User reviews

How on earth can this piece of garbage get 8.4 out of 10 stars? This seems to be happening more and more. I'm beginning to believe the IMDb ratings are bogus or people are just getting more simple minded.

I realize everyone is entitled to there own opinion but this movie really stinks! The cast and acting, for the most part, were good but what a waste of time. Jennifer Jason Leigh was really good. The plot on the other hand was a simple one but way over played. The dialogue was really boring. No wit or humor. Yet another movie that I will never watch again.

Tarantino the genius... Yeah, right.

Okay, the movie is beyond unbelievable. That aside it has a few shining moments. Some of the dialogue is good and there happens to be some good acting. The bad, it drags on. It's almost three hours that could have been cut down to an hour and a half which would have raised it's rating. Quentin Tarantino again loves to flaunt the fact he can use racial slurs. He must feel he gets away with it because he adds black actors, making them main characters many times the hero.

A disturbing part of this film is the graphic detail Samuel L. Jackson gets into describing him raping and sexually assaulting a white man. While Quentin Tarantino makes cameos in his movies he doesn't here, he does for the first time in this movie start narrating right after this descriptive scene. He is lisping with delight as he talks.

Kurt Russell and Jennifer Jason Leigh are good and each brutal in this movie.

To sum up, this is a western that takes place 90% of the times in a one room building, the fact they pulled this off is impressive, would be a lot more impressive if the movie was actually better.

This was a complete waste of decent actors talent. It starts off...just okay then slides to the deep bowels of the film industry's septic system. This guy has done nothing remotely good since PF. Taratino has become extremely predictable in the plot and outcome of his films and somehow continues to get rave reviews because of what? Apparently for the use of the N word and stupidity.

I do not understand the cult followers of this trash. It is NOT art, it is NOT good film making. If you thought Django was marginal...you'll find this one a complete waste of money but more importantly your time. If you absolutely have to see it....what for it to come out on Amazon Prime or Hulu when it's free and you're completely hungover.

Pros. Start studded cast. Curt Russell is as tough as ever. Samuel l. Jackson can really tell a story. Lets face these guys are cool as hell. Love the back drop and the beginning. It starts of interesting and keeps you interested at about a 70%. Then it just stays at about 70% for a while till it just drops off.

Cons....Who the hell is the main character? Tough to say by the end of the movie. You might think you have some good guys at the beginning but clearly threw the middle of this poorly writ story takes a turn and your not sure who to root for. Clearly the use of the "N" word repeatedly makes the audience uncomfortable but the story Samuel l. Jackson tells in the middle made the audience very very uncomfortable. Is he gay, evil, crude, there should be a time when an actor just says "No I'm not saying that". A story so ignorant that it makes you question the honor of the actor in real life and the writers intention, clearly a very racist sad empty volatile writer. This story make no sense at all and uses music and the shock value to keep you watching. So many things about this movie are pointless and just beyond stupid writing and from the past Quentin Tarantino movies, this movie falls in line with him needing some psychological help in the adolescent sexual orientation area.

Did anyone notice the plowed roads in the old west?

I am a movie lover and can watch the same movie over and over because the writing just moves me. Im a big fan of Curt Russell movies and clever movies, romance movies, feel good shoot'em out hero good guy movies.

This movie left my wife and I saying...1. that was just stupid. 2. Waist of money. 3. Never will I need to see that again. 4. A very limited type of person could watch this movie. And 5. I really hope Curt Russell didn't read this script before he was committed to doing this movie cause it would change our perspective about the past movies he has done.

In just 3 words, sorry but "NO".

I'm a lover of all that is Tarantino and could not wait to see this movie. To me it felt like this..... Quintin Tarantino woke up one morning and needed some milk from the shop, on his way he bumped into Samuel l Jackson, the legendary kurt russel and a few other actors, kurt began telling quintin about a cabin he'd hired for the weekend and Samuel l Jackson had some fancy dress clothing in the boot of his car, with that quintin said "hey let's make a shitty movie for a laugh" They all drove up to the cabin and on the way quintin scribbled a script on some paper they acted it out while quintin filmed it on his phone, didn't bother editing, then they all had a few beers.

This movie is terrible, and to the people who say, "you need to understand it" I completely understand the movie, it's just really, really bad.

The experience that Tarantino tried to create by releasing the film as an event was great. The roadshow, overture, intermission, and 70mm were fantastic. While the experience was great, this is about the film. Why use a large format for a movie that mainly takes place in a single room? The format would have been perfect for the scenery that accompanied many of the outside scenes, but instead we were stuck in a bottle. Add to that the extremely gratuitous use of the n-word, and general absurdity of the plot, and Tarantino playing homage to himself, and I just didn't care for it. Be warned of a graphic description of forced sodomy that is over the top that left me wondering what is wrong with Tarantino that he would dream that up.

I read the reviews on this movie and hoped it would be half as good as they said it was. Well, it wasn't, I didn't even stay till the end. It didn't hold my interest and all the great cinematography I was waiting to see never happened. It is nothing more than a rehash of every spaghetti western ever made. Just because it has an all-star cast doesn't automatically make a movie good, this is one of those examples. I should have been suspicious since they seemed to be over advertising this movie. I left before the end just to get to the parking deck faster just so I could get out of there. Save your money, all hype and no substance.

I give it a two for the scenery, sets, costumes, lighting and photography. Tarantino used the UltraPanavision format to good effect, and the results are on the screen (I saw the 70mm film version).

That said, the dialogue is comic-book level, the characters are cardboard props with no development whatsoever, the plot is rice paper-thin, the violence is beyond extreme for no good reason, and it is too long by at least an hour (more like an hour and a half, given the lack of a compelling plot). I don't want to judge the actors, as the cartoonish performances may be the result of having nothing worthwhile with which to work. A nihilistic, masturbatory exercise by someone whose entire worldview is informed by film.

Imagine this - a Tarantino fan is asked to write an eight hour season of a TV show, set in a log cabin for budget purposes.

They write it, paying homage to Tarantino films in a few different ways, casting some of his usual players. They do their best to be Tarantino - there are too many self-indulgent speeches, the characters all talk the same flowery lingo, every question or fact has to be asked/given in some repetitive, distracting, and unbelievably self-conscious way. Yet, it doesn't have any of the verve or quotability of an actual Tarantino project.

You eventually end up buying the DVD set of this series in a supermarket bargain bin. At home, you notice that one disc is labelled "Deleted Scenes". You put the disc in - check the time, and there are 180 minutes of deleted scenes. You watch them all in sequence.

THAT is exactly the experience of watching The Hateful Eight.

Come on Quentin, you can do better, I know you can. I saw reservoir dogs. This movie while comical in essence is about a decade late in when we were still entertained by 8 people dribbling none sense for 2 hours. The acting is top notch for 90'/early 2000's, which is exactly what I imagine he told the actors to act like for the duration of this movie. Kurt Russell resembled a drunken version of what he once was in tombstone. Samuel Jackson resembled what he once was in basic. And the other actors just pretty much followed in lockstep with them.

The story was disappointing, that is not to say that there weren't any entertaining parts, of course there were. However the general movie just felt like an overall waste of time. And what's with the nailing the door over and over again shut? They couldn't just use those same pegs to make sides by the door and then put a stick in between? I mean you have to figure at least 1 of out 8 of them has to have a brain cell considering at least 3 of them were in the army. 2/10 because come on, phoning in it like this is disgraceful. I don't care how many good movies you've made, there is no excuse for this piece of crap. Oh and 1 more thing why didn't he title it "The H8ful" it would have been much better for promos.

There are many reasons to dislike this film, here are a few:

Storyline: Simplistic, turgid and doesn't go anywhere. Someone told me there were some twists in it, which is why I didn't bail early on. There are no discernible twists (and I really wish I'd bailed)!

Characters: Unlikable to a man. There's really no one to root for (at least those who aren't killed-off after a few scenes). As a result, I didn't care about any potential outcomes.

Waaaay too long: Some films I never want to end.. This one I spent an hour and a half thinking 'when's this going to get going?' and another hour and a bit thinking 'is base gratuity all Tarantino has left?' Believe the people who say there's nothing which engages the viewer with this one.. IT"S A STINKER.

However, one has to acknowledge there MUST be an audience for this; and I can only imagine it's those sadistic, idiot types who whoop with joy to Bum-Fights and the crueler clips in Jackass.

I fear the high rating for this howler is more an indictment on the changing audience than it is a reflection of genuine merit.

The Hateful Eight is easily Tarantino's worst movie. It's a vanity project that lacks the inventiveness and wit of his other works. It's much too long, is way too talks, boasts cartoonish violence, and has nothing interesting to say. The snowbound setting is promising, but that's about it. Save yourself 168 minutes.

Ever watch a movie and it was so fantastic that you've watched it repeatedly? Ever watch and old John Wayne movie where each time you watch it, you get a feel that it only keeps getting better? The Hateful8 is NOT one of those movies. I thought the gay scene came just out of nowhere and certainly isn't going to be a movie where you would ever want to watch this disaster again.

I didn't like this movie at all. I rated it a 2. I would never watch it again. It had a fake django type feel to it where the characters weren't real at all. The N bombs were filled throughout the movie.

The scenery was great, the horses and carriages appeared authentic. That's why I gave it a two.

When I saw this movie was rated a 9.1 I was thrilled because I haven't seen movies rated that high and thought I'd see something GREAT!. I watched but was hugely disappointed. I stopped it a few times to go get something to drink, throw in a load of laundry and made dinner. It just wasn't the riveting 9.1 that other reviewers are making it out to be.

QT had been my favorite director till he turned out The Hateful Eight. I don't remember how many times I have seen Pulp Fiction. Even his later works like 'Inglourious Basterds' have left me speechless. His understanding of filmography is transcendental. Consequently, I was totally flummoxed by a film which turned out to be a truck-load of pure manure. If Tarantino has decided that the cause of African-Americans will be furthered by creating films of fictional Black-retribution he is most welcome to do it; but he should do it with more flair, and perhaps more care. It looks like that 'flair' is something which is totally missing in this movie, and has replaced with something like toxic self-indulgence. It looks like that that QT has decided that because he has built such an international reputation,any nonsense he now produces will be lapped up as great cinema. It does have the Tarantino trademarks of occasional great dialogue, competent acting, elaborate dance of blood and gore, and quality music. But where it goes all wrong is a remarkably languorous pace, a ponderous playhouse script, a completely meaningless and insane story, a remarkably linear storytelling (with the characteristic chapter-numbering of scenes laboring as cliché than any cinematic necessity), and a general feeling that QT is doing all this to advance his Black-retribution philosophy than any compulsion to create a compelling saga. If this film was produced as a second rate Hollywood flick by any B-grade filmmaker I would perhaps thought of rating it as passable, and then only if the running-time was kept under two hours. But with a 3 hour running time produced under the QT banner, it can only be called a monstrous waste of time and money, which deserves to be canned; or shown to film students as a case-study of how NOT to make a film. The 2 stars I have awarded is for some occasional good dialogue...otherwise it is such an awful film that I now feel that there should a law against producing such bad films. Best avoided.

The cast was wasted with that script. Tarantino can't do nuance or subtlety. A boring rehash of the same tired old tropes with cringey dialog and dumb plot that appears to have come straight from some pubescent schoolboy's imagination. Meandering monologues from one-dimensional characters, with only one standout, Walton Goggins. An unentertaining waste of two and a half hours.