Pointless, as always

Rating: 6/10 (9 January 2016)

With so many reviews already, I guess there aren't many chances one will read this one;despite the fact I found many things in other reviews I agree with, I wanted to put down some thoughts of mine regarding the cinema of Tarantino.From my rating, it is obvious that I am not among those who loved the movie;yet, I think we should take into account what he does in a general context which may explain the reason he enjoys a cult status and has so many devoted fans.To begin with, the cinema of Tarantino reflects a certain personality(of himself), it is recognizable at once, the way one immediately recognizes a Woody Allen movie;even the actors speak in the same way, not to mention the things they say and the pose they take to say them. To me, the dialogues seem pointless very often;I do not believe that phrases, even in a movie, serve only as information vehicles, but I do believe that they must bare a certain load of meaning, so I find small talk(as in some praised Linklater movies), or pose-talk(as in Tarantino movies) boring. I admit that every movie of his has a certain charm, and this is also true about these Hateful Eight, but this charm is based mainly on the concept(the basic idea) and his very interesting mixing of actors, music and other film memories in his own way that is sick with verbalism and pointless violence.When I say pointless violence, I must stress the fact that I do not object to it morally, and that I like a lot of movies who go for the gore, even having fun with it , as Tarantino does, but somehow in his films(in this one, for instance)he seems to do it in an exhibitionist way, not serving the purpose of the film, but trying to show off, to convince everyone, including himself, that he is clever. This way, his movies retain the personality I mentioned but they never have any meaning at all.What I mean by the word meaning is not some great statement about life(we hear many such things during his movies)-since I declare myself a fan of b-movies- but a certain attitude towards life every piece of art(adventure movies too) holds.From time to time, there are glimpses of meaningfulness, but the general feeling is of the narcissistic enjoyment of a supposed meta-look. What is the purpose of the 70 mm, for example, in this movie, since there is no meaningful use of it(watch the movie of John Carpenter or Robert Altman to see what cinemascope means)?So, was it fun?to me, so and so;sometimes I got bored, sometimes a little engaged. I guess others found it more suitable to their taste(and that is in no way objectable).Tarantino has a certain place in the contemporary cinema, and this movie is no stranger to this place.Every time I say to myself I won't watch his next movie, but every time I do.