generate excitement through it’s narrative.
2. Rey is bad not because she’s a powerful competent women, she’s boring because she is a generic paint by numbers “insert-here” protagonist meant to be as inoffensive as possible so no possible merchandising demographic would not like her.
3. Finn had a good arc in The Force Awakens. Shame then that he apparently forgot it all between movies and repeated it all this movie. That why he was so pointless, not cause he’s black.
4. Canto Bight is a thirty minute waste of time that does not effect the plot. It has no “anti-capitalist message” it has a toothless “hurr greed bad” message.
5. Holdo is a bad character because she is a walking plot device that makes decisions only so others have to take action. She was created backwards. Where they wanted Poe to learn a lesson about “not being a hot-head” but didn’t want him to actually do something wrong because then the audience wouldn’t like him (and buy his merchandise). therefore she makes contradictory and nonsensical moves because she isn’t a character, but a plot-object. None of this has to do with her purple hair (it’s space, some planets have weird hair) or being a woman.
6. Hyperspace ramming as elaborated in detail elsewhere invalidates the entire franchise.
7. Luke had all his character development from a whole trilogy wiped out. All so they could do a cliche “fed-up with life kung-fu master” cliche who then dies from thinking too hard.
cont.

I'm not the guy you're replying to, but you do know that Sharon Tate was actually murdered in real life, right?

8. The First Order are illogical, apparently they built a fleet and accompanying super weapons as big as the Galactic Empires without having a galaxy or empire to fund and build them. Somehow the entire galaxy is fine with them rolling up and taking charge without so much as a shrug because they blew up one system with a weapon they no longer have. The OT empire was well presented in how they ruled and operated the galaxy even in A New Hope. The First Order has no characterization beyond “remember the Empire?” Nothing the First Order does is even remotely related to the Republican party, their pretty generic space facists. They never rant about immigration or healthcare or really anything political other than the same "We hate Freedom" that the original Empire did, and they have a diverse multi-racial and gender equal approach to evil, more so even than the original. Unless you think being obvious pulp-Nazi stand-ins is an accurate depiction of the GOP they're pretty toothless when it comes to current political commentary.
9. Snoke is stupid, lots of critics claim “we knew nothing about the Emperor” but the viewer had no preconceived knowledge about the Star Wars universe in the original films. It stands to reason that powerful characters existed, unknown to the viewer.
In the new trilogy, the universe is established, The evil was the Empire, Vader and the Emperor. For a character of Snokes immense power to exist is contradictory. It requires an explanation. And for characters such as Luke and Leia to refer to him by name, on multiple occasions, and for others such as Rey to never question this, is disconcerting, unnatural and entirely immersion breaking.
cont.

your regurgitation of my argument doesn't work.
for the ice cream example im saying people only like ben and jerrys because they associate it with good experiences however they're new flavor is under performing at best however the flavor is receiving praise because it was created by ben and jerrys and ben jerrys usually creates great food

No Im actually a clueless moron. That probably would have changed everything.
I guess it would be similar to inglorious basterds where you wonder the whole time if they're actually going to kill Hitler by the end. Although I'd say there's better tension in that

Attached: 0a1.jpg (643x820, 80K)

because you are 12 and a pleb, you can not grasp the cultural consequences the manson murders had. its generally accepted as the most obvious sign of the death of the 60s
it wasnt hitler, which tarantino already killed, but it put an end to a period thats a lot closer to his heart than 40s europe
you find the period recreation boring because you're, well, a pleb used to marvel timing and obviously didnt pick up any of the references, but its a valid point
the plot doesnt always move forward in the traditional sense, as much as the film is a compendium of scenes
but they all serve a purpose and, as any other tarantino movie, its a hommage to entire genres which im assuming youve never watched

just admit you didnt know who sharon tate was, my man

Not the other user, but after watching this movie, while I def enjoyed it, I was thinking that if you don't know about the whole manson thing it might be a bit confusing. Which leads me to the question, is the movie bad if you don't know the context of it? My answe is no. I realized, and this answers also to , that the movie never makes any big explicit explanation of the whole manson thing and it's done on purpose because the movie works by itself. To someone who's not aware of the manson murders, tex, sadie and the other girl just went to kill brad because of what he did at the ranch, and then they decided to kill rick. It might not be as satisfactory watching those fucks get rekt without knowing what a bunch of fucking monsters they were, but it still works as classic tarantino.

10. Bad costume design, In the OT and PT everyone has a unique look and silhouette that is both easy to pick out in a crowd and memorable. From the Rebels on the Tantive IV to the Tatooine/Jedi robe look, to the Naboo guard outfits, to the Troopers in the Hoth Trenches. None of the costumes in The Last Jedi do this. I couldn't tell you what most main characters wore much less the extras. Everything is so generic and uninspired you could use it in another movie and no one would notice they were reusing Star Wars costumes.
11. All the ships and vehicles are just the original trilogies with some extra lines painted on. Both the prequels and Rogue One managed to have designs that were simultaneously unique looking but still thematically similar to the original movies. everything save the salt-speeders is just a repainted original with some flaps.
12. Finally It's funny hearing people complain about "fanboys" wanting TLJ to be a retread when TLJ dedicates it's entire runtime to nullifying any changes to the story since ANH. It has been 35 years in-universe and everything is now at exactly the same point it was during ANH, Empire has uncontested rule of the galaxy, Scrappy rebels (They even change their name from Resistance to Rebels in the third act!), Dark Lord ruling the aforementioned Empire, One half-trained Jedi to keep on the Orders legacy (which has been otherwise wiped out), and so-on. The entire original trilogy might as well not have happened now because the universe has been reset to a merchandise friendly timeless limbo.

mask posting is a much much richer contribution to this board than your opinion

please leave
im asking you nicely, for the betterment of this forsaken community

I expected you to read it, yes. It's the conclusive evidence that The Last Jedi is a terrible movie and everyone defending it in the internet are paid to do so

Yeah, it was really lazy. Here's another stab. How do you separate the director or an actor from their work? It worked because it was made by Tarantino starring Leo and Brad. Claiming that it would be shit without those people isn't a hot take, it's fucking retarded. Check this out. Imagine Obama's presidency but it wasn't Obama. Alright, let's discuss. What the fuck even is that?

you keep going on about the death of the 60s.
i dont think fucking years can die they are a concept.
shit changes the culture would never stagnate the 60s era and aesthetic were always going to fade away regardless if some random stacy died and making a movie with almost poor everything except acting isnt gonna bring it back.

I mean how hard could it have been to give some backstory to it at the beginning? He's all about non chronological timelines so I feel like he could do a decent job of explaining that they will be murdered without running the story

im sorry to say this, but youre either too young or just an irredeemable idiot
partially my fault, i shouldnt have replied to you in the first place

you have been pleb filtered by the most obvious and straight forward movie of a mainstream hollywood director

good luck in life
try to read and watch old movies, it would do you good if you have any hopes of improving your poor self

Kys

i can actually work with that metaphor.
whats the most recognizable thing about president obama.
>he's fucking black
without that what is there?
a shitty president.
its the same thing with this movie people dont associate obama with his mistakes they associate him as being the first black president.
just like how people dont associate this movie this movie with its content.
they think of this movie as the new 9th film by tarintino you know that big shot who made all those great movies.
thats why geuinley great movies like Filth and Sorry To Bother you get ignored because they lack the marketing push this mediocre film had

the film gives a shitload of back story

my fucking god
you get upset whenever the screen isnt spoon feeding you everything pre digested straight into your mouth
honest question how old are you?

in my opinion
>n-nno u
stop worrying about aesthetics start watching shit for content

Yeah I agree. I don't like movies that spoonfeed the audience but this was too fucking much. It lefts out a lot people out of the message of the story. I still think the movie is fine as it is though.

the content in this movie is rather obvious and it went right over your head

stick to cape shit and youtube tutorials on script writing

>without that what is there?
Removing variables changes the picture. Therefore, it's retarded to compare quality when the image has shifted. If I started plugging pixels out of a picture it would quickly turn into a shitty picture. Therefore, your claim that without "x and y these are shit" is a meaningless fucking statement, because yes but what's your point? People went in there to see Tarantino and they saw Tarantino, you didn't think it reached YOUR definition of a good movie and now you're upset about it using brand based arguments to shoot down the movie. If you want to talk about why a movie was bad point out specific bad shit instead of dick riding famous people's names.

friendly reminder that this is the average Yea Forums poster you argue with

it's a great slice of life with fun bits of revisionist history, where successful handsome straight white dudes murder hippies and save the day

>knowyourmeme filename

>successful handsome straight white dude...and save the day
Is that not allowed anymore?

nope

>forgetting to mention murdering women to save the day and btfo chinks with not a single diversity hire in sight

alright im gonna explain im analogy one last time in the most concise way.
>alright we have a nice bottle of Pepsi
>i take that pepsi and i pour it out into a plastic water bottle
>its still the same pepsi it has just lost its identity
which drink is going to sell better?
>the original pepsi
>however that doesnt mean the pepsi in the water bottle is any less pepsi
>Tarantino is the Pepsi bottle
>remove Tarantino, movie is the same movie
>the movie would be a fucking flop because on its own merits its a fucking shitty movie

I hear you, however no story or performance exists in a vacuum. By removing the people responsible for the movie you remove the the talent they bring to the product that makes it a success. Just like the Pepsi if you remove the carbonation it's now black sugar urine regardless of whether it's in a cup or a bottle. While it's fun to have this slam poetry / metaphor battle with you why don't you just post what your actual problems with the movie are?

ur reetardod

Now there i agree with you. The film depends on people knowing sharon tate and what happened for you to take the bait. But its very clear on film that they wanted to kill sharon and they changed their mind in the car so it may not be as strong if you dont know sharon was real and killed but the movie holds itself up.

>he failed to realise that casting Leo and Brad was essential to the movie's message

get a load of this brainlet

>this entire thread

there's a fucking idiot samefagging that the plot didnt make any sense, and he didnt know who sharon fucking tate was
possibly op

Attached: 928[1].png (733x464, 125K)

that horrendous meme texting fuck my eyes are burning you absolute redditor

Yep, I'm out

>film meanders throughout plot. for instance the scenes with rick creating the fake movie takes way to fucking long.
>i dont give a shit about the fake film rick is partaking in
>movie has filler for instance the flashback cgi shit, the opening scene, the fucking driving with 0 dialogue and also the fucking sharon tate watching herself shit.
>movie is almost obnoxious in greenscreening leo into old movies
>the manson family is set up to look like a bunch of pushover retards
>and finally the most insulting part the climax.
>the big finale of the film is established 3 retards attempting to do a break in how fucking anti climatic
>dog eating balls trope i see in every movie
>also that cringe fucking lets kill movie people monologue
>and all for what a shitty fan fiction where we get to see sharon tates feet and our epic cool guys save the day

>you know newfag if you check the numbers next to my op post number you can see all my replies

>calls other posters newfag
>doesnt understand how greentext works

>greentext is a concept
>i can use them however i want
>if i want them to be bulletins they will be
you just genuinely dont understand how this site works new fag do a triforce

Yeah, the movie was shit. I was shocked at how lifeless it was. QT's usually punchy dialogue came of derivative, especially in the first half of the movie. It was 80% naval gazing, so it makes sense that critics and Hollywood worshipers would lap it up.

...

Sure there was a lot of shit that didn't need to be in the movie, very true. Roasting footfags is w/e, but what's your beef with Manson's being clowns?
>and our epic cool guys save the day
Which is a problem now? That shit is a staple of story telling. I am so confused.

This is the kind of retard that didn't like this movie a last Jedi fan kek

t. retard

Btfo