Reservoir Dogs..

[max_tranmere]

The torment and suffering of the Policeman you get a real feeling of - as far as I remember.

[max_tranmere]

Apparently Michael Madsen had difficulty doing the torture scene - something I read when the film was first released, so I imagine the crew wouldnt have found it very pleasant either. Tarantino was probably in his element though!

[Sam Slater]

[quote]I think it is cheap shoddy film making to just go for shock when a better film-maker would imply it.[/quote]

I think there's more than one way of portraying something to an audience, Max. I don't think Reservoir Dogs is a subtle film. It's meant to be gory.

[The Last Word]

max_tranmere wrote:

> The amount the film was talked about, and still is because of
> that scene, proves the film is more known for its shock value
> than anything else.

Rubbish, for reasons too numerous to mention.

Once again one of your amusingly myopic culture posts gets it arse over tit in spectacular fashion.

Still, nice to see the violence in cinema debate (now in its fiftieth year - at least) still going strong.

[Robches]

It's a good argument for wearing a bullet proof vest when pulling a heist.

[andy ide]

For me, the most disturbing thing about the film in terms of the dramatic impact it had on me was the slow death of Tim Roth's character. He knows he's going to die (er, he does in the end, doesn't he? God, it's years since I saw it), and as the movie progresses his face gets paler and paler and the pool of blood around him grows and grows, gets darker and even looks sticky. Real horror that. Great performance.

On the subject of excusing QT's foibles though, I don't agree with you, Terry. Part of RD's power was its running time, brief compared to so much of his later work and perfect for the kind of powerhouse pulp movie he was celebrating. I wish he still respected that but he doesn't. He loves schlock, we love schlock, but it always works best at 90 minutes and he lets his stuff just drift on and on and on.

(And by the way, Terry, I stand corrected about Sin City. IMDB credits both Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller as directors.)

[Jonone]

Max, I suggest you seen Ian McKellen's turn in 'Extras' for one insight into acting.

[DickBush]

Reservoir Dogs isn't graphic in the slightest, sure people have some blood on them but that torture scene is quite famous for making people think the saw more than they actually did. The camera pans away before any ear cutting happens, you only see it in your head. I'm surprised you thought it was graphic, jeez don't go and see Kill Bill or Inglorious Basterds!

[one eyed jack]

Yeah i getyou on the running time Andy but maybe thats why he is given more credit for this genre of film because it waffled on with more dialogue than the films he is paying homage to

Also you will find that Rodriguez really did direct the movies more than Frank Miller who was given credit for.

Rodriguez is actually a sweet and shy retiring type believe it or not ( Iused to work in the West End cinema and a manager told me so).

I think he was happy to share the directing aspect with Frank Miller as a mark of respect for filming Sin City...its a fan boy thing and Rodriguez is not ashamed to say so.

This is not mere assumption on my part as I know I read it somewhere at the time of the film coming out which is why I was so convinced when I told you....i dont think it is in his book Rebel Without A Crew as im sure that came out before Sin City but I bet that info is on line somewhere.

Mind you you can't always believe everything you read so I could be wrong.