MovieChat Forums > Animal Kingdom (2010) Discussion > On 'Quentin Tarantino's' list of best of...

On 'Quentin Tarantino's' list of best of 2010!


He had it listed at #3! And I would guess he knows a little about movies!

reply

[deleted]

This movie was good, but let's not get carried away. Goodfellas is a better film on every level and it's not even close.

reply

[deleted]

Sheer terror isn't a prerequisite for a great gangster film. Goodfellas told a complete story, while AK told half a story. It was a good movie and I'm glad that you appreciate it, but Goodfellas and Pulp Fiction are on the top of the list.

reply

[deleted]

That was cute. Care to elaborate?

reply

[deleted]

You're right. Artistically they are not comparable. Pulp Fiction is on a different level in my opinion. Animal Kingdom is not as deep as you are letting on. If you think Pulp Fiction is overrated, you must be under the age of 28. AK was a solid debut, but that's about it. Seen it twice and it is what it is. A great movie with subpar acting from the kid and average writing. If you have raging man wood for it, great. But let's not bash the real classics.

reply

[deleted]

I only brought up Pulp Fiction because it's a gangster film and it happens to be my favorite movie. I agree, they are nothing alike. Pulp Fiction takes a lighter approach. Animal Kingdom is more gritty and dark. What makes Pulp Fiction so great to me is the great characters, superb acting and dialogue that has people reciting lines 20 yrs down the line.

Like I said before, AK was great, but not even close to PF or Goodfellas. Do me a favor and explain how Animal Kingdom was so deep and brooding. Also, how can you say the acting was so good, when the main character was about as engaging as a dead squirrel?

reply

[deleted]

Pulp Fiction is more of a gangster movie than Animal Kingdom. In PF at least they do gangster sh*t. In AK, they are just dealing with the aftermath of sh*t we never even see. The acting, other than J, was excellent but that ham was the lead. Tarantino gave Travolta, who was never as good before or after, into an actor who should have won an Oscar. I love that you have this much enthusiasm for a movie, I'm the same way. We just differ in opinions. Give me your top 5 movies and your age ( sounds dumb, but it's important).

reply

[deleted]

My top 5 always change, depending on the mood I'm in.

1. Pulp Fiction
2. The Grapes Of Wrath
3. There Will Be Blood
4. Rear Window
5. Fargo

I've found that folks under the age of 30, don't understand the importance of Pulp Fiction. I seen it first when I was 12 and it left a great impact. So original at the time. Love your list bro, keep loving movies.

reply

[deleted]

I loved Zodiac! Finchers most underrated film in my book. I grew up with a movie loving dad, so I have a few oldies on there, but those are badass movies regardless of how old they are. I could change Fargo out. with any other Coen movie, just depends on my mood. And since tv Fargo is my favorite show right now, I thought I'd make that my number 5.

By the way, it would take me 5 months to put together my top 10. I love a lot of movies!

reply

Also, how can you say the acting was so good, when the main character was about as engaging as a dead squirrel?


Yeah, well, the acting was "real". At least everyone located in the US should concede, there's plenty of real life ppl which ARE engaging as a dead squirrel.

What's way more appreciated though: people being fun to look at.

E.G., M. Mc Connaghuey, Brad Pit, Ben Affleck, J. Roberts, A. Jolie, they're pretty limited concerning their acting skills, but US audiences just love seing 'em.

And don't nobody expect average joe to recognize real skills or quality when he's hit in the face by it.

reply

Pulp Fiction is kind of in a category all its own. But I'm looking to see this Animal Kingdom,as it suddenly has renewed popularity in that a series has befun now on American cable TNT. it is also getting good reviews. It is not a copy,however of the film. Changes were made that doe dislike...Especially regarding the mother and her character in general.

But this has receive some of the greatest reviews for a movie of its kind I've seen in a long time. Pulp is a stand alone. Again,however,that Tarrentino puts this so high in his list,says a lot.

reply

So you have raging man wood for Tarantino?

reply

It also has a 97% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

reply

[deleted]

We were bored to death during this film even if it had a few interesting bits. I don't get all the 9 and 10 ratings and exemplary reviews to be honest, must have been written by "friends of the film" and film buffs. It was really quite mundane and sooo sooo slow - and dialogue inaudible for the most part. We used the fast forward button several times. Oh well just goes to show - something. Now don't go putting a butthurt on me for my opinion. I said there were some interesting bits. But don't you think this would've been better as a weekly tv series, like the Sopranos? That way the character development would be really mesmerizing. I'd watch it.

reply

I don't understand how people can fast forward through any part of a film they haven't seen before. If you're so uninterested in a film that you feel the need to fast forward through it to get through, why not just turn it off at that point? Makes no sense to me. I just got done watching it, and I really enjoyed it. The acting was top notch. I even enjoyed the kid's performance. He held his own against some extremely talented actors.

*Life is great. Without it, you'd be dead*

reply

That would probably put me off seeing something.

reply