Vic Sage

Daniel Craig returns as Bond, James Bond... secret agent 007.

If you're talking about its length, yeah, it's epic. But what about the actual scale makes KB epic for you? It's a straightforward, straightmoving revenge flick with a handful of temporal digressions to flesh out secondary characters. The actors do good work, but the characters are pretty damn flat/small. Hell, even the majority of the battles-- Crazy 88s aside-- are small. I go: 1) PF 2) RD 3) KB 4) IB 5) Jackie Brown And scriptwise, it's his... but "True Romance" isn't entirely a Tarantino film, is it? (I'd slot it at 2.5 if it were.) I have no quarrel with your ranking; it's your ranking, and it seems entirely reasonable to me. As for TRUE ROMANCE, no it's not entirely a Tarantino film, but it is SO like the rest of his films, and so UNLIKE the entirety of Tony Scott's career, that I've necessarily included it within TQ's canon. And of course you can like, love or hate KILL BILL as you choose, and i won't say "boo" about it. But please don't tell me what it is or isn't. My reading of KB reveals a mythopoetic tale of archtypal characters out of legend. It's not epic? It's fucking biblical. A pregnant bride and all who care about her are slaughtered at a wedding by her former lover and fellow assassins (who all go by code names). Years later, she rises from death as a white spirit of vengeance (so nameless as to have her named bleeped when spoken aloud). She obtains a weapon of great significance which is crafted especially for her vengeance quest... a quest which takes her around the world, to overcome overwhelming odds, then to confront a woman of such power and evil that her motivations can only be described through animation (realism isnt' adequate). The confrontation is a quiet samurai battle in the snow, it's whiteness defiled by blood. There, the Bride learns that her quest will lead her to a daughter she thought murdered. She is now a warrior/earth mother questing not only for vengeance but for her own child. She returns to her home in pursuit, killing off her own fellow assassins along the way. One catches her and imprisons her in a coffin beneath the earth. In a "temporal digression to flesh out a secondary character", we learn of her prior life and her training by a Chinese Master, the archtypal wiseman/shaman whose death she must also avenge, and whose training allows her to emerge from the trap. Crawling out of the earth as if reborn, covered in blood and earth (blood of the warrior, earth of the mother), she is a twice-killed twice risen figure out of myth. Ultimately, she must use the secret teachings of her dead master (the exploding heart technique) to defeat her enemy and reclaim her child and her soul. It's Joseph Campbell and LADY SNOWBIRD; it's the Bible and asian cinema, It's BEOWULF and FISTFUL OF DOLLARS. It's everything QT has ever loved or thought about films packed into 4 funny, violent, poignant hours. Does it have thousands of Romans attacking the Gauls? No. And if that's your definition of "epic", then i guess its not. But i think that's too narrow a construction of the term. KB 1+2 is epic in its themes, in its scope, in its aspiration. That's enough for me.

What do you think we're going to get, shopping at the discount store? while OBP is obviously a critical component of any player's offensive contribution, all we're looking for is a low-cost platoon partner for Thole, who'll play against LHPs and hit toward the bottom of the order, and can give us more than we got from Nickeas/Shoppach/Johnson in that role last year. All we need for that is a guy who can slug a bit and throw ok. Is Olivo the best available guy fitting that description? Dunno, but I bet Sandy does.

i think most folks would rate PULP FICTION first among his films, and KILL BILL 2nd or even lower, preferring RESERVOIR DOGS or even BASTERDS (maybe even DJANGO now). It's just my take on it. KB is epic in a way none of his other films are; its scale and aspirations are grander. I like that. I like that alot.

Quentin Tarantino, the ultimate indie-hyphenate (as an actor/writer/director/producer), is the preeminent pop poet and violence aesthete of his generation. Growing up in working class LA, dropping out of HS and going to work at a video store while taking acting classes, Tarantino lived on the fringes of the industry until he sold the screenplay for TRUE ROMANCE (later directed by Tony Scott). This gave him enough money and connections to write and direct RESERVOIR DOGS, which launched his career at the Sundance Festival. A success de' estime, DOGS set the stage for what was to come... Reservoir Dogs (1992) - A heist film with no heist, an action film propelled by dialogue, a dynamic and intensely kinetic film that takes place primarily in a single set (an empty warehouse), a sympathetic portrait of unsympathetic characters, these contradictions make for fascinating drama. Great performances, too, particularly Michael Madsen as the most feral of the canines. True Romance (1993) (screenplay) - It's the only Tony Scott film worth seeing, with Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette as the most adorable killer/drug dealer couple on the run that you ever wanted to just hug. Natural Born Killers (1994) (story) - Oliver Stone rewrote (and destroyed) QT's screenplay to such an extent he lost his screenplay credit, which he was probably happy about considering how the film turned out. Pulp Fiction (1994) - QT's career exploded with his first huge hit, a blackly comic neo-noir that won him an Oscar for his screenplay and a nomination for his direction. It also featured great performances, including the Oscar-nominated comeback of John Travolta and a star turn by Samuel L. Jackson. PULP's nonlinear, fractured structure with interweaving narratives, was fascinating storytelling. And with its pop cultural references and pastiche, and it's self-aware and highly stylized form, it became an iconic representation of post-modernist film-making, but without ever losing itself in pretension or losing sight of itself as entertainment. It is the quintessence of Quentin. Four Rooms (1995) ("The Man From Hollywood" segment) - QT wrote and directed 1 of 4 separate stories in this flop comedy. Didn't see it; don't want to. From Dusk Till Dawn (1996) (screenplay) - he chose not to direct this one, turning it over to his buddy Robert Rodriguez, so he could focus on his performance and the script. Which was too bad, since this comic horror homage to the blood and gore screamers of his youth probably could have used a more interesting directorial flourish, and it certainly would have benefited from less of him in front of the camera. As good a filmmaker as he is, QT is a very annoying actor. If only he had Hitchcock's restraint to limit himself to the briefest of cameos. Still, this is a fun movie, well worth seeing. Jackie Brown (1997) - QT's tribute to the "blaxploitation" cinema of the 70s is a rambling, overlong, unfocused and largely unsuccessful adaptation of an Elmore Leonard story. With this film, he tried to revive the career of blaxploitation queen Pam Greer, as he had earlier done for Travolta, but it didn't quite work out that way. Still, it did boost the career of veteran actor Robert Forster, earning him an academy award nomination, and Samuel L. Jackson was his usual menacing self. This is lesser Tarantino. Kill Bill: Vol. 1, 2 (2003-,2004) - QT returned to glory with this film, split into 2 volumes for distribution but originally shot as a single work. KB is an epic pop cultural melange on `roids, mixing Hong Kong martial arts films, with Japanese samurai melodramas and anime, spaghetti westerns, revenge thrillers and 70s crime actioners, into a unique concoction too overwhelming for a single sitting. Uma Thurman, whom I've never had much use for except in QT's films, is used to absolute perfection as the vengeance-seeking samurai assassin searching for her stolen child. The other performances are consistently good as well. The films both unfold obliquely, with digressions, and novelistic chapter headings to guide us from one set piece to another. While some folks prefer the more action-oriented Vol.1 to the more contemplative Vol.2, i found V2 to be the more satisfying work. Overall, I'd rate the KBs as my single favorite work of his, with its epic scale dwarfing the otherwise fabulous but smaller scale PULP FICTION. Grindhouse ("Death Proof" segment) - A double feature of 60s-70s era low-budget exploitation films he made with Robert Rodriguez, this is one of QT's least interesting works. A sort of slasher film on wheels turns into a deadly femme revenge flick halfway through, it resolves anticlimactically, with the chicks simply standing around beating up the bad guy, played by Kurt Russell in an apparent parody of his Snake Plisskin character. It's especially unsatisfying compared with Rodriguez's "Planet Terror" horror/sci-fi segment, which is a disgusting blast of fun. Although, to be fair, its been reported that Quentin co-directed PLANET TERROR, too. Inglourious Basterds (2009) - QT's alternate history of WWII is a "bunch a guys with a mission" type war movie, ala DIRTY DOZEN, etc., with a title based on a 70s low budget Italian war film, but it is uniquely Tarantino nonetheless. With 8 Oscar nominations (including an Oscar to supporting actor Christoph Waltz), it's also his highest grossing film to date. Its intertwining, episodic parallel story threads works as a structure, but fails to allow the Basterds themselves to get developed as characters we should care about, especially Brad Pitt, who is funny but 1-dimensional and cartoonish. Still, the opening sequence, with its Morricone music, shot compositions, themes and even the narrative itself, is a remake of the opening of ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST, and if QT had been able to maintain that sensibility, it would've been an amazing film. However, the subsequent sequences vary greatly in tone and style, so the whole thing feels more like a mishmash than a coherently articulated concept. Still, it works on many levels and, as a seminal part of his oeuvre, is not to be missed. Django Unchained (2012) - I'm looking forward to his spaghetti western. Its been in development for quite a while. My Top 5 (in order): KILL BILL 1,2 PULP FICTION RESERVOIR DOGS TRUE ROMANCE INGLORIOUS BASTERDS (though i suspect DJANGO will knock it off my list, once i've seen it)

for discussion of "Basterds": viewtopic.php?f=11&t=12346&hilit=Tarantino I can't believe I've never done a Tarantino filmography.

Mets are considering Miguel Olivo as the platoon partner for Thole this year. http://www.mlbdailydish.com/2012/12/5/3733064/mlb-winter-meeetings-mets-miguel-olivo some power, with a good arm. Can't be worse than Nickeas.

How much more is Hart's .270/25hr/85rbi slash line worth than Duda's .255/20hr/75rbi full season average? It's worth more, certainly, but nearly $10m more? And as bad as Duda is in RF, Hart was moved to 1B last season. He's 31, and his speed has gone from 25 SBs a year, to 5-10 SBs. So again, he's better than Duda in RF also, even at this stage, but $10m better? I don't think so, on either count. So, if they're going to spend $10m more to upgrade RF (and i don't think they will), I'd hope they could do better than a slowing Cory Hart without having to trade assets, too.

Not official yet but, according to a tweet from Andy Martino/NY Daily News, the Mariners have reached an agreement to sign left fielder Jason Bay pending a physical. It's a one-year deal worth $1M, with another $2M in incentives, according to Jon Heyman/CBS Sports. Read more at http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/12/mariners-to-sign-jason-bay.html#24pF7ihQ7vm3RJjU.99

I guess its a nicer way of saying "19th Century" or something Except that the "pre-integration" era went halfway through the 20th century too. And what kind of Orwellian bullshit word is that anyway? It's not the "pre-integration" era; it's the era of "segregation". Stop putting smiley faces on our ugly past.

Edgy convinced me about Schilling last year, but i'd forgotten. I'll revise my ballot accordingly.

Wasn't Andro, at that time, a legal product available over-the-counter in the U.S. And not banned by baseball? i believe that's correct. My threshold is, unless you're a worse human being than ty cobb, you are not disqualified for HOF consideration. put them all in and let god sort them out, says I. some of baseball's story is grand and some sordid, but its all part of the story. This Orwellian instinct among baseball writers to whitewash the history of the game is grotesque, especially considering they chose to ignore it while it was happening. good column about the hypocrisy of sports writers on this issue: http://www.amazinavenue.com/2012/11/29/3702220/groundhog-day-for-hall-of-fame-hypocrisy?ref=yahoo

nobody puts Jeffy in the corner...

the thing about the PEDs brigade is that Bonds and Clemens were clearly HOFers before their late career Roid-induced surges, whereas i think the HOF case for McGwire, Sosa and Palmiero relies primarily on their Roid years.

[revised 11/30/12] yes: Roger Clemens * Barry Bonds * Mike Piazza Jeff Bagwell Craig Biggio Tim Raines Borderline / Yes: Curt Schilling Alan Trammell Edgar Martinez Borderline / No: Mark McGwire * Rafael Palmeiro * Sammy Sosa * Larry Walker Jack Morris Lee Smith * = PED brigade No, but stick around: Dale Murphy Fred McGriff Don Mattingly Bernie Williams Sandy Alomar Jr Kenny Lofton 1-and-done: Julio Franco Shawn Green Roberto Hernandez David Wells Steve Finley Ryan Klesko Mike Lieberthal Jose Mesa Tony Batista Jeff Conine Jeff Cirillo Royce Clayton Damian Miller Reggie Sanders Aaron Sele Mike Stanton Jose Valentin Todd Walker Rondell White Bob Wickman Woody Williams

there's no way he's going to turn down this one and hold on to his image and the good will he's worked so hard at maintaining. IOW, the crap sandwich of bad pr would fall totally on his head if he doesn't accept this deal and I can't see him allowing that to happen. he'd also have to play out the season, risking debilitating or even career-ending injury. If he's getting more than Zimm and Longoria per year, no way he passes on this deal on the off-chance somebody will pay him a few bucks more (and i don't think they would; he's not worth $20m/yr for 7+yrs to anybody but the Mets).

if the baseline is the $17m/yr average deals for Longoria and Zimmerman, and the Mets are offering 7 years (on top of the year he still has), then that would be about $120M in total. While i wouldn't be thrilled with having a 38-year old making $17m, Wright does bring other things to the table (he'll soon hold all Met hitting records, and a face of the franchise equaling that of Seaver himself) that makes me think this would still be a good deal.

the veteran's committee has been changed over the years, but has generally been dominated by management/owner/executive types along with older players from the pre-Miller era, who didn't benefit from Miller's successes are said to resent the big salaries of modern players. It's not hard to see why such a group has chosen not to enshrine Miller in the HOF, even as they gave plaques to mediocrities like Bowie Kuhn, who Miller whipped like a rented mule. It's a disgrace, but it's entirely comprehensible.

production is finite, money isn't This may be the most Ceetarded thing he's ever posted. As the former president of the Trade In Tomorrow for Today Society (TiTTS, you say!), i'm all about not counting on prospects (ours or others) to become superstars, and winning now, for tomorrow we may all be dead. that being said... The Mets are not one SP away from contention, or even .500 level mediocrity. We have holes everywhere and, as reported, not so much of that infinite money to fill them with. Right now, we have a 38-year old pitcher coming off a CY season, with a $5m contract for next season. So we can either (1) let him play out the year and compete with every other team to re-sign him; (2) re-sign him now to an extension, or (3) trade him while he's at the peak of his value. I think we can all agree that (1) is not a very good option. Lets call it the Reyes Option, in which we are likely to turn an asset into nothing whatsoever. That leaves signing him to an extension or trading him. an extension would likely require a 3-4 year commitment at $12-$15m/yr, or something in that range. So, even if the Wilpons could afford it (and i don't know that they can), we will be paying fair market value for a guy coming off a career year after his 38th birthday. I know he's a knuckler, and therefore we assume he's got many years left, but 40 is 40, and after the steroid era, bodies break down even when the arm doesn't. also, Dickey throws an unusually HARD knuckler, and he came to it late in his career after throwing a lot of fastballs and breaking balls in the majors, so its a crapshoot how much he's really got left. While i'm all for them re-signing Dickey, the Mets could be facing the reality of having to guarantee a broken down 42-year old $15m in a few years. Lets call this the Jason Bay Option... or Santana Lite. Or the Mets can make a move, turning an aging pitcher coming off a career year into a few studly prospects, or an uber-prospect. We would be dealing from our 1 and only position of depth (SP) to fill some of our multitude of holes; we would be capitalizing on a career year from an old pitcher (a high risk position to begin with) into young everyday players (OFs and/or Cs) with futures. Wouldn't it be nice to be on the GOOD side of such a deal for a change? you want to talk economics? Buy low and sell high. Rinse. Repeat.

Somebody has to back up Tejada, and Hicks seems to be more of a SS than Turner. But while Hicks had some pop in the minors (20hr/550AB power), Turner is a better hitter and would be more useful as a PH.

Having given up on video games after PONG, i don't think i'll get any of the jokes or references. so i'll pass.

RealityChuck wrote: From the list: The Ten Commandments (1956) Doctor Zhivago (1965) The Exorcist (1973) The Bells of St. Mary's (1945) Lawrence of Arabia (1962) The Best Years of Our Lives (1946) The Poseidon Adventure (1972) House of Wax (1953) some surprises from an accomplished film guy like Chuck. The Bells of St. Mary's (1945) - i fell in love with Ingrid Bergman as a nun... is that wrong? The Best Years of Our Lives (1946) - "soap opera"-ish, but still surprisingly effective in describing post-war America. The Ten Commandments (1956) - yeah, where's yer Moses NOW, see? Awful, but on an epic scale. House of Wax (1953) - you got Vincent Price, a young Charles Bronson, one of the first 3D features, in a solid DeToth thriller. Still fun, i think. Lawrence of Arabia (1962) - really Chuck? this is on my short list of greatest movies ever made... Doctor Zhivago (1965) - ... but not all of David Lean's films were winners. This one is a total bore. The Poseidon Adventure (1972) - there's got to be a morning after... and you haven't lived til you see a fat Shelley Winters take the plunge. The Exorcist (1973) - scared me when i was a kid; made me laugh as an adult ..."your mother sews socks that smell!"

Ceetar wrote: Twilight made a whole boatload of money. you should see that too. yeah, if you're a 13-year-old girl, or the parent of one being forced to drive her to the theater. Ditto for "The Hunger Games" As for the others: Avatar (2009) Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) - I like James Cameron, and these were pretty spectacular. Spider-Man (2002) Spider-Man 3 (2007) - I assume you saw SM2, which was the only good one of the series, so you can give these a miss. Marvel's The Avengers (2012) - but this one totally kicks ass. The Dark Knight (2008) The Dark Knight Rises (2012) - i love this trilogy. But if you saw and didn't like the 1st one, odds are you won't like these either. The Sixth Sense (1999) - terrific film. The Passion of the Christ (2004) - didn't see it, didn't want to. Mrs. Doubtfire (1993) Ghost (1990) - 2 chick flicks; only worth sitting thru if it'll make you seem sensitive and gets you laid. Independence Day (1996) Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006) Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003) Jurassic Park (1993) The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997) Twister (1996) Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009) Shrek 2 (2004) - all soulless product, sound & fury signifying nothing.

top 100 us box office (adjusted for inflation) Gone With the Wind (1939) Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope (1977) The Sound of Music (1965) E. T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982) Titanic (1997) The Ten Commandments (1956) Jaws (1975) Doctor Zhivago (1965) The Exorcist (1973) Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) 101 Dalmatians (1961) Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) Ben-Hur (1959) Avatar (2009) Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983) Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999) The Sting (1973) The Lion King (1994) Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) Jurassic Park (1993) The Graduate (1967) Fantasia (1940) The Godfather (1972) Forrest Gump (1994) Mary Poppins (1964) Grease (1978) Marvel's The Avengers (2012) Thunderball (1965) The Dark Knight (2008) The Jungle Book (1967) Sleeping Beauty (1959) Shrek 2 (2004) Ghostbusters (1984) Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969) Love Story (1970) Spider-Man (2002) Independence Day (1996) Home Alone (1990) Pinocchio (1940) Cleopatra (1963) Beverly Hills Cop (1984) Goldfinger (1964) Airport (1970) American Graffiti (1973) The Robe (1953) Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006) Around the World in 80 Days (1956) Bambi (1942) Blazing Saddles (1974) Batman (1989) The Bells of St. Mary's (1945) The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) Finding Nemo (2003) The Towering Inferno (1974) Spider-Man 2 (2004) My Fair Lady (1964) The Greatest Show on Earth (1952) National Lampoon's Animal House (1978) The Passion of the Christ (2004) Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005) Back to the Future (1985) The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) The Sixth Sense (1999) The Dark Knight Rises (2012) Superman (1978) Tootsie (1982) Smokey and the Bandit (1977) West Side Story (1961) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001) Lady and the Tramp (1955) Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977/1980) Lawrence of Arabia (1962) The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975) Rocky (1976) The Best Years of Our Lives (1946) The Poseidon Adventure (1972) The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) Twister (1996) Men in Black (1997) The Bridge On The River Kwai (1957) Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009) It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World (1963) Swiss Family Robinson (1960) One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) M*A*S*H (1970) Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002) Mrs. Doubtfire (1993) Aladdin (1992) Toy Story 3 (2010) Ghost (1990) Duel in the Sun (1946) The Hunger Games (2012) Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003) House of Wax (1953) Rear Window (1954) The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997) Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) Spider-Man 3 (2007) Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) the only ones i haven't seen: - Love Story (1970) - The Passion of the Christ (2004) - Swiss Family Robinson (1960) - Duel in the Sun (1946)

i think I've seen every movie anybody has listed so far in this thread. Wait... I didn't see 'Brokeback Mountain", nor do i intend to, nor almost every movie adaptation since 1961 that was based on any 19th century novels written by Henry James, Jane Austen or any of the Brontes (including most movies made by Merchant/Ivory). I don't know how many of these would qualify as Mega-hits, but i think some did (A ROOM WITH A VIEW, SENSE & SENSIBILITY come to mind). SHAWSHANK wasn't a megahit. It was more of a mega-flop. I love it, and it has developed a cult following and great critical reputation, but its not a 'mega-hit' in any reasonable meaning of that word. And any meaning of the term that doesn't include TITANIC and AVATAR is missing the point entirely.