Looks Like Quentin Tarantino Hasn’t Scrapped The Hateful Eight After All

Posted by on April 21st, 2014   Filed under: Rumours, Western
Source: Variety

hatefuleightliveread

It’s been a few months now since the script for Quentin Tarantino’s next film The Hateful Eight leaked online, prompting Tarantino to take legal action and put the project on hold indefinitely. Since then, it seems that the story has remained close to his heart and he may be having second thoughts about shelving it. Over the weekend, the Ace Hotel in L.A. held a live reading of the film’s script with Tarantino himself on stage essentially directing his dream cast. While he did not announce anything official with regards to making the movie, he did reveal that he is currently working on a third draft of the script. Does this mean we’ll be seeing The Hateful Eight on screen sooner rather than later?

A handful of reviews of the live read have appeared online, verifying that the script is full of violence, profanity and n-bombs. In other words, it sounds like a Quentin Tarantino movie. Tarantino started the night by informing audience members that the fifth chapter had been completely overhauled, stating this was the only time it would be performed in its current incarnation. The cast for the live read was as follows:

  • Samuel L. Jackson as Major Marquis Warren
  • Kurt Russell as bounty hunter John Ruth aka “The Hangman”
  • Bruce Dern as Confederate General Smithers
  • Zoe Bell as Six Horse Judy
  • Walton Goggins as Chris Mannix
  • James Parks as the driver O.B.
  • Amber Tamblyn as his prisoner Daisy Domergue
  • Denis Menochet as the Frenchman Bob
  • Tim Roth as the Englishman Oswaldo Mobray
  • Michael Madsen as John Gage
  • Dana Gourrier as Minnie
  • James Remar as Jody

While it’s not quite clear if the entire line-up would be available to reprise their roles on screen, Tarantino did make it clear that he would shoot the film in 70mm if he decides to make it. Did anyone out there attend the event or read the first draft of the script? If so, what did you think? Do you still hope that Quentin Tarantino makes The Hateful Eight his next film?



  • kyri

    whatever he spouts I ll eat

  • Lisa

    Told you he was a crybaby. What he did last time was typical of a child’s reaction. And as expected, the child reverts back to his previous condition after realizing that his immature behaviour/reaction actually hurt no one else but him.

    He even reverted his old claim of forever sticking to 35mm. Not only is he not very smart, but he also got no balls.

  • pineapplepuss

    Quentin Tarantino is the stupidest person I’ve ever seen

  • kyri

    Don’t worry

    There are plenty of Joss Whedons, Michael bays, and Zack Snyders still around to vomit digital garbage for you to consume.

    and How is shotting in 70mm instead of 35 lack of integrity? 70mm is still analogue but with more resolution.

    Nowadays 35mm projectors practically don’t exist anymore. Everything is digital now. What is he supposed to do? use 35 film and then shove it up his ass?

    He made those comments when the battle of digital vs film was still somewhat ongoing – probably hoping that he could make an impact – Now 35mm is officially a dead medium. If he chose to film in it then 90% of the theaters would just play the digital copy anyway and imax that uses 70mm wouldn’t be utilized either.

    So he made the right/only choice and I am actually looking forward to a higher resolution analogue film by him.

    And even if he shot his film digitally – how is changing your mind over something a bad thing? or lack of integrity? I would argue the opposite but again.. it’s a waste of time even bothering to argue with people that prefer digital over analogue.

  • Lisa

    First off, there is no such thing as “higher resolution analogue”, as the two last words are contradictory. Analogue films don’t have a resolution. Secondly, 35 mm is still a widely used, and, most importantly, it’s more widely used than 70 mm.

    And associating the digitial medium with the mentioned directors, who suck ass, makes zero sense as everyone are using it now. I didn’t even defend digital medium or attack analogue film, and couldn’t care less for the debate. Nor did I criticize Tarantino’s directorial skills.

  • La Menthe

    A Tarantino fanboy trying to play a snob. How cute!

    I guess I could also say that there is no reason discussing with people who have no apprecation og the film as true as it can be to the art medium it is: trying to tell the viewer something, datter than presenting meaningless entertainment. I would be surprised if you har even seen a film by such director’s as Fellini, Bergman, Tarkovsky and Haneke.

  • La Menthe

    You should see his interviews, or whenever he’s at a talk show. It’s hilarious.

  • kent88

    I’m not kyri but I have seen films by all of those filmmakers and still think that Tarantino — with maybe the exception of DJANGO UNCHAINED — is pretty great. Imagine that…

  • kyri

    Yes, there was a point in history, 6-7 years ago that big studios lost some ground because of digital films popping out with lower budget that generated more revenue etc.

    Then big studios soon realized that they could use that technique- save money from film costs- and CRUSH the competition by investing that spare cash on marketing.

    it’s simple as that.

    Big studio films still have $200million+ budgets and there is nothing democratic about the marketing campaigns that we see the last few years plus, ironically, they look worse than digital lower budget films because they don’t even give a fuck.

    So digital is in fact less democratic than film because it is exploited by big studios to give them this severely unethical marketing advantage over smaller studios. Not to mention the fact that the initial investment for Digital equipment that is used in big budget films is still INSANELY expensive, even more expensive than analogue initial investment, but since you save money in film it makes sense for a big studio that films 50 films each year to use digital equipment. A private individual has to either rent or buy that equipment to film a single film. So again. digital + big budget studios != democracy.

    So where this left us?

    we lost both independent films that popped out from smaller studios like apocalypto etc. and unfortunately we will soon, most likely, loose entirely the quality that film provided us.

    Sure some things digital can do well, some times as good as film. But There are aspects in cinematography are just un-attainable with digital. I am not talking only resolution When digital is bad. it is HORRIBLE.

    And if a talented director can make digital look good this is irrelevant, I guarantee you if he filmed it on film it would just look better. in all fucking cases. that is science.

    Yes “good looking” films can be made on digital – if the guy knows how to avoid digital weak spots- but I can’t find a single director that created his BEST work by using digital cameras.

    Even apocalypto that is one of the best looking digital films, the’r some scenes in it.. that I wish he could use film instead.

  • devolutionary

    He’s definitely a bit of a blow hard in interviews, but the film-nerdiness brings out the best in his DVD/Blu Ray commentaries I find (usually love them).