Xixax Film Forum

Had never seen it.  Could only find it on VHS.  It was great!  Brought back those old feelings like when I saw Pulp Fiction, From Dusk till Dawn, and Desperado for the first time.

Quentin's short was a little amateurish, mostly due to his acting, but still enjoyable.  Lots of long takes...

It's just fresh in my mind.  Anybody else enjoy Four Rooms?  Care to comment?

Haven't seen it yet, but judging from your enthusiasm I think I'll pick it up tonight.  :-D

Quote from: Ghoulardi GoonHaven't seen it yet, but judging from your enthusiasm I think I'll pick it up tonight.  :-D

I'm flattered!  :shock:

This movie is definitely a GREAT way to break up all the summer blockbusters.

i always thought it was fantastic. were probably the only ones though

Quote from: Cecil B. Dementedwe're probably the only ones though

Yes.

The only good segment was Rodriguez's. I was disappointed by Tarantino's because it was just a rehash of an Alfred Hitchcock Presents episode.

And there's Madonna....automatically brings a movie down.

i really liked it.  my friends and i always quote that movie.  i really like MISBEHAVIORS and THE MAN FROM HOLLYWOOD.  i really think it's the most clever dialouge tarantino ever wrote.

it's very sharp!  as sharp as the devil himself!

Quote from: rudieobas sharp as the devil himself!

Oh, that's so great.  That's a great line.

*HUGE SPOILER*


And how about the end of the Hollywood short?  I love how the lighter doesn't go up even once.  Just, *click* and *chop* and credits.  So fucking great.  He built the tension up soooo well with that 60 seconds gimmick.


*END HUGE SPOILER*

I'm a big fan of Rodriguez's and Tarantino's segments. I think they're just great... they build an interesting story which end (both of them) in the most hilarious of ways.

I also enjoyed the Alexandre Rockwell segment. The only one I really don't quite like is the first one, although avery single actress there was just "perfect casting".

Also enjoyed Tom Roth... very funny performance, especially between segments 3 and 4 when he calls Betty. Really great dialogue there..... "I'm Betty. Who the fuck are you?"  :lol:  by the way...... who do you guys think wrote this particular scene in the movie? My guess is it's Quentin's

I really didn't like it.

Quote from: SHAFTRI really didn't like it.

Release the hounds.  :x

I really liked the second one too.

spoiler

When tim roth sticks his head out the window and yells HELP HELP; then an arrow fashes pointing at him "TED".
Thats very funny.

Quotespoiler

When tim roth sticks his head out the window and yells HELP HELP; then an arrow fashes pointing at him "TED".
Thats very funny.

LOOOL I agree completely. And that scream for help is just so weird and pointless and....... funny as hell!!!!! Tim Roth gave a great performance right there.

I love Tarantino's. The rest I thought was shit. But I did enjoy bits of the second one (with that actress, what's her name?, who appears in Tarantino's as well).

It's a great, fun movie. The only segment that's weak is the witches room. Everything else is well done and entertaining. I think most people get put off by its segmented style and the fact that different writers wrote different parts. Aside from PF, I consider the Hollywood segment Avary's best writing.

And Roth is perfect.

i love the witch segment. hows the dialogue go again?

-youre not my mother
-yes i am
-then why are we sleeping together?
freeze frame. big interrogation point

or something like that. hahah

i hated the witch segment, thought rockwells was okay, loved rodriguez's, loved tarantino's

QuoteAside from PF, I consider the Hollywood segment Avary's best writing.

??????? Avary's? was it Avary?

two cents:  great idea, decent movie.  couldve been so much more with the talent involved.  i havent seen this since it came out on video in like 9th grade or something.

Quote from: RoyalTenenbaum

QuoteAside from PF, I consider the Hollywood segment Avary's best writing.

??????? Avary's? was it Avary?

Actually, no. It wasn't. I don't know why I thought Avary and Tarantino co-wrote "The Man from Hollywood." Guess old age is catching up with me.

I really only care for half of this flick, but that half is great! The second half is where the party's at.....for me at least. I thought 'The Misbehavers' was the best of them all. Antonio Banderas was fucking classic ("BEHAAAAVE"). Tarantino's was cool, it looked so improvised (hence the beauty of it). There were great touches all round e.g. Bruce Willis's temper tantrum "What the fuck is the matter with this bitch?!", a rundown of every nickname for a penis etc.

All in all, it's Tim Roth's show. He lifted the best moments and made the worst moments tolerable.

I've seen this a few times and I’m undecided which is the best segment, what I do know is that The Missing Ingredient segment is my least favorite by quite away, I thought the dialog was quite crappy, and the story was quite poor.
The Man From Hollywood is good but Willis is the only thing that stands out from what I can remember.
I like the style of the Wrong Man, it all feels very Noir.
The Misbehavers builds so well, to a fantastically chaotic finally.

Four Rooms has some of my favorite dialogue in it as well, mainly from Ted

Ted: Problem? I haven't got a problem. I've got fucking problems. Plural.

His rant on the phone to Betty cracks me up every time.
Ted: Well, most recently, there's room 309, there's this scary Mexican gangster dude poking his finger in my chest. There's his hooligan kids snapping their fingers at me. There's a putrid, rotting corpse of a dead whore stuck in the springs of the bed. There's rooms blazing afire. There's a big fat needle from God knows where, stuck in my leg, infecting me with God knows what. And finally there's me, walking out the door, right fucking now. Buenas noches.

Roth does make the film I can't see it working if Ted was played by anyone else.

I think the linking segments must have written and directed by Tarantino as Ted smokes red apple cigarettes, linking Ted to the Tarantino universe.

I liked Rodriguez's but just for the mattress part

Quote from: Duck SauceI liked Rodriguez's but just for the mattress part

and the vomit spewing "JESUS CHRIST WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT?!"

Quoteand the vomit spewing "JESUS CHRIST WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT?!"

that's riiiiiiiiight. I really need to see that again. that was some funny repugnant shit

I don't understand, I've seen this movie twice.  The first time I hated it.  The second time, watching as a Tarantino and Rodriguez fan, I realized the 2nd half is a lot better but still overall...I can't stand the bellhop.  I'm not criticizing Tim Roth's acting, I just didn't like the character.  I found him to be annoying, not funny.

Watch it the third time as a Tim Roth fan, 'kay Honeybunny?

I thought Tim Roth was going way over the top (too much) during the first story, but then I got into it.  The first story is definitely the weakest... so it's nice to get it over with right off the bat.

I enjoyed Roth very much through the rest of the movie.

Quote from: Cecil B. Demented
and the vomit spewing "JESUS CHRIST WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT?!"

Oh wow.  That part was soooo funny and soooooo gross and ridiculous all at the same time.  What a great movie.

i watched this on Sundance recently and i hadn't seen it in like 10 years from when i remember liking it.  but it's really pretty bad.  rodriguez's is the only segment that didn't make me really annoyed.  what is with tarantino & kathy griffin? 

I find Kathy Griffin to be so annoying and she's like an inferior version of Beth from Newsradio.  I dunno why people like QT and Larry David love her.  BUT, who was she in Pulp fiction?

shes one of the gawkers during the car crash.

edit: found my own answer...

Q: You also did ER...

Kathy Griffin: I was the wacky character... I was dating Quentin Tarantino at the time; he was a pretty freaky guy...

http://www.askmen.com/toys/interview_60/90_kathy_griffin_interview.html

weird.  and i wish i did not know that.

holy shit. i saw this again for the first time in 12 years and it's way worst than I remembered. the first to episodes are painful, are bringyoudowntotears painful to watch.

rodriguez is the only one who kind of gets its right.
tarantino, well...ok...

but it's weird how tim roth only really makes his performance work in the rodriguez segment.

This film is a scatterbrained piece of frustration that works overall but is weak when you just watch the segments separately. The sum being much more than its parts.

Not for me. This doesn't work separately or any other way. The first two episodes are embarrasing. I don't know the back story but I just don't understand how no one just stoped this at some point and tried to get some sense into all these guys heads. The acting is really off the mark, starting with Roth, who is not really miscast, it's just that he depends so much on ticks and manerisms and caricature. It only works in the Rodriguez segment because he made a cartoon with humans there. And Banderas is funny too.

But those first two (and I would include the opening credits) are like a compilation of the worst attributes in the 90's american independent movement. Very self indulgent in general, and not in any kind of good way. Tarantino's piece is kind of ok, but he just doesn't cut it as an actor, and in the end what's the point really of remaking an alfred hitchcock presents epidose for the big screen? Trivia?

I guess I was just blown away by how bad it really is. 

I haven't seen this since I was like 14 years old. I remember enjoying Rodriguez and QT's parts, but hated the other two.

All I really remember is that QT's part involved a finger and Bruce Willis is hilarious in it. Roberts part had children and I think a dead body.

Really, the only thing I know for sure is that Bruce Willis is hilarious in it. The rest is hazy. I'd probably hate it now. I bet it is the epitome of the self-indulgent independent 90's aesthetic of filmmaking.

Quote from: Alexandro on April 13, 2009, 07:30:24 PM
But those first two (and I would include the opening credits) are like a compilation of the worst attributes in the 90's american independent movement. Very self indulgent in general, and not in any kind of good way. Tarantino's piece is kind of ok, but he just doesn't cut it as an actor, and in the end what's the point really of remaking an alfred hitchcock presents epidose for the big screen? Trivia?

I recently watched this for the first time in 12 years or so and thought it was still mildly entertaining all the way through.  The first two are certainly nothing special but have a smattering of little pleasures for my brain anyway.  Rodriguez's is pretty near the top of his game and Quentin's piece is actually a pretty interesting look at his own instant celebrity.  It's not great but certainly it's more than just a re-hash of the AHP episode, which really only takes up the last few minutes.  Quentin's performance has some bumps but it's mildly enjoyable and yes Bruce Willis is very funny.  The whole project is a mess but I think it's a pleasant mess that I'm glad to have sitting around. 

Quote from: Alexandro on April 13, 2009, 07:30:24 PM
and in the end what's the point really of remaking an alfred hitchcock presents epidose for the big screen?

I don't know if Hitchcock did something similar but the QT segment as far as I know was taken from an episode of Tales of the Unexpected, a British series from the 70's and 80's, in that episode a compulsive gambler bets his ferrari or whatever exotic car he had to a guy with lighter, he bets he can't light it ten times straight against the lighter guy's pinky, before they can finish the bet (around the 7th try) the gambler's wife appears and says he doesn't own the car anymore, and that in fact he lost everything already and that she only lost twice, showing her hand with three fingers.

Quote from: Fernando on April 14, 2009, 10:28:59 AM

Quote from: Alexandro on April 13, 2009, 07:30:24 PM
and in the end what's the point really of remaking an alfred hitchcock presents epidose for the big screen?

I don't know if Hitchcock did something similar but the QT segment as far as I know was taken from an episode of Tales of the Unexpected, a British series from the 70's and 80's, in that episode a compulsive gambler bets his ferrari or whatever exotic car he had to a guy with lighter, he bets he can't light it ten times straight against the lighter guy's pinky, before they can finish the bet (around the 7th try) the gambler's wife appears and says he doesn't own the car anymore, and that in fact he lost everything already and that she only lost twice, showing her hand with three fingers.

They are both adapted from the same Roald Dahl short story, The Man From The South.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0508196/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0717498/

Quote from: markums2k on July 21, 2003, 10:35:00 AM
Rented watched Four Rooms the end of Kill Bill 1 followed by Kill Bill 2 on cable last night...

Quote from: Alexandro on April 13, 2009, 03:23:33 PM
holy shit. i saw this them again for the first time in 12 years and it's they're way worst than I remembered. the first to episodes one are is painful, the second one are is bringyoudowntotears painful to watch.

rodriguez the guy who plays Michael Madsen's boss is the only one who kind of gets its right.
tarantino, well...ok...his self-indulgence has/will continue to cause his movies to age poorly.

but it's weird how tim roth both movies only really would makes his performance work in the with Porodriguezer's ideas for segment alternate endings.