11/4/17
Wild, winding, outrageous, often tedious, superfluous, redundant, bold, unique, self-assured without sure identity, excessively confident, necessarily confident, directionless but comfortable. Alternating disappointment and excitement, ambivalence and potency: simultaneously ill-captained and sure-footed. The whole film is unnecessary but functional; unimportant but useful. It is a dragging limping professional mess; capably-made; well-trimmed and arbitrary. I respect this movie, though I don't really like it and don't really think it's good. Therefore I like it on some higher level as a higher entity.
This film played out very strangely. At one point it promised to be Tarantino's maniacal take on Clue, which would have been fun. But it lied, and this film wasn't a mystery. Later it set up for the final satisfaction of the director's previous films, with high anticipation. But it lied, and this film wasn't satisfying. His films often end with what this one calls 'frontier justice', but usually it feels more just. It ultimately defied easy categorization, or perhaps slumped under. Genres are created by common purposes: this film defied classification insofar as it really had no purpose. Its uniqueness was largely its homelessness, and a tramp isn't to be praised for his non-convention.
But I do think he can be applauded for carriage and gait, which is why this film receives:
2.5/4
No comments:
Post a Comment