Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
21 Jan 13
22:51
Joined:
Date Joined:
14 Sep 04
I watched Quentin Tarantino's latest movie this evening and was dismayed to notice a 19th century billiards table sporting a 21st century cueball. I've never seen such a glaring error, it ruined the whole film for me.
Just thought I'd give you all a heads up so you can save your money.
Just thought I'd give you all a heads up so you can save your money.
Show More
Going to see it this week, looks very good from the trailer, long film nearly 3 hours, longer than Les Mis !
excellent advice PM, much appreciated.
aswell as everyone having shiney ass teeth....Also, most of them have gone under the surgeons knife.
I'll see it in the next couple of weeks when I get around to it. From what I've seen it has had favourable reviews but a quick half time pint will be the order of the day no doubt.
"Good, cold, evening gentlemen.
Amongst your inventory, I've been led to believe,
there's a specimen I'm keen to acquire."
Django - the 'D' is silent.
Amongst your inventory, I've been led to believe,
there's a specimen I'm keen to acquire."
Django - the 'D' is silent.
I thought I spotted a mistake when Leo Di Capiro's character was talking about Phylogeny when the film was set before Darwin published 'On the Origin of the Species'. However I've checked and the tree of life hypothesis was about before 1859.
Good film though a bit long. I preferred Inglorious Basterds.
Good film though a bit long. I preferred Inglorious Basterds.
It was riddled with mistakes in my view. Django's sunglasses were far too modern; three corpses (worth thousands of dollars in bounty) were just abandoned; plus the aforementioned cueball.
Joking aside, though, I didn't like the film very much. It was too long and I found the blood-spattering effects overly dramatic and unconvincing. Some of those old six-shooters blew people away like a damned bazooka.
Joking aside, though, I didn't like the film very much. It was too long and I found the blood-spattering effects overly dramatic and unconvincing. Some of those old six-shooters blew people away like a damned bazooka.
On a positive note, I thought the main actors performed well.
"Christoph Waltz is an outstanding actor."
In his mid-30's he was just a bit actor with small parts in TV and film and a bit of theatre work, and more or less accepted he was never going to make it now......then Quentin Tarantino somehow discovered him......and when he was in Inglorious Basterds he was the only actor in any Tarantino film to win an oscar. And QT was quick to use him again in Django.
In his mid-30's he was just a bit actor with small parts in TV and film and a bit of theatre work, and more or less accepted he was never going to make it now......then Quentin Tarantino somehow discovered him......and when he was in Inglorious Basterds he was the only actor in any Tarantino film to win an oscar. And QT was quick to use him again in Django.
^ yep. It is. Outstanding again from QT
rommel - comic book ? exactly - thats the point !! hth.
rommel - comic book ? exactly - thats the point !! hth.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539