robertstuckey's Profile - Rotten Tomatoes

Want-to-See Movies

Want-to-See TV

This user has no Want to See TV selections yet.

Rating History

Inglourious Basterds
6 years ago via Flixster

I was intrigued, I was mesmerized, I was eagerly anticipating. I waited. I waited. I waited. At the end of nearly two hours and thirty minutes, I felt I had been entertained. Yet, something was missing. Something large. A vague feeling that turned into resentment the more I thought about it. QT, yo. Why you wanna mess with us like this?

Perhaps fifteen minutes of material drawn out to a full length movie, with overlapping and jumping around acts, episodes, sketches telling a story from divergent viewpoints. A simple, pointless, meaningless story, although one which had its moments. A movie that overall did not make a cohesive whole, except on a superficial summarized level. Stuff happened. Most everyone died. World War II has ended in the alternate universe. We've learned something or another about film, war and the human condition. Some brilliant performances, yes. A great movie? Not even an acceptable one. It simply did not work.

The opening scene portends the rest of the story. A situation is set up, one which whets the appetite. Something excellent, interesting, logical and meaningful must be coming up. Two people talk. A battle of wits, vivid imagery, a sense of wonder and complex mysterious interplay. They talk, they talk, they talk. What's going on! Something is afoot! They talk, they talk, they talk. Then bang, what the visitor could have done when he walked in happens, the hidden are massacred. Then, without any reasoning or motive (that real people would have) the survivor is allowed to leave.

Excuse me, what did I just waste the last few minutes watching? This is what later had me upset once I let it sink in and thought about it -- the only reason for any of the nonsense BS between the visitor and the farmer is to show it to the audience. That wasn't people doing something for themselves, this was the director having them do it so we could see it. Could you be a little less obvious about it next time? Or are we simply the proxy by which you're giving the finger to Hollywood?

Something similar happens later more than once (especially the True Romance sequence in the bar) where we take far too long to set up far too simple a resolution. A resolution which only resolves how much the director is producing something in order to cover us with the result. Pick your bodily fluid; let's keep it family friendly and say vomit.

Returning to the first scene, the one that droned on and on and ended pointlessly, remember? The girl that is allowed to escape, the one who just happens to be the only one that survived. She just happens to later succeed in burning a bunch of people to death, including the guys who actually kill the main targets. Rather ironic, certainly. I totally didn't expect the guy she shot to kill her, NOT.

I'm not sure it even deserves one star, but some of it was funny. Even if there was only fifteen minutes of plot.

Van Helsing
Van Helsing (2004)
6 years ago via Flixster
½

I reallly enjoyed watching the movie, although it's got a lot of just overall weird vibes from the way they put it together, and it ends kind of abruptly.

Fight Club
Fight Club (1999)
8 years ago via Flixster

Disturbing in some ways (you may not want to watch it with your mother) but oh so excellent. This is the only movie I've seen in the last 10 or so years that I have put on my top ten favorites. This movie is awesome. Period. It tells a story on so many levels, it takes watching it 10 or 20 times to get it all. Almost exactly like the book (if you like the movie but haven't read the book, do so!) and there are almost no mistakes in this, although of course some of the scenes don't quite make sense in the grand scheme of things. If you haven't seen the movie, all I can tell you is: I do not talk about fight club.