Cheex Incarnate Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 Wow, Tarantino just threw quite a curveball. In a recent interview he gave (i can't find the link right now, but you can get to it through www.tarantino.info ). QT talks about an idea he has for the Vega Brothers movie. He also brings up a Godzilla-esque flick, and the fact that he'll be guest directing Sin City (yes! GOD YES!) with Rodriguez. Anyway, interesting to hear, but a Vega Brothers movie? Madsen has been wanting him to do this for years, but i never bought the idea. I mean, Madsen is too fat to be Vic, and Travolta is too old to be Vincent. Plus, it'd have to be a prequel (both bros. died in their movies), so they'd have to look even younger. But, he and Madsen say the idea could work in a movie universe, so who knows. Cheex out.
Guest I Got Banned for Sucking Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 A Vega brothers flick would be cool - going Kevin Smith-esque there, with a tang, which includes the vocabulary, but has more of a point and a helluva lot more blood. But Godzilla-esque?
TheOriginalOrangeGoblin Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 Madsen could still off Vic without any problems IMO, but I can't see how Travolta can pull off Vince. Nonetheless I'd love to see that movie. It'd be #1 on my want list by far.
Guest I Got Banned for Sucking Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 If anyone but John Travolta and Michael Madsen played their respective Vega brother, the film would go into my "Whatever" category, but not before my "AAAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHH!" one.
Mik Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 How about you try that one more time... in English.
razazteca Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 The Vega Brothers movie could work all they have to is set up the time period using flashbacks or chapters. Since Vince was in Europe before Pulp Fiction they could establish that as the setting for the movie and have some obscure brit actor as the comeback actor.
Guest OctoberBlood Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 Just stick to fresh ideas, QT. Please. Quentin Tarantino gave an interview to New Zealand's Aotearoa News to promote "Kill Bill" and was asked about the status of the Vega Bros. movie which appeared dead after comments by Michael Madsen in July but may not be after all - "That's something I always planned on doing, but other projects took precedence. Ten years on, John Travolta's getting older, Michael's getting older. I don't think they'd even want to do it. Not that that's the last hope audiences have of seeing more of Vic or Vincent Vega. There's an idea I have a Pulp Fiction follow-up. Sequels generally suck, so it's nothing I want to rush into. But Bottom line the studio wants it, the fans want it. I'm sure I can compromise somewhere. It'd be my way of apologizing for never getting Vega Brothers off the ground I guess. That way, we could get John, we could get Michael, and we could get Sam and Tim...everyone back. It would be interesting to see whatever happened to Jules and his plans to 'walk the earth'. Hey, just having Michael and John in the same frame would be great. They're great. But that said, I got to write such a thing". QT is confirmed next to do the WW2 flick "Inglorious Bastards" and a potential "Kill Bill" prequel.
razazteca Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 So QT will use the same 10 or so actors in every movie he will ever direct or produce?
Nighthawk Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 Godzillaesque would be good. I know the perfect comic book he can base it on. It was called Giant Killer.
Guest JumpinJackFlash Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 QT is confirmed next to do the WW2 flick "Inglorious Bastards" Now, that's the kind of film I want to see....a Tarantino war film.
Guest I Got Banned for Sucking Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 Tarantino + war = disaster. Oh, and a lot of deals, unconventional blood & death and talk about battlefield cuisine before an ending that makes no sense in a war scenario.
razazteca Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 Will the soldiers discuss their favorite pin up girl while they try to hide in the fox holes? But Michael Madson torturing an enemy spy could be something good.
Guest I Got Banned for Sucking Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 Will the soldiers discuss their favorite pin up girl while they try to hide in the fox holes? But Michael Madson torturing an enemy spy could be something good. I'll never forget that scene from Reservoir Dogs...
justsoyouknow Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 Tarantino + war = disaster. Oh, and a lot of deals, unconventional blood & death and talk about battlefield cuisine before an ending that makes no sense in a war scenario. I'd guess that a Tarantino war film would feature minimal combat and a lot of dialogue. You can say whatever you want about Tarantino, the man is a genius when it comes to capturing the human spirit through dialogue. This movie will own you. And what exactly is "conventional" blood and death in a war film? It's war, people die in fucked up ways all the time.
Ravenbomb Posted April 24, 2004 Report Posted April 24, 2004 So QT will use the same 10 or so actors in every movie he will ever direct or produce? Kill Bill only had 4 people he'd worked with before, and you can hardly count Sam Jackson
Guest El Satanico Posted April 25, 2004 Report Posted April 25, 2004 I'd love to see Tarantino's take on war movies. War movies could use a different spin. I'd have no problem with a war movie that focused on the people and kept the fighting aspect in the background.
Ravenbomb Posted April 25, 2004 Report Posted April 25, 2004 I'd love to see Tarantino's take on war movies. War movies could use a different spin. I'd have no problem with a war movie that focused on the people and kept the fighting aspect in the background. they've got that, it's called Tigerland
Guest I Got Banned for Sucking Posted April 25, 2004 Report Posted April 25, 2004 Tarantino + war = disaster. Oh, and a lot of deals, unconventional blood & death and talk about battlefield cuisine before an ending that makes no sense in a war scenario. I'd guess that a Tarantino war film would feature minimal combat and a lot of dialogue. You can say whatever you want about Tarantino, the man is a genius when it comes to capturing the human spirit through dialogue. This movie will own you. And what exactly is "conventional" blood and death in a war film? It's war, people die in fucked up ways all the time. Definitely agreed on the first paragraph, but on the second, I mean, we'd probably see guys tortured and then thrown in a trunk or something.
Guest El Satanico Posted April 25, 2004 Report Posted April 25, 2004 I'd love to see Tarantino's take on war movies. War movies could use a different spin. I'd have no problem with a war movie that focused on the people and kept the fighting aspect in the background. they've got that, it's called Tigerland Oh...well I hear that's good, so yeah. That format with a Tarantino spin...I could live with that. what exactly is "conventional" blood and death in a war film? It's war, people die in fucked up ways all the time. I mean, we'd probably see guys tortured and then thrown in a trunk or something. And you say that as if it would be a bad thing, but I don't know why you'd think that.
Ravenbomb Posted April 25, 2004 Report Posted April 25, 2004 I'd love to see Tarantino's take on war movies. War movies could use a different spin. I'd have no problem with a war movie that focused on the people and kept the fighting aspect in the background. they've got that, it's called Tigerland Oh...well I hear that's good, so yeah. it's fucking great
Guest I Got Banned for Sucking Posted April 25, 2004 Report Posted April 25, 2004 I'd love to see Tarantino's take on war movies. War movies could use a different spin. I'd have no problem with a war movie that focused on the people and kept the fighting aspect in the background. they've got that, it's called Tigerland Oh...well I hear that's good, so yeah. That format with a Tarantino spin...I could live with that. what exactly is "conventional" blood and death in a war film? It's war, people die in fucked up ways all the time. I mean, we'd probably see guys tortured and then thrown in a trunk or something. And you say that as if it would be a bad thing, but I don't know why you'd think that. Sarcasm or not, it would hardly fit in with the tone of a war epic, no doubt what he'd shoot for. Actually, I'd love to see a comedy war film from Tarantino, but without choosing a fictitious war, which would be extremely corny from the outset or there wasn't a metaphoric element in there somewhere, he'd cop a lot of flak.
Jorge Gorgeous Posted April 25, 2004 Report Posted April 25, 2004 I'm looking forward to "Inglorious Bastards." This was going to be Tarantino's epic before "Kill Bill" became his epic. Tarantino never went to film school (He never even made it past 9th grade) so his education was watching massive amounts of movies - therefore, I'd trust him with just about any genre out there.
Guest I Got Banned for Sucking Posted April 26, 2004 Report Posted April 26, 2004 I'm looking forward to "Inglorious Bastards." This was going to be Tarantino's epic before "Kill Bill" became his epic. Tarantino never went to film school (He never even made it past 9th grade) so his education was watching massive amounts of movies - therefore, I'd trust him with just about any genre out there. That's why he's so damn good at about everything with them. Ok, young aspiring film-makers - quit school and watch movies all day. Then - you shall achieve your dream.
Brush with Greatness Posted April 26, 2004 Report Posted April 26, 2004 The name of Tarantino's war flick should be changed to "Coming Home in a Bodybag" .
Guest El Satanico Posted April 26, 2004 Report Posted April 26, 2004 I'd love to see Tarantino's take on war movies. War movies could use a different spin. I'd have no problem with a war movie that focused on the people and kept the fighting aspect in the background. they've got that, it's called Tigerland Oh...well I hear that's good, so yeah. That format with a Tarantino spin...I could live with that. what exactly is "conventional" blood and death in a war film? It's war, people die in fucked up ways all the time. I mean, we'd probably see guys tortured and then thrown in a trunk or something. And you say that as if it would be a bad thing, but I don't know why you'd think that. Sarcasm or not, it would hardly fit in with the tone of a war epic, no doubt what he'd shoot for. Actually, I'd love to see a comedy war film from Tarantino, but without choosing a fictitious war, which would be extremely corny from the outset or there wasn't a metaphoric element in there somewhere, he'd cop a lot of flak. Stanley Kubrick survived getting flax over making light of a serious thing with Dr. Strangelove, so Tarantino would be fine. Speaking of Dr. Strangelove...we need someone with the balls to release a movie like it about terrorists or something that's comparable to the threat Strangelove used.
Guest thebigjig Posted April 26, 2004 Report Posted April 26, 2004 All I care about is the possibility of QT doing Casino Royale... probably won't happen, but a man can dream
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now