The OtherArena

Steve Yohe · Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 6:25 pm Post subject:

John it's way worst than Savages. That was fun. 8 was just sick & hard to watch. I wanted to leave, but I wanted to see if it had some type of ending that would redeem the mess. Maybe 8 would have been fun if I had John to make jokes with.--Yohe

Ken Viewer · Joined: 04 Aug 2006 Posts: 319

If you're a subscriber to Amazon Prime, you can rent The Hateful Eight for streaming viewing in HD for 99 cents today. At night in Manhattan, my Internet provider has sporadic-but-predictable outages and I don't want to have to spend five hours trying to watch the movie (the shorter digital version) by having to repeatedly kill the power on my router in order to restore the service.

The price is a bit hard to find. Search for and find the film *for purchase* and the rental deal is clearly marked there.

If it's still 99 cents tomorrow, I'll try to watch it in the daytime. The deal is not Internet-provider specific and since I have the Chromecast system, I can watch it on my flat-screen TV in the Blehh-Vision digital process.

Once I see it, I can discuss it with Yohe. I don't review movies, but I have my eccentric policy which allows for a less-than-zero-stars choice.

And I gave The Searchers 21 stars the first time I saw it in a movie theater in 1956. On the print I saw, of course, John Ford was listed as the director. And some fellow named Merian C. Cooper was billed as a producer, which he was, of the film.

In 1939, the New York Daily News, which rated films by 1/2-star to 4 stars, gave Gone With the Wind eight (count 'em, eight) stars. It was a different era. In those days, pigs could fly. With several Tarantino films, it's still true.

Ken

Steve Yohe · Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2016 12:49 am Post subject:

It's going to be on HBO or cable 10 times a day soon. I'm trying to forget it.---Yohe

Ken Viewer · Joined: 04 Aug 2006 Posts: 319

Yohe,

Well, if I had to sit through The Hateful 8, I'd want it to be in one of the old 42nd Street "grind houses" that ran the same films 23 hours per day and had more action in the balcony than on the screen.

Even in the balcony of one of those grind houses, most everything would stop so that the pimps, resting there until it got dark, could pull out their handguns and shoot at the screen.

Here's a spoiler in the form of some excerpts of the film. It is, in my opinion, deserving of an "X rating." Actually, the "X rating" is no longer used. It signified the ratings board refused to rate the film as suitable fare for any audience. Now the board no longer has an "X" symbol It just refuses any rating to such pictures and the film has to go out as unrated -- with no mention of the ratings board, except to note they refused to rate the film for any audiences.

This excerpt may have sequences out of order and is not suitable for showing to anyone under the age of 21. Warning: should not be viewed by people without strong stomachs and able to put up repeated use of the "N" word:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiOxO46fL1Q

Ken

Ken Viewer · Joined: 04 Aug 2006 Posts: 319

... (Double post.)

Ken Viewer · Joined: 04 Aug 2006 Posts: 319

The OA board was wonky earlier so I couldn't correct my error in the post about the "X" "rating." The ratings department of the MPAA now uses "NC-17," which means, at the theater, no one under the age of 17 will be admitted to see the film.

Because the MPAA never trademarked the "X" "rating," anyone can apply it to any film.

Should we label Moolah's matches "X rated?"

Ken