*** Official The Hateful Eight Review Thread

[Yavin]

Title: The Hateful Eight (2015)

Tagline: No one comes up here without a damn good reason.

Genre: Crime, Drama, Mystery, Western

Director: Quentin Tarantino

Cast: Samuel L. Jackson, Kurt Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Walton Goggins, Demián Bichir, Tim Roth, Michael Madsen, Bruce Dern, James Parks, Dana Gourrier, Zoë Bell, Lee Horsley, Gene Jones, Keith Jefferson, Craig Stark, Belinda Owino, Channing Tatum, Quentin Tarantino

Release: 2015-12-25

Runtime: 188

Plot: Bounty hunters seek shelter from a raging blizzard and get caught up in a plot of betrayal and deception.

My full, spoiler-free review, and my quick take on the movie:

The spirit of classic cinema is alive in Quentin Tarantino's eighth feature, aptly titled The Hateful Eight. Filmed in 70mm and set not long after the end of the Civil War, The Hateful Eight begins with a stagecoach trying to outrun a brutal Wyoming blizzard. Aboard it, John "The Hangman" Ruth (Kurt Russell), who's on his way to the town of Red Rock to collect the $10,000 bounty on the head of his captive, notorious murderer Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh). Soon, however, the film's setting shifts indoors, when the pair find themselves holed up in Minnie's Haberdashery along with six relative strangers, some more suspicious than others. Convinced that at least one of these men has intentions to free his prisoner, Ruth sets out to uncover the snake in their midst. But in a place where no one is as they seem, can he deduce the truth before Daisy's accomplice has a chance to strike? Magnificently shot and scored by Tarantino's frequent collaborators, Robert Richardson and Ennio Morricone, The Hateful Eight also features mesmerizing performances from the likes of Samuel L. Jackson and Walton Goggins. And of course, let's not forget the film's bloody climax, which rivals even that of Tarantino's 2012 effort, Django Unchained. Yes, nobody makes a movie quite like Quentin Tarantino, and The Hateful Eight is his pièce de résistance.

4 out of 5

 

[TonyD]

Short take

3/5
Was long but didn't feel it.
Glad I saw the 70 version.
Wouldn't have felt much for it otherwise.
Basically a forgettable film. A few hours after seeing it I couldn't tell you what the last shot is if I had to.

Image was fabulous.
Loved seeing the corners as one would see a movie projected onto a screen. They were rounded off rather than perfect squared corners.
Only thing missing was cig marks for reel changes.
Made me feel like a kid at the movies in the early to mid 70's seeing movies like the Sting and Poseidon Adventure.

There was no masking in top or bottom. Not sure if that was qt or AMC.

There was a flicker in the image most noticeable in the beginning with all the bright snow.
Probably because my eyes weren't used to seeing film moving on a giant screen.

There was an odd moment a minute or so after the opening credits, but we just took it as a QT signature addition to the experience.

If your seeing the 70 get there on time, no previews.

The entrance music was nice and the intermission was in the perfect place and time.

Made

Only thinking out loud thought was that it seems strange he decided to use this movie to feature 70mm super wide when nearly the entire movie was in a cabin.

 

[Eric Meske]

I saw it last night. Still trying to formulate my thoughts, but I'm pretty sure it will end up as one of my favorite Tarantino flicks. The ensemble cast is excellent, with Walton Goggins stealing the show. The runtime seems long, but for me the movie moved at a good pace, even if most of that movement came through dialogue. The score is vintage Morricone, and as usual Tarantino has a knack for peppering the story with unconventional contemporary songs as well. And good God is it bloody as hell...

The whole roadshow presentation with the overture and intermission just added to the experience. Sadly, it was a little bizarre hearing an actual film projector running in the back of the theater.

I guess I'm saying I think I kind of loved it.

 

[WillG]

Here are my thoughts (note I'm cheating a little here by posting a reply made by me to someone's assessment from another message board, so try not to get confused by he response format)

WillG: I mostly agree with what you have below. I'll add a few thoughts:

There are good parts:

Walton Goggins
WillG: For my money easily the best thing about this movie cast wise. A shame he's not more well known. Always thought he never got the credit he deserved for his outstanding work on "The Shield" One would hope The Hateful Eight would be to Goggins what Basterds was to Waltz. However, (and I'll admit to being wrong about this kind of thing before) I think the odds are that Eight will ultimately underperform at the box office. For one its been a shitty year for Oscar season films (Even Spielberg, Zemeckis and Boyle bombed at the box office this year) it's a 3+ hour western which the world hasn't exactly been waiting for. And of course Tarantino's recent foray into political activism has pissed off a decent section of the American public (sometimes this kind of controversy helps, but I don't think that will happen this time)

Samuel L. Jackson
WillG: You list him as both good and bad. Don't disagree there. You're never unaware you're watching Samuel L. Jackson but the scene where

Spoiler

he tells Bruce Dern what he did to his son was fucked up (bullshit or not)

Jennifer Jason Leigh
WillG: She was fine, not sure I have anything specific to say about her.

The film's score
WillG: Regarding the score except for he main theme it seemed like very little that was original. Pieces of the score from Carpenter's "The Thing" were used in some scenes. There was, I swear, score lifted from "Exorcist II" (Morricone did the score for that one as well)

Even though the movie is three hours, it doesn't feel like a 3 hour movie.
WillG: Thought it was a bit slow in the beginning, but picked up ok

The overture
WillG: I thought that the overture could have been gimmicky, but I really dug it. The music really helped set the tone. I'm starting to realize that I really am staring to miss opening credit sequences in movies nowadays. I think I would like to see overtures being used every once and awhile more these days. I don't know how intentional it may have been but it made me feel like I was going to be watching a horror film. The movie that most immediately came to mind for me was, again, Carpenter's "The Thing" (although I'm sure "The Thing" borrowed quite liberally from older westerns as well). However there were some note for note parts between the two movies such as Russell's "Someone here isn't who he says he is" (I know that line wasn't a word for word lift from "The Thing" but obviously, close enough). Jackson's interrogation scene was very reminiscent of the blood test scene. Of course there's the over the top blood/gore as well. Even:

Spoiler

The very last scene with Goggins and Jackson

Was very reminiscent as well

Then there are bad parts:

Samuel L. Jackson
WillG: Already covered

Tim Roth playing Christoph Waltz. Although there are times it felt like Roth was trying to do his own thing.
WillG: I thought Roth was fine, but agree it was Roth playing Waltz. Why did Waltz not do this film, any specific reason? Availability?

It may not feel like a 3 hour movie. But I kept asking myself, did this movie really need to be 3 hours.
WillG: I didn't mind the length, but seemed pretty obvious that it was long just for the sake of being long.

An overindulgent QT.
WillG: I thought his narration was overall a mistake. That turned out to be too gimmicky. On a side note, I was surprised how fast the movie went back into action after the intermission. I saw at least 1 person come back into the theater a minute or two late and thought "dude, you just missed a pretty big plot point.

I wish at some points that Tarantino would not have held back information and give the audience a chance to figure things out on their own. A prime example

Spoiler

Jackson figures out the Mexican's involvement and that Minnie is likely dead partially because of the "No Dogs or Mexicans" sign that Minnie used to have hung but had since taken down. But why not let the audience see that sign (not saying have it front and center, but somewhere in the background where an attentive viewer could spot). Personally, I like movies that reward the audience for paying attention. Maybe also some kind of subtle clue that someone was waiting in the basement as well

WillG: Overall, I enjoyed it and felt it was worth the 25 or so minute drive for the "Roadshow" presentation. I'm tempted to catch it one more time in that format because I have a feeling that when it comes time for DVD/Blu-Ray the Weinsteins may only release the general release version. Also, is he general release going to stick with the 2.76:1 ratio or will it be cropped down to 2.35:1 which would also be a consideration for DVD/Blu-Ray. BTW for the studio, no roadshow version on the DVD/Blu release = No Sale

 

[Sam Posten]

Loved it. Reminded me of a Tarantino 10 Little Indians. Could have used a little editing. The Tarantino Voice Over should have either been throughout the film or scrapped altogether.

The film flickering was very distracting. I don't ever remember being bothered by it before digital. =)

 

[Dr Griffin]

I saw it today at the AFI Washington D.C. Sam Peckinpah would be horrified with the level of blood and gore in this film. I thought it was great. Darkly humorous and goofy at times.I enjoyed QT's narration, especially the line about "tidying up Minnie's". The image on the a 50-60 ft wide screen had a very film-like look (this is a joke), so kudos to the production. I was surprised it was in Dolby 5.1, but I can understand why Tarantino didn't want to push the five screen channel mix, probably single digits amount of theaters in the 100 that are capable of that. The dialog was center channel only except for a few off camera voices that were sent to right or left and the surrounds. It was very noticeable when someone was extreme L/R and the voice coming from dead center. I think it was a missed opportunity to do a more realistic mix, especially in light of sending it out in 2.76:1. The pause that John Ruth gives when Daisy asks him if she can play the guitar is epic, I'd say 10 long seconds ( it was eternity), and it probably should be one of the cuts for general release. I really enjoyed the Overture and credits sequence, it set a great tone, everything had a vintage tone to it.

Apparently the programs have a different centerfold ( I got Daisy), so go to the movie 8 times to collect all eight kids!

 

[Mark Booth]

I'll get this out of the way right from the start... 'The Hateful Eight' is one of Quentin Tarantino's best films! It is also one of the best films of the year!

I experienced the 70mm Ultra Panavision Roadshow version today! The first 104 minutes were some of the most riveting minutes I've ever spent in a movie theater! The film gushed with rich characters that were larger than the huge, wide, screen they occupied. As is common with Tarantino films, the dialog was downright spellbinding. During those 104 minutes, I was convinced 'The Hateful Eight' would end up being my favorite film of the year. Up until the intermission, it was a 5 out of 5 film, easily! Cinematic perfection!



Unfortunately, for me, Tarantino was unable to maintain that perfect pace during the second part of the film. Don't get me wrong, I still absolutely loved it and Tarantino only slightly disappointed me following the intermission. But certain changes in how the story was being told left me feeling a little cheated. Those changes, plus the intermission itself, pulled me out of the mood of the film for a bit. Happily, it only took about 5 minutes before I was again immersed into the experience of it all.


The Roadshow version of 'The Hateful Eight' is absolutely awesome! A film that SHOULD be seen in a BIG theater with a BIG screen! A film you EXPERIENCE, not just a film you watch.


The Booth Bijou gives 'The Hateful Eight' (187 minute Roadshow version) 4.75 out of 5 stars! If not for the somewhat abrupt change in how the story was being told, I would definitely be giving it 5 out of 5 and anoint 'The Hateful Eight' the best film of the year.


Regarding the Roadshow version... The 70mm Ultra Panavision was GLORIOUS. I could hear the projector at the back of the theater (during quiet parts of the film) and there was even a small hair at the bottom of the frame in the lower left corner (only visible during the outdoor snow scenes). Those two things only ADDED to my utter enjoyment of experiencing an extraordinarily fine movie projected via film again! WOW! I am SO glad I took the time to see the Roadshow version! And I hope the full 187 minute Roadshow version is the version we eventually get on Blu-ray, in all of its ultra-wide glory!


We were given the wonderful 'Special Roadshow Engagement' program following the film! A very nice souvenir, indeed! I actually ended up with two copies, both with Samuel L. Jackson as the centerfold.



Mark

 

[Tino]

Just came back and despite a few issues I pretty much loved it. Tarantino's craziest film. Gotta let it sink a while but right now it's a [emoji294]️[emoji294]️[emoji294]️1/2 out of [emoji294]️[emoji294]️[emoji294]️[emoji294]️

The 70Mm presentations was mediocre at best. Very disappointed. Saw it at the ANC Garden State 16 in one of their medium size auditoriums. No better than a 35 mm print and I'm sure the digital version will look a million times better. I'll blame the theater as I have seen properly projected 70MM and this was the worst. [emoji107]

 

[benbess]

Just saw it today. It was digital projection, but looked great. Really liked the film. Makes my top ten list for the year. As usual with his films, there's a lot of blood. Stay away if that's not your cup of tea.....

 

[Patrick Sun]

I found this film annoyingly tedious to sit through for the most part. It's an exercise in shocking the audience with gruesome things humans do to one another in a "dog eat dog" world of the wild wild west. It's yet another overly long joke being told by Tarantino without much of a satisfying pay-off, and no "protagonist" to empathize with in the story.


Instead of a program book, perhaps a barf bag would have been a better item to hand out to viewers of this film.


I give it 1.75 stars, or a grade of C-.

 

[sleroi]

Just got back from seeing thiscin 70mm. If youre in Dallas id suggest trying Northpark because the Plano theater was quite small. Also, the Overture card was nt positioned correctly, it took an audience commotion to fix it. And then in the climax of the film, the projector stopped for about two minutes. And there were a few noticeable scratches throughout the print.

Though the presentation was a little lacking, i really liked the movie, with a few minor quibbles that kept me from loving it. First off, I HATED the narration! I also didnt think Tarantino fully took advantage of all the real estate in his frame. There was one shot of Michael Madsen lying in bed filling up the whole screen, but it only lasted about half a second. The two chairs in front of the fireplace were wasted. In Escape From New York there is a great scene with Hauk and Plisken sitting opposite each other on the edges of the frame. QT left too much dead space behind those chairs. And one of my pet peeves in a wide screen movie is the two shot of characters at different lengths from the camera with tbe obvious, unnatural blur line between them.

And speaking of Carpenter, I get that this is a movie about paranoia, in a blizzard starring Kurt Russell, so I was expecting some homage. But there were so many it actually made the movie seem a little derivative and uninspired.

I have more substantive thoughts, but ill wait for a full discussion thread to open.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I've moved some posted reviews to this thread.

 

[JoeDoakes]

Watching the first half of this film, I really thought it was headed for masterpiece territory. It really takes a downturn at the Major Marquis Warren/General Sandy Smithers confrontation. It was over the top in a way that blew the "reality" of the film for me. Although it's nice to see Bruce Dern working, the film would have been better without his character unless Tarantino could have written it more believably. He's a bit too much like the Kenneth Branagh character in Wild Wild West, and that's no compliment. Also, this is one of those films that, once you have seen it and know how it ends, parts that you saw and believed originally start not to make sense. Still, I'd never heard of Walton Goggins before and he really shines. Jennifer Jason Leigh also seems to hit her career highpoint here. She completely throws herself into a thoroughly unlikable role. Overall, probably a 3.5 out of 5. Better than The Force Awakens by far.

 

[Vic Pardo]

Overlong buildup to surprisingly weak pay-off. The script needed a few more go-rounds before being finalized. One key character is removed from the narrative way too soon and the final hour suffers without this character, while another character, who should have had a greater role in the action, emerges much too late and does too little. Agreed that Walton Goggins shines. He should get major leading roles after this. I'd previously only seen him in DJANGO. And why the 70mm? It's all set in a dark interior.


Overall, a big disappointment.

 

[Sam Favate]

I finally saw this, despite the blu-ray sitting on my shelf for nearly 2 years.

I liked it, but it's far from Tarantino's best. It lacked the scope of his other films, and obviously, this is set up more as a stage play than anything else, but it focused on a narrow little part of the world.

The cast, the writing, the music and the photography are excellent (although I will echo the complaint of having so much of it set indoors). But why does every Tarantino movie have to end in an orgy of blood? Much of the violence is intended to disgust the audience, which is the hallmark of shock cinema, not one of the world's premier filmmakers. Tarantino's excesses make an otherwise mature, thoughtful film seem juvenile. He has a great, mature movie in him; I just it gets out before he quits.

PS I hope he realizes - because no one will ever tell him - that his Star Trek need not be like this. Star Trek should inspire, not disgust.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I'm bumping this thread because it feels like as good of a place as any to put this, since Erino Morricone scored The Hateful Eight for Tarantino, and even won the Oscar for it.

His comments reported by Variety at the link below are...unflattering, to say the least.

https://variety.com/2018/film/globa...-italian-composer-ennio-morricone-1203025547/

Honestly, it kind of makes me sad to know that he didn't enjoy working on the film, and apparently doesn't even hold the Oscar he got for it in high regard, because I think his work on the film is exemplary. But I also loved the film...so...*shrug*.

Obviously, he's allowed to feel how he wants to feel, but it's so much more fun to hear about people who enjoyed making movies I enjoy. It's too bad this wasn't a positive experience for him.

I wonder what he did with his Oscar. I would assume he kept it, but he doesn't particularly seem to care that he has it.

Incidentally, his Oscar is now the last Oscar won for a film backed by Harvey Weinstein.

 

[Jake Lipson]

In an interesting twist, Erino Morricone is now denying he ever made those comments and says the magazine made up tjhe whole interview: https://variety.com/2018/film/news/...-threatens-to-sue-playboy-germany-1203025669/

 

[Sam Favate]

That's bizarre. Obviously, Morricone is a cinematic treasure no matter what happened.

I liked Hateful Eight, the characters were well drawn, the dialogue was sharp as ever, the music was great, and the cinematography was beautiful, although I felt that the movie fell into an all-too-typical Tarantino orgy of blood at the end.