By the way the "victim" who lost the eyeball in Kill Bill was played by Daryl Hannah. Her character was a very nasty piece of work and if anyone deserved such a fate, it was her.

Kill Bill Part 1 was unapologetically a display of style over substance. Part 2 started adding some depth to some of the characters while dialing back on mind numbing action scenes.

@sukhisoo said:

There is a scene where Uma Thurman engages in a sword fight with "The crazy 88s." There does indeed seem to be about 88 opponents. She dismembers most of them and blood is constantly spurting everywhere. It is, as you mention, shot to be more cartoonish than realistic. Still, the scene goes on and on. He does stave off some tedium by changing up the cinematographic techniques in mid battle, but it eventually grows tiresome. It seemed as if Sunshine was concerned about the length and repetitive nature of the final battle in Dusk Till Dawn just as much as the gore itself.

I guess that fight scene was more on the bloody side. It still just seemed more cartoon-ish to me. The wedding massacre was arguably worse.

@Knixon said: I guess that fight scene was more on the bloody side. It still just seemed more cartoon-ish to me. The wedding massacre was arguably worse.

Ironically, the "wedding massacre" wasn't even shown. The movie opens with the aftermath of said massacre, which is bloody, but the camera doesn't linger overly much on the carnage. The narrative spends more time on the jaded sheriff and his description of the scene.

The prelude comes much later. (Oh Quentin. Have you not heard of chronological order?) It is quite long and presents the titular Bill as quite a charming gentleman. Since we, the viewers, know how it will turn out, there is an element of tension underneath the breezy conversation. The movie stops before the actual massacre takes place and we move on to another place in the narrative. It's actually quite cleverly done.

by Nixon.

I don't think it makes sense that the Kelvin timeline would have all the same experiences as the original TOS for a variety of reasons, including A) Why didn't Spock (Prime?) tell them what all was going to happen, at least so they could avoid the very worst of the disasters, and B) All of the Kelvin timeline stuff happens years earlier than the original timeline because Kirk didn't take command of the Enterprise in the original timeline until several years after he graduated from the Academy, served under Captain Garrovick, etc.

@ Prime Spock did give the transwarp formula to Scottie so NuKirk could get back on the Enterprise ,stop NuSpock from going off to regroup with the primary fleet (which was busy in the Laurentian System) and head after Nero ,who was directed to Earth.

In this case he was doing his BEST TO RECTIFY events that Nero's arrival and his present actions were causing , events that would never have taken place had Spock saved Romulus in the primetime.

Prime Spock was obviously "emotionally compromised"but he did realise that Nero's arrival had created a new timeline and that if he didn't help nu Kirk most probably not only would NuKirk never become captain of the Enterprise there would be no Earth to go back to ...humanity was doomed.

Spock didn't reveal any other details of future incidents most probable because ,as you stated , events of the alternate timeline , would likely be different seeing nuKirk was a lot younger when he is assigned his 5 year exploration mission .

Question: Did Spock revealed ,at least, future catastrophic events . Threats that would be present even in this timeline because they would not have been affected by Nero's arrival.

Eg :

Khan

the Killerplanet on course for the Rigel colonies,

Deneva , ravaged by the neural parasites

The conflict with the Gorns.

The war with the Dominion

V,ger

The whale probe.

Ultimately , I don't think Spock would have revealed anything that would alter their future because trying to change events is like playing with fire .

1. No one can predict the final outcome ..what initially could appear to be a good move (to save lives) could put in motion other events that could cause more damage than what they were initially trying to avoid.

Or simply he was abiding to :

1. The Temporal Prime Directive, known as General Order 157, is a principle of Starfleet and the Federation Department of Temporal Investigations that was introduced in 2268, requiring non-interference with the timeline in cases of time travel and temporal displacement.

@sukhisoo said: "Jackie Brown is a good starting place. It is an understated and often overlooked film in his ouevre, but it has its witty moments retaining much of the Elmore Leonard dialog from the book it was taken from. The female protagonist is the smartest character in the film and it is a joy watching her smoothly navigate the various challenges she is presented with. It has a low gore factor." _

I agree Pam Grier is fun to watch and I love her scenes with Robert Forester who surprised me with his acting since I had only seen him in The Black Hole(which is one of my guilty pleasures).

"Generally, though, QT is not so much about gore as about the scenes leading up to the gore. You know blood is about to be shed and so do the characters. He likes to linger on these tense moments (much like Sergio Leone)."

Yes but like in Leone's movie the violence is sudden and brief and often not displayed in all it's gore it works on the level of the" terror in the mind of the viewer" it's an old but effective horror trick not to display the truly gruesome part but cut away from the violence but let the viewer fill in the gaps with his/her mind by using sound,music or close up of faces or montage.

Example one ; The shower scene in Psycho

Example two: What I found the most terrifying/disturbing scene in Alien wasn't a scene where the Alien is shown butchering somebody but is when you hear Lamberts death screams echoing through the corridors of the Nostromo.

@Sunshine62 said;"So it turns out that I haven't even seen one of Tarantino "masterpieces" with the except of some you tube clips ..eg: like Uma squashing an eyeball with her bloody foot while the victim is going berserk and screaming like a pig about to be slaughtered."

But you don't actually see her ripper her eyeball out and she is not killed and Elle did get what was coming to her because prior getting her second eyeball ripped out (The first was taken out by Pai Mei whom she killed)she killed Bud using a Black Mamba so she could lay the blame with Beatrice(Thurman named after our former queen,Tarantino use to live in Amsterdam for a while).

@sunshine62 said :_"Just to familiarise with the director today I watched some interviews he made .. he rubs off somewhat mental stating that the violence and blood in his films has no possible negative effect on the public..he invites mothers ,with their 12 year old kids ,to see Kill Bill.😳

He said that HE grew up fine watching violent films 😆 and that Uma's character (a woman on a revenge rampage) can inspire girls 😳..he mentioned woman empowerment."_

I agree with him I got to watch movies like Alien,The Thing, a lot of old Hammer and Corman horror and violent movies like the Godfather,Taxi Driver,French Connection,American Werewolf In London, in my very early teens (10-12 years) and I don't feel the urge to be violent so I agree with Tarantino on that I think that Tarantino makes a clear distinction between violence with consequence and the non-consequential violence in most big blockbuster movies where explicit violence is shown but only to serve as backdrop for funny lines and up tempo pop music or classic rock anthems.At least the violence in his movie is show as a result of tension and conflict rather than to serve as amusement(much like in old days of bloody gladiator games in the Roman Colosseum )like in major blockbuster movies.

The problem with Spock Prime not revealing some of the coming disasters, is that we were presented, time and again, with situations where basically ONLY Kirk would have been able to stop them. Because of his particular background, trickery, etc. None of which he would have developed if he didn't spend the time gathering experience, serving with Captain Garrovick, etc. Which means Earth was probably doomed anyway. Just not quite as soon. No other captain could have dealt with Nomad, just for one example, because only by confusing Kirk with Jackson Roykirk did Nomad stop its attacks which would have led to finding - and "sterilizing" - Earth. And basically we're shown that only Kirk could argue Nomad into destroying itself. etc, etc.

I am far too lazy to read all the loooong replies here.

A scene unintentionally funny:

In "Charlie x" in the gym when two security show up to take Charlie into custody. Their are pants different shades of black. They look like "Mutt & Jeff".

No ice cream for you !

SPOCK: I have never understood the female capacity to avoid a direct answer to any question

In "Charlie x" in the gym when two security show up to take Charlie into custody. Their are pants different shades of black. They look like "Muff & Jeff".

"Muff" and Jeff?

Hmmmm. That's interesting.

@Chris109 said:

In "Charlie x" in the gym when two security show up to take Charlie into custody. Their are pants different shades of black. They look like "Muff & Jeff".

"Muff" and Jeff?

Hmmmm. That's interesting.

Typo Chris. I fixed it.

@Jetfire59 said:

Typo Chris. I fixed it.

Urban dictionary has an interesting definition.

@Chris109 said:

@Jetfire59 said:

Typo Chris. I fixed it.

Urban dictionary has an interesting definition.

I bet it does.

Enlighten us ?

@Nexus71 said:

Enlighten us ?

(Jet shines a halogen spotlight on Nexus.)

There; how's that?