True Romance
- Runaway lovers Clarence and Alabama (Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette) play a dangerous game when they come to possess a suitcase of mob contraband. They head for Los Angeles, where they’ll sell the goods and begin a new life. But both sides of the law have other ideas. Screenwriter Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown) and director Tony Scott (Top Gun, Spy Game) shoot the works in
Product Description
Studio: Warner Home Video Release Date: 05/26/2009 Run time: 121 minutes Rating: NrAmazon.com
It was directed with energetic skill by Top Gun Tony Scott, but this breathtaking 1993 thriller (think of it as an adolescent crime fantasy on steroids) has Quentin Tarantino written all over it. True Romance is really part of a loose trilogy that includes Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, with a crackling Tarantino screenplay that rides a fine line between raucous comedy and violent excess. Christian Slater plays Clarence, the comic-book lover who meets a beguiling prostitute named Alabama (Patricia Arquette), confronts her vicious pimp (Gary Oldman), and embarks on a cross-country odyssey with $5 million … More >>
February 4th, 2010 at 1:57 am
This was just not a movie I enjoyed, however there are those out there that loved this movie. This just simply wasn’t for me. I would imagine that if you liked “Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas” or maybe even “Natural Born Killers” then you might like this one. Otherwise, I say pass.
Rating: 1 / 5
February 4th, 2010 at 3:26 am
I must admit I’m not a Tarantino fan, and movie buffs mostly aren’t. He gets it wrong again and again. It’s arrogance at work disguised as an adventure. He’s obviously prejudiced(your Sicilian slept around, The Compton schmeel in Res. Dogs), ect. The close-ups of the actors, again and again. Yes, I know they are pretty/cute/important, but just because the director says someone is outta sight, doesn’t make it so. Oh, and how can I forget the rambling. On and on about whatever just as long as it doesn’t make sense. Like discussing a drug deal on a roller coaster. This is supposed to make Christian Slater hiper than hip, but let’s face it. Anyone buying 200,000 dollars worth of cocaine should be able to handle a roller coaster, right? I’m glad he hasen’t put out any movies recently so people can get back to what a good movie should be like, such as “Trees Lounge” or “The Fellowship of the Ring.”
Rating: 2 / 5
February 4th, 2010 at 4:43 am
Could have been a good movie, if tarentino’s ego were kept under wraps. He inserts himself into everything and HIS actual life is terribly boring. Tarentino’s films are universally and fundamentally boring for anyone who has ever lived a real life and not just fantasized about having one. His dipictions of violence eminate from his own personal lack of sexual energy. Sadly, teenage males without girlfriends seem to like these slammed together video games that are being called brilliant, and continue to support the trash factory that generates this type of hyper garbage. It’s especially sad when a true film afficienado understands the brilliance of all of the original pictures which he doggedly ripped off and claimed the scenes for his own. If one more person calls this sad, pathetic, lack of a man a genious, I will become even more sick of him. Please get a life and buy a real movie.
Rating: 1 / 5
February 4th, 2010 at 6:21 am
The main characters are two commonplace, identifiable, likable people, who very much fall in love, and then start killing other people in an orgy of mindless violence. After his first unnecessary murder He comes back home to tell her about it, and She starry eyed finds that what he did sooo romantic. At the end of the movie She too kills people, in one case for no better reason than apparently to stop her victim from making noise.
Now Pulp Fiction works because it is a parody, Natural Born Killers and Silence of Lambs works because in all their excess we understand that the killers are psychopaths. But here we are talking about normal people, and this makes True Romance incongruous through and through. It trivializes murder in a way I found deeply troubling. Sure, the actors get slapped around a bit before doing the killing, but this is such a flimsy and artificial excuse for introducing the murders that I found my intelligence insulted too. After seeing this movie I started thinking that Hollywood’s love story with violence and the way that viewers in general have been anesthetized to it, does not bespeak well of the direction our culture is taking. This is not a trivial matter and I am not moralizing here. Cinema of this caliber is an art form, and art has power.
We do get a long string of recognizable actors, but I found their acting rather forced and pretentious. Technically the movie is ok, but I think that the director himself felt that something is wrong. In the specials he rather defensively claims that this movie is not about violence, but rather about true love being able to withstand violence. This does not make sense either: in this story it is the lovebirds themselves who start and cause the mayhem. The script writer could have achieved a very similar dark and violent effect, and could have helped create a much better movie, by having a loving couple of questionable (i.e. normal) morals being caught up in the violence and surviving – But to express the idea that it was love that inspired and guided normal folks to murder, is really sick.
Rating: 1 / 5
February 4th, 2010 at 6:50 am
(…). This movie MIGHT have been great, and I know why some enjoy it, but Slater and Arquette were one of the most annoying, self-absorbed, and incredibly stupid couple in movie history. I really wanted them (of all the characters) to die all throughout the movie! And in the end they have a son. You can tell this kid is going to end up in prison or worse by the time he is old enough to vote. But worst of all is the stupidity. Clarence, the main character, somehow manages to take $500,000 worth of cocaine after committing mass murder, but leaves his ID in a dead guy’s hand–even though the ID was the reason that he blew his top in the first place? And after his wife is almost killed, Clarence chooses to put them all in even more danger… suddenly the “coke” and $200,000 has become more important to him than his wife’s safety or his own… even though their “romance” was the supposed catalyst for his transformation from comic book geek to mass murderer? Not to mention the title of the movie??!? These characters are stupid, unbelievable, the embodiment of immaturity and self-absorbedness, and end up becoming the murdering drug dealers they’re supposed to be up against. And they actually concieve a child! No actually there’s soemthing worse than all that…its that the movie tintilates you with the possibility of one or both this nefarious couple dying as a result of their own mistakes and self-degradation as they deserve, but doesn’t follow through. If this movie were true it would be a serious concern about the viability of the human race. Thank goodness it is not. And thank goodness the movie is over.
Rating: 1 / 5