MovieChat Forums > Jackie Brown (1997) Discussion > Underwhelming. Paul Thomas Anderson woul...

Underwhelming. Paul Thomas Anderson would have made it better.

posted 3 years ago by lolkatz (475)
8 replies | jump to latest

I've seen this movie properly for the first time only last night on TV. Movie crits still applaud it. It seems as if Tarantino had made it so that he could later say, "See, I can make a *normal* movie," while the crits could always point to it as a "proof" that Tarantino is a worthy director, not just an aficionado of schlocky stuff. The movie sets up many thing correctly. The hero is good, her ally is good, so is the villain etc, but the movie just falls short to emotionally engage you.

I believe that PTA, had he been hired to direct it and work on the script, would have brought out that extra potential the story had and would have possibly turned it into another Magnolia or Boogie Nights. QT just doesn't seem to have the empathy. [SPOILERS AHEAD] For example, when Sheronda appears for the first time to pick up the cash, I was disturbed, because Ordell had been describing her as a country girl from the South. When she finally appears, she seems as either mentally disabled, or stuck in a heavy drug addiction, or maybe even both. It's so obvious Ordell keeps her as a slave. This had the potential to really make you hate Ordell. However, the movie didn't dwell too much on that idea.

The final shootout was so underwhelming. I mean, the apparent stakeout went according to the plan. There was no drama at all. The cop just came out from the back office and shot the main villain. Where's the drama in that? I regret to say that I felt a bit let down with the movie in general.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

I liked it, I thought Tarantino did a great job. You know not every film of his has to end with a bloodbath.

[–] lolkatz (475) 3 years ago

Well that's exactly the attitude of fans of this film. But seen on its own merit, the movie really isn't much. It's technically well made, with many things going for it, as mentioned in the OP, but the end result leaves much to be desired, in my humble opinion.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Ok I see, to me Pam Grier’s performance made up for any short comings

[–] R_Kane (15828) 3 years ago

I found the whole thing a boring, self-impressed turd.

[–] BourbonKing (5612) 3 years ago

I completely disagree. I read the novel before it was adapted and to me this holds up as Tarantino's BEST film. Since this isn't his original story I thought he did a brilliant job of adapting Elmore Leonard's characters and creating a visual and completely realized world of suburban L.A. in the mid 90s but with a hint of QT's penchant to pay homage to a certain movie genre, in this case Blaxploitation, which was what brought Pam Grier to prominence when she started out back in the 70s.

As for PTA, he has his own penchant to recreate fully realized worlds and while Boogie Nights and Magnolia are brilliant pictures in themselves I don't see how that translates into him being a better choice for adapting this movie.

I'm not sure I follow your take on Sharonda either. We learn really early just how amoral and evil Ordell is so I don't see how Sharonda's exploitation by him means anything different than him murdering Beaumont and then trying to murder Jackie Brown as well.

The final confrontation, I thought, was skillfully directed and the tension felt real for me.

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 3 years ago

You'd have preferred a cliche shootout ending instead? If that's the case, I'm guessing you didn't like no country for old men either.

[–] lolkatz (475) 3 years ago

No, I loved it. In the meantime I've come across this theory that Max Cherry had already seen the ending of the movie at the mall (as he leaves the movie theatre before chancing upon Jackie, you can hear the same end-credits music as the one played later at the end credits of the actual Jackie Brown Film). This way, he was omniscient, an angel-like or even God-like character who knew what would happen later. Makes the movie very meta and if that was QT's intention, then I like it better.

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 3 years ago

Now i need to rewatch it, because I've never caught that, but that's amazing. As far as this ending, I didn't mind it being very anticlimactic. It was always Jackie's story, and the focus was justly applied to her arc of getting off clean.