I think when a director can hold an audience for 3 hours in a small cabin in the snow with mostly only dialogue to keep the story moving is something to be loved and enjoyed, Tarantino is special and so are his films.

Mark Kermode looks like the old dude from Up

Only Mark Kermode can remember things from Exorcist 2 The Heretic

I want a 7 hour version

Been trying to figure out recently, in the run up to this film, what my problem with post-Jackie Brown Tarantino is, and Kermode just nailed it- emotion, humanity and a message always come second to the spectacle, of violence and of words. Genius critique.

"a post-modern frisson, what is one of those?" - the kind of sentence you only hear in a Kermode & Mayo review

I personally love this film. It's like a 5 act play and there's no real Tarantino-esque violence until halfway through, it all feels earned.

I honestly didn't feel like it was long at all. It flew by for me. I thought it was excellent. I was fully engrossed from beginning to end, it was worth waiting for.

Tim Roth was playing Christopher woltz

Strange how the humour in the film was not mentioned. The repeated door closing scenes brought some big laughs from the audience I was in.

Tarantino makes me angry. He ought to be producing masterpieces. I really hope we get at least one more great film from him one day.

it was missing shape shifting alien & flamethrower :)

I think this is one of his best films to be honest. And for me it wasn't too long at all, so yeah, opinions!

Actually, this is the first Tarantino film in ages that I haven't found the post-modernism maddeningly distracting. I always forget what a great film-maker he is because I always end up thinking about the films he's referencing, rather than the film he's making, but I didn't this time around. And while the film is long, I can't think of anything I'd want to cut. In fact I could have done with it being twice as long; 3 hours for the film, and added to the beginning, another 3 hours of driving through the snow in Ultra Panavision 70.

Definitely needed 30 or so minutes trimmed off. I agree with Kermode that Tarantino needs someone that can reign him in but also in the way he portrays extreme violence, the end of the movie was just comical, it was almost slapstick. I was completely thrown out of the tense final moments, I even noticed some of the squibs were missed timed.

I just love the way that the soundtrack is always spot on for his films. Went into the film a bit worried after seeing a few negative comments, they couldn't have been more wrong.

*Kill Bill* is two films. I paid twice, it's two films. End of discussion.

I watched the movie twice and I will watch it a third time. The scenery is just amazing and this tale is rich and well written.

All of his flaws aside, I can almost always expect a spectacular film experience when I watch a Tarantino film.

I thought Tim Roth’s accent was delightful 😁 Making a film that was almost all talk, and never dull, was quite an achievement.

Kill bill had emotion. I cried when she finally got her baby back!

One of Tarantino's better films, the final act is sublime, hilarious, cruel.

One of the only reasons I watched this film was because of the 65mm/70mm cinematography and Ennio Morricone's music. The film, which is a bit overlong, is not at all bad. However, it requires several viewings in order to reveal itself.

'a post- modern frisson ' sounds like a dish from Heston Blumenthal

Tarantino is like that genius auteur kid - an enfant terrible even. Ever since his first film the guy has demonstrated absolute brilliance. But he never grew up. He never matured as an artist. He falls back on his strengths and never challenged himself. Which is a bit frustrating. And he's becoming way too self indulgent of late. Which is very disappointing. For me The Hateful Eight is Tarantino's worst film.

I went to see it yesterday and thought it was very good. A tense build -up to the almighty, bloody finale. Ennio Morricone's score was superb too. Found myself humming it on the way home.Why can't films take their time and give you your moneys worth.

I thought it was one of Tarantino's more enjoyable films, though I at least partly agree with Mark. While it didn't feel too long, in the sense that it never really dragged for me, he may be right in the sense that it might have been a better film if it was shortened.

Really interesting point as far as the characters not simply having their own voices, but being Tarantino's voice imprinted on other people. It strikes me that in his best films, like Inglourious Basterds and Pulp Fiction, there's a genuine sense that the characters maintain their own sense of self (Bruce Willis, Christoph Waltz and Brad Pitt as big examples). I like The Hateful Eight, but it's easily his worst as far as forcing everyone to use his own voice.

I'd love to hear Mark's suggestions about what scene or dialogue to cut from the movie to make it shorter, because every single scene means something. For the life of me I could not suggest losing one minute of the movies run time.

Completely agree with mark about the violence being affectless. It would be alright for a 90 minute movie, but not for a 3 hour film

I like the 4 hour extended version actually. I laughed at “Bob” at one point while he was plucking the chicken. The wide angle interior and exterior shots were fantastic. I enjoy the surface of the piece. Yes there are a lot of similarities and almost references to other films but I found those kind of nice too. My only gripe with Tarantino is his frequent assumption that I actually want to figure out implied (unseen) dialogues that set up a current conversation between characters. For example: the discussion of “the Lincoln letter” started by oswaldo mobrey upon meeting Chris Mannix. At what point did someone mention the Lincoln letter to him? I try to imagine writing that scene in my head and can’t see Domergue or the Hangman mentioning it him.

I love the dialogue! dialogue is what makes a movie for me the more that I get the more I like I thought this movie was too short!

I'm usually inline with Marks reviews, but I have to disagree with his issue over how long it is. Really didn't bother me at all. I was completely captivated from beginning to end. Watched the Panavision version at Odeon, London Leicester Square, been a while since I had a good quality film experience like this, amazing! Tarantino is one of the few proper film makers still around.

This hasn't ended up one of his more popularly liked entries but I have to say it's one of my favourites from among his films, and I think this touched on why. I think he does the Reservoir Dogs thing really well. And... this was basically that. And I like that, and I liked this. Didn't feel too long to me. I think different viewers are affected in different ways by length... you can be more on the side of a long length being a bad thing in and of itself, or you can be more on the side of length being completely scaled according to how much you're engaged by it. We're all somewhere between those extremes. Neither's better or more correct than the other, it's just preferences. I think I'm quite a lot on the latter end of the scale. I can stand an enormously long thing if I felt I got something out of it, but I can't put up with even a moderately long thing if by the end of it I felt my time was wasted. I guess some people got that thought from this film, I didn't I suppose. If I made films myself I'd almost certainly make stuff people hated for being too long, because in all art you don't create for an audience, you create for yourself and hope an audience attaches itself to it, since to do anything else is nothing more than insincere guesswork. Having said all that I'm not immune to the guy's flaws. I do find the style of his stuff quite grating at times. I still think Dogs is his best.

'let's slow it waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down'.

Saw the "Roadshow" version of this and while it's way too long I still loved it.

I've been listening to movie reviewers for months now. I thought there were several who were good. This guy's casual recant of this movie blows them all away.

I did not think this film was to long at all. The build-up as the passenges were picked helped to make the film. It's pure entertainment.

I have great respect for Kermode but I can't help believing that all professional critics are far too involved with the subject to give an average audience opinion. When I watch a film it is usually with an open expectation of an enjoyable experience, not a view taken with a magnifying glass. That said I loved this film, it took me on a ride that I was sad to get off. Critics seem to leave the cinema remembering the negatives, I leave full of the positives.

My favourite Tarantino film. If not one of my favourite movies…period. Endless rewatching ability for me. Love everything about it.

If the dialogue was bad, i’d agree. But it’s poetry. I’ll listen to poetry accompanied with beautiful imagines for 3 hours any day.

I saw it it 70mm. It looked great. I hope they do this with other films in the future. I didn't think it was too long. It was paced very well and the performances keep your attention throughout.

Ole Mary Todd is calling, so I guess it’s time for bed!😴

not a patch on The Great Silence

Oddly enough, I find myself totally at odds with Mark on this one. I've always enjoyed Tarantino's overindulgence in dialogue, and aside from the late-movie flashback that didn't seem to add much until I reflected on it later, I didn't think the length (with the intermission, of course) was an issue at all. To address his larger issue, I don't think for one second that the film's self-indulgent surface ever forgets about its thematic underpinning. Various characters' reactions to the Lincoln letter mark key turning points in the movie, and the last chapter of the movie makes the entire films thematic statement pretty pointedly: that people who hate one another can only get along by passing their hatred off onto a common enemy (shown through Minnie's "no Mexicans" sign and the lynching of Daisy Domargue).

I think it is a little unfair to say he's a director who has "occasionally made very good films" - to the extent this is only his ninth feature and at least two of those films are bone fide classics, while as many as 5 of the others were well received. That's a much better success rate than, say, Ridley Scott, whose stinkers and mediocrities now totally outweigh his great moments.

He finds it hard to connect emotionally with one of the hateful 8. Wow. Great review, Ringo.

I loved it. Think it'll be judged as one of his best over repeat viewers

Simon: "Why would you ignore Four Rooms?" Me: My god, why wouldn't you ignore Four Rooms?

In summary, narcissism prevents artistic maturity and creating masterpieces. Brilliance can encounter road blocks and Tarentino hasn't found a way around his own personality.

Tarantino is inspired by other films, Kermode dwells on any connection to other films. I often chime with Kermode, but his misfiring of Tarantino reviewing (and his total disregard of video games as a medium at any extend) really grinds my gears.

Two things: The cinematography and the music. Excellent.

Every Tarantino film I have seen has stuck with me ever since. Not the greatest films I have ever seen, but easily modern day classics, especially this masterpiece. I don't think people realise how hard it is to make a 3 hour film built on shear dialogue. There is only 1 major setting, and the characters give alot of exposition. However the film didn't feel 3 hours, yes it was long, but by no means did I get bored. I'd give it an 8/10 for sure. The writing took the trophy for me, easily the element that made the film so memorable.

Mark has been disappointed by Tarantino more often than not recently, but all credit to him for providing this long and thoughtful review.

I loved the lighting inside the cabin and did become invested in the Young Confederate soon to become sheriff and the Union officer and the relationship between them that adapts and culminates with the pair of them fighting evil.

I had the pleasure of seeing the 70mm Roadshow version in all of it's 2:76:1 scope glory and it was gorgeous. Thanks to the team at the home of 70mm projection in Victoria. The Astor Theatre in St Kilda. The last classic single screen (Big Scope Screen) cinema left in Melbourne. I agree with Mr Kermode that the dialogue could easily have been cut by thirty to forty minutes without anything being lost. However, given the talent behind and in front of the camera. What's so bad about a display of self indulgence? Given the insulting, vapid nature of 90% of Hollywood cinema. I enjoyed the film more on a technical than a narrative level. By pure coincidence,just a few days before seeing the film I'd pulled out a DVD of Richard Schickel's restoration of Samuel Fuller's, "The Big Red One" (1980,1999). So when i saw a certain bit of iconography in the opening moments of "The Hateful Eight" that echoed the opening and another key moment in Fuller's film, I pretty much knew what I was in for. That and the obivious allusions to John Carpenter's "The Thing" (1982). Allusions, uh, ok right out lifts in certain scenes. If you've seen and enjoyed the film, I recommend you take a look at "The Big Red One" and enjoy a great performance from Lee Marvin. He would of sorted these guys out easily.

He's only made good films. And this was one of the best. It was riveting the whole way thru.

Absolutely loved this movie, saw it at the cinema and never got bum ache once, and actually laughed out loud at times. Then went home and thought about it for a couple of days.

Great film that flowed well with me. Kept me engaged - would make a good stage play too. Kermode is bang on the money about Tarantino though - he creates movies that are nearly magnificent but leave you feeling frustrated.

What en excellent spot on review.

Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown! Will we ever see films like you again!?

The length criticism is something I get, but do not agree with in the case of Tarantino's films. Personally, I love QT's characters and the dialogue they speak. Another hr would've pleased me. But I wish that Mark and UK audiences could experience the road show version of the film where there is not only a 12 min intermission, but has an overture and is projected in 70mm. Those that are complaining about time would benefit from an intermission.

Shame Mark didn't comment on the use of slow-mo during pretty much every gunfight; it was unusual for Tarantino, who usually goes for blindingly realtime bullet flying, and I found it highly effective.

Hi could i say my first gauge of a good film is i cant wait to see it again.I know it seems a bit simple but this film did it.

I really enjoyed the film. The interval was great as you could discuss what you thought was in store.....the red jelly bean on the floor!

I thoroughly enjoyed this one. In my opinion it was a big step up from Django and Inglourious Basterds and felt like a return to form reminding me of Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. Definitely could have been shorter and I understand your criticisms and actually agree with some but I really liked it how it was too. Maybe I'm biased because I'm a huge fan of Quentin's but I suppose it all comes down to personal taste.

5:15 mark talks about Daisy getting punched its nothing compared to the scene in True Romance when James Gandolfini beats up Patricia Arquette

Jackie Brown his best film

This is an excellent review by Mark. Since Kill Bill, a Tarantino is style over substance, a template that doesn't allow one to get emotionally invested in the characters. As a result, the violence will always end up feeling cartoonesque and, though enjoyable on a stylistic level, it lacks emotional impact. I've come to accept it as QTs hallmark. Matter of fact, I think it contributes to why his films can be watched over and over again. And indeed, usually I find myself rewatching set pieces more than entire films. Still, one of the very few directors who's work I will always gladly pay that ticket for.

I agree with him about post Jackie brown the films lacking the emotional connection, but I think Django is different - you do care about him and his wife, and when he rescues her you do feel emotion. I did, I was cheering him on

Wut... too long? Me and my friends as we left the cinema had one single complaint about the movie. It should have been longer. The suspense and excitement was there the whole movie. Dialogue and acting was fantastic imo. Wasn't bored for a second, which is a massive achievement imo considering the amount of dialogue.

Jennifer Jason Leigh steals this. Great performance.

I think the "postmodern frisson" to which Kermode refers may extend to Tarantino's title for his film. Tarantino advertises that this is his 8th film (if one considers KB 1+2 a single film) although as Mayo asks, "What about Four Rooms"? Is this then Tarantino's 8 1/2 film? If so, this leads me to wonder whether in calling his 8th film The Hateful Eight, is he referring as much to his own directorial filmography? Applying Fellini's approach to his 8 1/2 film, which is a self-aware biographical modernist journey into a filmmaker's anxieties about his own persona and creative process (and much more), is Tarantino playing with a similar form of self-reflection? Is this why he returns to his first film without so much as a shrug? I have no answers.

Anyone who is honest and has followed his career would see that he has gradually become more and more self indulgent over the years. You could actually say it started post Pulp Fiction. Death Proof was not the wake up call it might have been and as long as his movies continue to make money he can pretty much do what he wants. It will be interesting to see how his movies fare in 20-30 years time. How many will hold up well?

I always enjoy the Tarantino movies because he is self indulgent. How many directors today have that luxury?? In an age where streaming cinema is becoming as formulated as a cereal box it's nice to be taken away from the norm. Real cinema.

I find Kill Bill and Django Unchained emotional. I also find the stories of the characters of Jules in Pulp Fiction and Shoshanna in Inglourious Basterds to be emotionally affecting.

Great film, all the best bits from Reservoir Dogs and Django Unchained rolled into one. 9/10

I thought it was just bad storytelling: why did Russels character suddenly know about the fact that there was someone there who wanted to help the woman? Why was there a dramatic need for Jackson to do his speech? In True Romance Hopper can't lie and will be tortured to the point of giving up the location of his son, so he does the only thing left; commit suicide by insulting Walkens character to the point that he kills him. No such character need here. And why that flashback scene at the end (and film it as it it was terribly tens while it was a bunch of armed men against unarmed women and an old man). And if (NO SPOILER) the end is as it turned out, why did they not act sooner? It all just made no sense on any character and story level. Never did it have the intensity or cleverness of say the first scene in Basterds.

Very pertinent review.

I feel with Tarantino his films have alot of potential to be amazing and some of my all time favourite films but I feel the constant chatty dialogue style can just be hard going! I love the characters, the way his films are shot but I just feel something is slightly missing and it might just be the heavy dialogue I am not sure... I have just recently paid attention to his work and watched Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 and will watch Jackie Brown next I think. For Tarantino I feel I enjoyed Natural Born Killers (he was the Story Writer) and From dusk till dawn (screenplay writer/actor) more but that is just my opinion, probably because it had a better mix of action and dialogue and didn't feel as long winded (Kermode regularly brings that up with films) but he is definately someone in film making to get inspiration from....

What is with the shots from above that show a huge mess of computer cables and strange people leaving the room?

I think it could've made for a brilliant 90 minute movie. But now it's like 3 hours and okay.

Pulp Fiction is for me Tarantino's masterpiece & I simply cannot ever see him making anything better. If he were making it today it would run for at least six hours & have to be split into two films. The whole Royale With Cheese / Big Kahuna Burger scene would be at least an hour long.

Enjoyed this movie a lot. In my opinion the length is a plus to this film and gave some unexpected pacing. It gives the viewer the opportunity to really settle into this surrounding. I had a feeling like I was going to spend a couple of days with these characters just as they thought them selves. And you don't see things coming, it keeps you guessing till the very end.

John Carpenter's The Thing. That's exactly what I was thinking. Especially with Russell's beard.

Spot on review.

Hateful 8 started out promisingly but ending up just rambling to its conclusion almost feeling like a lesser director attempting to do Tarantino. You could say that around half of his output is overlong but for the most part he has had great success so has been able to fall back on that but imo Inglorious, Django and H8 were all overlong and would have definitely benefited from some scissor work, maybe even Jackie Brown as well. In particular I think Django suffered the most as with a tighter running time it could have been great instead of just being good.

He says the film become a horror film, but it doesn't it becomes a mystery. The giallo score gave him that misconception. Yes it had nods to certain horror films, but it never had any tinge of the horror genre other than the score, which tarantino didn't envision when he wrote it.

I think Mark Kermode is one of the few critics I feel are worth listening to. The mark of a good critic is while you might not necessarily agree with them, but they always have an intelligent point to bring up, and he makes a valid point about the treatment of Daisy Domergue. She is just as bad and nasty as the other male characters (Tarantino even likened her to Susan Atkins), and John Ruth as a character has a reputation for brutality, and would probably have treated a male prisoner in exactly the same way. Tarantino does treat his characters equally callously, and gender bears no relevance here. Another example being Kill Bill. A lot of movies with kick-ass women in it, you're always aware at the back of your head that they look pretty damn glamourous despite being in a brutal fight, but Uma Thurman gets absolutely SOAKED in blood, like a male action star probably would. Although the film as a whole paled in comparison to Django Unchained and it did drag in places, the 70mm experience was AMAZING. Good watch overall.

the post-modern self-referential bit made me think of that shot in Django Unchained when there is a super fast zoom to DiCaprio turning around. when the trailer for django played before prometheus, that part a lot oflaughs cause it's like, "oh cool it's Leo DiCaprio that's funny " I think Tarantino relies on it a bit much these days he needs to just make a straight laced move no gimmicks

Kermode's views on Tarantino match mine completely. Stunning, awesome, mesmerising, witty style over sneering, off-hand, post modernist, witty substance. Very little humanity and empathy. Still looking forward to seeing the film though.

The good doctor was spot on here

I was looking forward to Hateful 8 and while I didn't think it was bad at all, I do think that it could have been alot better. I also think that Bone Tomahawk released that same year, was the film that hateful 8 could have been.

Just seen this.Much more brooding, atmospheric and interesting than his recent efforts. Definitely warrants a rewatch on dvd when it comes out. It is however too long, and I saw the shortened version. Flawed but excellent. Also, does anyone agree with the argument that Jackie Brown is the Tarantino movie for those who don't like Tarantino movies? A very solid and rather cool movie but I feel it lacks some of the Tarantino wild brilliance we see in some of his more hit and miss efforts.

Loved this film....full of interesting characters and good action.

I didn’t finish it. Dialogue for dialogues sake. Input designed to shock for the sake of shocking without being overly relevant to the scattered plot. I honestly couldn’t or didn’t care about how any of the characters developed individually or collectively. The story lacked cohesion and pace. The association that occurs between light humour and casual violence in a real life setting was wholly unrealistic. Especially when it interacts, between, and in the presence of total strangers. “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” it was worth the wait. Quite possibly his greatest work to date.

Postmodern frisson. love that so much. So true. Still a lot of fun though.

This film is one of the rare times I think Tarantino failed in his main aim; he says he wanted the film to feel like The Thing and for paranoia to be bouncing off the walls but... it doesn't feel like that all, because the scenes are so drawn out and it's so indulgent... it would be need to be 'snappier' to feel like, there's no tension, it just feels like a long conversation with some violence.

I think it’s a great great film, I take his point about not emotionally connecting with them, but I think what sustains it is the story itself - who is lying? Who are the bad guys and who are the good guys? I think all the stuff in the haberdashery works great. I agree it takes too long to get there- those lingering shots of the stage coach could be shorter I agree with his main point about Tarantino - no one seems to tell him no. I thought Once Upon A Time... was far too self indulgent and over long, it needed a lot of trimming. But I think The Hateful 8 works better than that does

Kermode needs to check out Bone Tomahawk, he would love it