True Romance (1993)

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Ralphie talks a lot about this film here (written by Quentin Tarantino) but I don't think I ever saw it. Till the other day, anyway.

Loved it when Tony Soprano got brained with the toilet tank lid, liked the energy, the story and just about all of the performances except Christian Slater who to me was too slick to be the loser-hero the movie called for.

What'd ya think?

Edited November 3, 2013 by Guest

[TransMonk]

One of my faves. I'll watch it whenever it is on.

[Vic Sage]

Slick? with a daddy in a trailer, a job in a comic store, and a hooker for his birthday. Nah. The gods of tarantino just smiled down on his good heart and his true love and gave him the wherewithal to raise himself up. and he does. and us too, by extension.

No, I wouldn't call him slick. I'd call him smart (smarter certainly than his station in life would have anyone realize) and brave (with a courage forged in love. and borne out of nothing left to lose), and amusingly lucky (because the gods favor true love). This gives him a certain coolness that others respond to with respect... a respect he likely had not been the target of until that moment in his life when luck, courage and smarts converged to give him what he deserved.

When was the last time you saw a movie with 2 doomed lover/losers on the run that ends with them getting everything they wished for? Those characters don't usually get happy Hollywood endings; they get noble sacrifice and bloody tragedy. Tarantino says fuck that... i like these guys, you like these guys, and they deserve to win, no matter the body count they've left in their wake. so here ya go.

and I said thanks, Quentin. May we have another? And he said, yeah, here's some more.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Eh. I can't believe the first thing any character says to Slater isn't "Why are you doing this Jack Nicholson thing?"

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Oh, Screenplay Clarence I like. Slater-as-Clarence, not so much.

It's not that he's an awful choice; he's just not optimal. And it sticks out, since virtually everything else about this movie-- the Pitt cameo, Oldman-as-Drexl, the snappiness of the dialogue, Michael Fucking Rapaport, Bronson Fucking Pinchot-- is pitch-perfect, and in a lot of cases, in never-better form.

Edited November 4, 2013 by Guest

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

zactly.

[Vic Sage]

yeah, i guess i don't see the problem you're seeing. Slater is believable to me both as the romantic lead and smart-ass tough guy; i found him totally sympathetic. He's had that "Nicholson" thing hung around his neck his whole career, but that's the way he talks and looks. If there hadn't been a Nicholson before him, Slater may have become a major star. Maybe he played into the charicature too much in some roles, but i didn't have that problem with him in this. I can't imagine Jack ever playing this kind of guy, or even wanting to.

[Fman99]

I enjoy it, as it's said above, for the minor parts... while Slater and Arquette are the focal points they are pretty vanilla.

All of the really enjoyable parts are the surrounding cast and bit players -- Oldman, Rappaport, Pitt, Gandolfini, Val Kilmer as Elvis, Hopper, Walken, Saul Rubinek, Pinchot, Chris Penn and Tom Sizemore as the cops, etc. That's what makes it SO great.

[TransMonk]

Samuel L Jackson's first Tarantino, too!

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Let's not stand around sucking each other's opinions just yet, gentlemen-- I want to hear from Mr. OneStar.