I liked the movie but the problem with it was you pretty much needed to read the book to understand The Kothoga beast. It also didn't touch on it's true threat (It wasn't too difficult to make more of them). At first I was miffed Pendergast was cut from the book to the film but after seeing the movie I found it more grounded and tense to NOT have his overpowered deductive reasoning and Mary Sue tendencies.
Good points. I loved the film, and honestly I liked the design of the Kothoga, because as much as I loved the book, the beast wasn't really described too well.
I saw about 30 seconds of this movie at the end where Penelope Ann Miller outruns an explosion and jumps into a garbage bin for safety. I just shook my head and went back to leaving the theater.
Disagree about the monster. The design by Stan Winston studio was a fantastic interpretation of the kothoga creature from the novel, and my favorite part of the concept was the logic of it. The cg was badly done especially in hindsight over 20 yrs later, but I must say that this take from Quentin is abnormally thoughtless. Further, whoever this host is feels like he’s both infecting and feeding off this very pedestrian and normally un-Quentin attitude of “I didn’t pay enough attention to the dialogue to understand the movie logic, therefore it doesn’t make sense” I personally think that the Relic had all the ingredients to be actually fantastic, but was handled in a very meatheaded way by this director Quentin is praising, and the screenplay cut too much of what made the novel’s narrative so compelling, specifically the lore and history of the dna altering ceremonial paste derived from rare jungle fungus, which infected the archaeologist pursuing information about the mythological creature that the stone RELIC was based off of, and ends up with a showdown of him now transformed into the VERY MYTH portrayed in the artifact, IN HIS museum DURING an exhibition on the dangers of believing in, and exploitation of myths! If handled correctly, it actually could have been a legendary film amongst sci-fi/horror classics like Cronenberg’s Fly and Carpenter’s thing. And no, Penelope’s character was not in love with the archaeologist/now creature character, rather she hated him and his unscientific approach to exploration and historic documentation, which was supposed to kind of be the moral, or rather an overall study of the idea that what you study you affect, and the reverse side of that where the scientist becomes negatively affected by his obsession with dark forbidden knowledge from a culture he is foolish enough to think he comprehends. Juxtaposed against the very theme of the museum’s themed show about the dangers of believing in myth and worshipping idols. I take offense to this half assed analysis. Normally I agree with Quentin or at least agree with his logic if not his opinion. This however, was idiotic. Even the praise he gave was somewhat odd to me, focusing on the vague potential hinted at relationship between Penelope Anne Miller and Tom Sizemore?! It’s LITERALLY the least interesting thing going on in the entire story. Ugh I truly feel he was not following the story properly. I’ve never been one of those “you have to read the book to get it” guys, but Quentin you’re missing out on one of the all time “what could have beens” of creature cinema history. If anyone reads my diatribe here and is truly a fan of smart sci-fi/horror, look up the Stan Winston studios kothoga drawings and read the novel. Had a great sequel as well. The novel that is. Sigh.
@@nadagabri5783 yea I know it’s a lot. Basically just saying that I usually agree with Tarantino but think he’s uninformed in this case. It’s ironic because his praise for many films are based on obscure detailed knowledge about them including technical details and creatives involved and i felt strongly that his opinions on this movie would likely be much more positive if he were made aware. I know he’ll never read that but if I meet him I’ll deliver my diatribe in person 😅
@@chasedwards9626 Golly, you sure do enjoy typing! 😛 (Tho I dig how you declare the movie a mediocre waste of potential while shitting all over the reviewers for declaring it a mediocre waste of potential -- half-assed bastards!)
Saw it when it came out! Actually saw them filming it back in 96! No joke.
Quentin Tarantino is the most underrated director in the history of underrated directors.
No just no.
Peter Hyams might be.
@@Geronimo_Jehoshaphat Outland is insanely great!
I liked the movie but the problem with it was you pretty much needed to read the book to understand The Kothoga beast. It also didn't touch on it's true threat (It wasn't too difficult to make more of them). At first I was miffed Pendergast was cut from the book to the film but after seeing the movie I found it more grounded and tense to NOT have his overpowered deductive reasoning and Mary Sue tendencies.
Good points. I loved the film, and honestly I liked the design of the Kothoga, because as much as I loved the book, the beast wasn't really described too well.
I saw about 30 seconds of this movie at the end where Penelope Ann Miller outruns an explosion and jumps into a garbage bin for safety. I just shook my head and went back to leaving the theater.
Just Saw It for the First time. Cool movie but the DVD image is waaaayyyyyy too much dark and shadows
The Blu-ray is an improvement. When it was released it played on some IMAX screens. This movie on that size screen was very impressive.
Disagree about the monster. The design by Stan Winston studio was a fantastic interpretation of the kothoga creature from the novel, and my favorite part of the concept was the logic of it. The cg was badly done especially in hindsight over 20 yrs later, but I must say that this take from Quentin is abnormally thoughtless.
Further, whoever this host is feels like he’s both infecting and feeding off this very pedestrian and normally un-Quentin attitude of “I didn’t pay enough attention to the dialogue to understand the movie logic, therefore it doesn’t make sense”
I personally think that the Relic had all the ingredients to be actually fantastic, but was handled in a very meatheaded way by this director Quentin is praising, and the screenplay cut too much of what made the novel’s narrative so compelling, specifically the lore and history of the dna altering ceremonial paste derived from rare jungle fungus, which infected the archaeologist pursuing information about the mythological creature that the stone RELIC was based off of, and ends up with a showdown of him now transformed into the VERY MYTH portrayed in the artifact, IN HIS museum DURING an exhibition on the dangers of believing in, and exploitation of myths!
If handled correctly, it actually could have been a legendary film amongst sci-fi/horror classics like Cronenberg’s Fly and Carpenter’s thing.
And no, Penelope’s character was not in love with the archaeologist/now creature character, rather she hated him and his unscientific approach to exploration and historic documentation, which was supposed to kind of be the moral, or rather an overall study of the idea that what you study you affect, and the reverse side of that where the scientist becomes negatively affected by his obsession with dark forbidden knowledge from a culture he is foolish enough to think he comprehends. Juxtaposed against the very theme of the museum’s themed show about the dangers of believing in myth and worshipping idols.
I take offense to this half assed analysis.
Normally I agree with Quentin or at least agree with his logic if not his opinion.
This however, was idiotic. Even the praise he gave was somewhat odd to me, focusing on the vague potential hinted at relationship between Penelope Anne Miller and Tom Sizemore?! It’s LITERALLY the least interesting thing going on in the entire story. Ugh I truly feel he was not following the story properly.
I’ve never been one of those “you have to read the book to get it” guys, but Quentin you’re missing out on one of the all time “what could have beens” of creature cinema history.
If anyone reads my diatribe here and is truly a fan of smart sci-fi/horror, look up the Stan Winston studios kothoga drawings and read the novel. Had a great sequel as well. The novel that is.
Sigh.
I couldn’t read it all, (your diatribe) yet quite a counter!
@@nadagabri5783 yea I know it’s a lot. Basically just saying that I usually agree with Tarantino but think he’s uninformed in this case. It’s ironic because his praise for many films are based on obscure detailed knowledge about them including technical details and creatives involved and i felt strongly that his opinions on this movie would likely be much more positive if he were made aware. I know he’ll never read that but if I meet him I’ll deliver my diatribe in person 😅
@@chasedwards9626 Golly, you sure do enjoy typing! 😛
(Tho I dig how you declare the movie a mediocre waste of potential while shitting all over the reviewers for declaring it a mediocre waste of potential -- half-assed bastards!)
The host is Roger Avery, director of Killing Zoe, The Rules of Attraction and the guy who came up with the story for Pulp Fiction.