Jackie Brown (1997) - Crime, Drama, Thriller

Hohum Score



A middle-aged woman finds herself in the middle of a huge conflict that will either make her a profit or cost her life.

IMDB: 7.5
Director: Quentin Tarantino
Stars: Pam Grier, Samuel L. Jackson
Length: 154 Minutes
PG Rating: R
Reviews: 80 out of 492 found boring (16.26%)

One-line Reviews (373)

It has the excitement of the money swap, but also wonderful slow scenes - especially those between Max and Jackie.

You want to get what you expected, even if it means the same old superficial, predictable thing.

Though the plot of "Jackie Brown" is wonderful, the characters make this film worth watching.

So slow!!.

Robert De Niro has perhaps one of the most entertaining roles as an ex-con who keeps to himself, silently observing and judging the world he is getting reacquainted with.

It was just too slow with very little action or even drama.

I thought it was boring and dull to watch.

My one major criticism of Jackie Brown is that the films final quarter is a bit boring and all of the things that happen feel very dragged out for no reason, although the films ending is a satisfying end.

It is a slow scene, played out to wonderfully lingering effect by Tarantino and I cherish his desire to focus on this couple every time I see it.

If you love his other work, then you must give this gem a chance, although everything is done very differently then in his other work, yet the Tarantino magic is still very recognizable and highly enjoyable.

I think 30 years from now that people will still be watching it and finding it as enjoyable as they do now.

Quentin Tarantino's much-anticipated return to film-making following "Pulp Fiction" is an intriguing character-drama about a cool-headed flight attendant in cahoots with a merciless gunrunner who ends up playing both sides of the law to save herself from going to jail.

It was engaging, satisfying and genuine.

I have been watching this movie for 50 minutes now, and I am BORED OUT OF MY MIND.

I thought it was overlong, uninteresting, dull and not nearly containing enough violence and spectacular gimmicks.

"Jackie Brown" is filmmaking at its best with these vibrant characters, engaging story and the detailed use of style, song choice, and framing of shots to keep all of the connections alive.

The only fact which was pretty unexpected was the very good performance from Robert Foster who was definitely higher than his friends.

When I came out of JB, I started wondering why I'd enjoyed it so much; and then I realised - how often in the cinema, even now, does the woman pull all the strings, twisting the men round her little finger simply by the use of her brain, and come out the winner in a thriller?

We really slow down to look at them.

This movie weaves an engaging little fabric of trust and deceit, hope and disappointment, success and failure.

Acting was weak and rather dull.

This is a gritty crime film that is actually worth watching just for the dialog alone.

The film is long because it works on a repetitive process, vital to create a feeling of logical continuity when the whole plot is based on pure logic.

The movie is very long and you have to be a Tarantino fan to truly enjoy it.

Nevertheless, the plot is consistently moving, the twists are expertly executed & it is entertaining for the most part.

This film is worth watching for his performance alone.

In summary, if you have seen pulp fiction et al and are expecting much of the same then think again, you will find probably find this film very bland.

It got dreary hearing that song played in the final act.

Boring and pointless .

This film was perhaps not marketed as well as it should have been, and is worth a look for those wanting a suspenseful thriller where characterisation is more important than explosions and special effects.

It was "complex" - which I realize to be false after a second viewing - and it was very slow.

Tarantino has a knack of being able to tell tall tales about unimportant people that you'll find fascinating through the strong performances by all.

Overall this film is just a BIT slow.

The twenty or so minutes when the sting finally starts to go down is definitely worth watching, with fine performances all round.

However, if you are looking for an adrenaline rush, like "Pulp Fiction," this might not be your cup of tea.

a strangely boring experience from the wonder boy Tarantino .

It's a great cinematic experience, feeling that inexorable pull as a great filmmaker pulls you around unexpected corners.

Slow moving crime drama, not as much action as Pulp Fiction .

The whole cast is superb, but Pam Grier brings a weary realism to Jackie Brown that is stunning, and Robert Foster's performance is pitch perfect.

"Jackie Brown" is absorbing, compelling, and sometimes shocking.

I unfortunately found myself bored throughout this movie.

On the negative side, the plot does feel overly drawn out.

There was a plot but the film was long and boring.

Sure, he isn't entirely original, but his movies are entertaining, and you don't need to understand such hopelessly trivial "deep" themes to understand.

Grier and Forster, who were both dragged from the depths of obscurity only to find their careers slightly revitalized for the film are both in top form and go a long way in driving home the human nature of the plot.

But if you like a good story (done in a truly entertaining technique) with great acting (De Niro as an excon toker) and can follow a plot that requires a little thought, 'Jackie Brown' just may end up in your movie collection as it has in mine.

Jackson plays a criminal with all of the menace and none of the charm of his character in 'Pulp Fiction', while Bridget Fonda and a (cast against type) Robert de Niro are entertaining as a pair of useless crack-heads.

It's also way too long, at 2.5 hours.

Jackie Brown is an absolutely BRILLIANT Crime Thriller, Tarantino created a gripping, intelligent, exciting, funny & totally entertaining piece of pulp cinema & my personal favourite Tarantino film or atleast stands next to Pulp fiction, This crime Thriller is right up there with Reservoir dogs & Pulp fiction though, the 90's were the best for Tarantino's genius.

The thing is, although Jackie is about 20 minutes too long, it's entertaining throughout.

It's enjoyable, well made and stylish.

Especially enjoyable is the performance by Robert Forster whose character I thought was outstanding.

I saw him on Howard Stern and thought he was kind of fascinating so when Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction came on cable a few years ago, I watched them.

There are also quite a bit of main players, to a degree even more so than Pulp Fiction because here they are part of the intricate and complex plot rather than supporting characters thrown in for some enjoyable banter.

Because the middle is in the beginning and the end is at the middle it can get very confusing.

Ultimately, a bit boring, don't you think.

However, it is extremely entertaining, helped along by a great cast and a terrific script.

The only film I have ever stopped watching part way through because it was so boring.

Quentin Tarantino is clearly finding it difficult to follow the phenomenal success of "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction", which made him the hottest writer-director of his generation.

Unfortunately Jackie Brown has a lack of taughtness and - I hate to say it - is downright boring in places with nothing worthwhile or interesting going on.

Quentin Tarintino is an amazing writer/director, unfortunately this is by far the worst movie he has made.

It's not as fast-paced as Pulp and with alot less violence and profanity, but is a very entertaining film.

This is a very subtle film but runs very smoothly and very enjoyable.

Its a compelling, mesmerizing performance that rivals his performance in Pulp Fiction as his best work.

The movie's quite well made and enjoyable.

First of all, it isn't nearly as violent as those films, but still has some intense brutal violence.

C-Span is more exciting.

The most intriguing thing Tarantino does is show a crucial sequence in the film from three different perspectives.

The scenarios of that movie, while fun and totally entertaining, aren't too realistic.

Jackie Brown is a very enjoyable movie with an awesome soundtrack.

Bridget Fonda is surprisingly great as beach bum Melanie, both with her pitch perfect performance and with her unexpected sexiness.

Authentic and well acted but it drags on for far too long .

I'm not sure why people call this a "character study", but I think it means that since the plot is so boring, the only thing the film has to offer is interesting characters.

This may be due to the source material which I've never read, but in the film it comes across as being contrived.

These conversations are mostly about nothing or do not really matter as far as the plot goes, but still they are interesting and entertaining to see,because they are gripping and sometimes even funny in their simplicity.

The story was inventive, involved and entertaining.

Jackie Brown was not fully appreciated when it first came out, and Tarantino sadly seems to have disavowed it to some extent, following it with the indulgent and pointless Kill Bill duo, before finding himself again with the more playful Deathproof.

However it is how Mr Tarintino changes the simple plot to a labyrinth of sub plots and explaining the story in unchronlogical order which makes it intriguing to watch.

The movie includes no special effects, shock moments or unexpected twists and feels surprisingly down to earth for a Quentin Tarantino movie.

The plot was unique, sometimes confusing, and barely ever boring.

I can understand why there's a few people out there that don't really like this entry as after the tough and memorable "Reservoir dogs", and the brilliant vibrancy of "Pulp fiction" many movie goers were expecting yet more again, and what they got was a hugely talky, slower paced piece that didn't feel like it was getting anywhere soon.

Here we have a story about what happens to gangsters in their old age, when they get worn out by an intense profession.


Entertaining in an old fashioned way.

And as for the completeness of the film itself, due to some branches of the story are not telling advisably and smoothly, therefore, the length of the film is too long, and its rhythm is somewhat sluggish.

Fantastic use of the camera and a great song to go along with it, but then once you get to the movie, beyond the stylized and interesting opening, the film starts to slow down and goes on for 2 1/2 it didn't need to.

They expected some Hollywood Lethal Weaponish crap with its requisite cliched script and formulaic car crashes and explosions.

If you are a Great, but at times Self-Indulgent Director and decide to Tone-Down the Zing that made You the Talk-of-the-Town, you might end up with a Self-Indulgent Movie without Zing.

Great, great movie thats drug down by Tarantino's slow pacing.

It's not of award caliber, but still quite enjoyable.

Jackson's brutal (off-screen) dispatching of Chris Tucker in the boot of a car, as the camera slowly cranes up into the sky, is masterfully conceived and a scene, which is subtly built up to, involving a teasing Fonda and a p*****-off De Niro is as unexpected and as shocking as anything Tarantino has done before.

However to me this is a satisfying film with an enjoyable plot and a more traditional delivery.

Robert DeNiro is just as excellent as you would naturally expect, while Bridget Fonda is just as sexy as she is talented as Melanie, one of the most intriguing characters in this movie.

This doesn't mean it's at all bad, and in actual fact it's entertaining to watch Tarantino try something different for a change.

Highly enjoyable crime caper .

"Endless scenes of boring, boring dialogue.

I for one find this to be among my favorites because of the slower pacing which makes the stakes for these characters seem real and true.

Less showy than Pulp, but a more mature story that is just as enjoyable .

The script is also very good as well, with great dialogue & interesting themes relating to the ideas of aging, gun violence, betrayal and many more that keep the film utterly engrossing throughout.

Pam Grier as Jackie Brown was a sexy, intriguing, intelligent character.

In my opinion this is Tarantinos weakest movie and to be honest for maybe 45 minutes in the middle, this movie is kind of boring.

When you read the book its confusing why Lenoard made the lead character white because the story flow isn't that good.

I can't understand how a clever, empty style-fest like Pulp Fiction could've been praised as a masterpiece while others are actually disappointed to see that Tarantino has decided to slow down and focus on his characters.

(Side Note: I've been bashed pretty hard on that one, but I guess I do have little patience for very slow moving movies.

It was a good movie with great performances and great directing as always by Tarantino but the movie was really slow to a point of almost being boring.

Looking up at characters from the tight angle, the scene always looks strangely intriguing, almost like your secretly observing on a private conversation.

I loathed Kill Bill, was bored stiff by Death Proof and unimpressed by Inglorious Basterds.

Entertaining .

To be fair, I did not read local favorite Leonard's novel, but the plot seemed a little disjointed to me.

Pam Grier as the title character is simply a revelation, beautiful, funny, and absorbing.

The plot is a pretty good, but a little too predictable, and it has almost as bad a pace as Pulp Fiction; the thing that kept me watching was my enjoyment of Tarantino's style and the fact that I wasn't as confused by it as I was by Pulp Fiction.

And while I've enjoyed everything he's made, this one I can't fault and the parts I love, I love more than in his other films and a lot of other films I love in general This film is a rarity - how many films do you see with an African-American women of Pam Griers age have a roll like this in the film She looks absolutely stunning and is quite simply excellent in the film, as everyone is.

While fans of Tarantino's more notorious fare will have a hard time seeing the brilliance of "Jackie Brown," it's a film that will no doubt please the palate of the viewer who craves rich characters, natural pacing and an engrossing plot, not to mention a killer soundtrack.

That leaves our heroine, ready to leave the country with just a goodbye kiss for Max Cherry, who isn't so sure he should stay behind.

Unfortunately, while Jackie Brown is entertaining in its own right, has a brilliant performance by Samuel L.

I know were supposed to learn about the characters and how they interact and about their motavations but the conversations between them are dull and pointless you end up complety losing interest.

Jackie Brown may not be as thrilling as Reservoir Dogs and it may not be as cool and mysterious as Pulp Fiction, but it still is an enjoyable experience.

Overall still worth the watch.

I´ve always been a huge fan of blaxploitation-queen Pam Grier and her stunning cult movies like "Coffy", "Foxy Brown" or "Friday Foster", and I also love Quentin Tarantino and his cool gangsta films "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction"!

Tarantino Tribute to 70's Culture & Crime Films Saturated With Self-Indulgence .

I did however find it a little predictable at times but it was still an entertaining watch.

Slick, Witty & Highly Entertaining .

This is a change of pace for Tarantino, a much slower, less flashy film than his previous classics.

Max is the rhythm of the movie himself: Being just smooth and equilibrated he keeps the movie on an even but always thrilling elapse.

The development of actual good characters beyond snappy dialogue is what impressed me the most.

It was so boring I kept looking at the clock to see when it would be over.

All those a**holes make are unwatchable movies from unreadable books.

Unfortunately, most `real' people we know are boring and limp; certainly less-than-dynamic.

It is by no means boring, but that same adrenaline rush that came along with, well, Uma Thurman's adrenaline rush, just isn't here.

Whilst this is an enjoyable, whilst slow paced movie, it doesn't hit the viewer on the same level and actually left me slightly disappointed.

"Jackie Brown" is one of the dullest movies I've ever seen (actually, I shut it off about 2/3 of the way through, since I wasn't following the story anymore and had no interest in doing so).

Good, engrossing flick .

The rest of the support is solid too, especially Chris Tucker in a small but entertaining role.

It cannot be said that Tarantino movies are ever boring.

Her endearing work makes the movie worth watching.

The entire movie, like any Tarantino movie, is filled with intriguing dialogs, what is most striking is that the film manages to be extremely fun just getting the dialog, and the plot twists than any movie Tarantino has.

The movie's attempts at plot twists were to predictable.

It bores their tiny minds and they trip all over themselves to shout how unsuccessful the film was.

She conveys Jackie's combination of toughness and vulnerability really well and is a compelling presence throughout the entire movie.

Basically it is about an aging bailbondsman (Robert Forster) bored with his dead end job who helps smuggler Jackie Brown (Pam Grier) frame her boss and run off with his money.

) and give him a throw away role - as a slow speaking criminal moron that anyone in the Actors A-Z could play!

This film is slow beyond belief.

But this was another typical Leonard character: the indolent half-wit who suddenly remembers how he got to where he was: he was, after all, a violent hard-bitten career criminal who is, albeit at unexpected times, required to practice his craft and show how he came to be a violent hard-bitten career criminal.

From the opening shots of Pam Grier rushing through the airport to the strains of Across 110th Street, the story unfolds in a gentle but gripping way that allows the characters to breath and become far greater than the sum of their parts.

As fun as Sam Jackson is, these two are what hold the film together and make it so enjoyable to watch over and over.

I think it took a lot of guts to make this film, it was bound to receive a lot of flak-a lot of Pfiction and Rdogs fans found this dreary and tedious.

One of the most annoying cliché you can read in a review of a Tarantino movie is some kind of pompous statement about "Jackie Brown" being his best/most mature work to date, usually meant to imply that everything went down hill from there.

Leonard is supposedly famous for the snappy dialogue he writes.

It's not as good as his first two movies, but still entertaining.

The plot is simple on the surface - but there are depths and unexpected twists all the way.

And we're satisfied that, at least, they could finally exchange a tender, intense and rewarding kiss before another song could get between them, leaving the ellipsis or the interrogation mark up to the viewer.

Tarantino's follow-up to Pulp Fiction is a bit too ambitious to be a really enjoyable experience.

Jackie Brown has a snazzier intro and better written characters than you might expect from a typical Hollywood suspense flick, but while a few of the twists are directed in a more bold and confident style, it's hardly surprising that in a movie like this there are double-crosses, people playing both sides, and unexpected problems coming up for people's carefully planned schemes.

I think this movie works very well despite the slow pace which seems to put a lot of people off.

I can see why many would rate it among his lessor efforts, but I thought it was particularly engaging and well-paced.

This was not a bad movie, just a little disappointing and too drawn out.

Pretty much every theatrical box is checked and my only main dislike is that it gets somewhat boring and dialogue heavy in certain areas.

Boring, boring, boring, boring.

Absorbing .

Aside from being slow at certain parts, the main bit of criticism I have to give this film is that it seems way too heavy on close-ups or shots that zoom into close-ups and pull back as a reaction.

The story can be extremely hard to follow at times.

Jackson is hyper about it and De Niro is taking it slow.

While there is plenty of substance to be experienced, the plot supplements little excitement and conveys at an unnecessarily slow pace, clocking at a 152 runtime that feels more like three hours.

It makes Jackie and Max and Ordell and Ray and Louis and Melanie real; it makes them fascinating.

That's one of the main things that makes it so enjoyable to watch over and over.

A film that is provacotive and entertaining, a film that features solid performances and skilled directing.

Instead, it is all just great character acting, and he manages to make the mundane a roller coaster of verbal levity.

The good news is that it is a good film and definitely worth watching.

Taratino's Coming of Age .

" A deadly boring story, little action, and it all goes on for far, far too long.

During certain scenes I felt myself losing focus due to sheer boredom.

This is a truly engaging film.

Jackie Brown is an entertaining crime-heist film that definitely needs much more attention.

De Niro's character is in a post-prison stupor, but you know he's still very formidable, which one character is too dull to realize.

Such as a minimum of 30 minutes to make a much more tight and suspenseful film.

This was all in all, a poor film, it is too long and too boring.

Amazingly boring.

The only truly gripping moments in this movie are the first E encounter between Pam Grier and Samuel L.

To be fair, the film does feel slower than his previous films and isn't as enjoyable as them because of it (not helped by he film's overlong two and a half hour running time), but it is still engaging nonetheless, due to it's story and characters, which due to the lack of action the film has more time for.

Jackie Brown: This is her movie; but, consider the compelling personality of this woman.

Tarantino's best film, a tremendously entertaining thriller .

" thing before it gets boring and confusing, and Tarantino broke the record with this script.

This is another very enjoyable Tarantino movie.

I think that Pulp Fiction is liked more because people were expecting a fast-paced, action packed movie.

Overall I'd say this is well worth watching; assuming you aren't put off by the amount of swearing.

Just be warned about the slow pace.

In my opinion: Django is Tarantino's BEST work, Pulp Fiction is his most entertaining...

The story works well and it thrilling and intriguing.

The rest of the Cast is Fine, except maybe Keaton who fails to be anything but Dull in a thankless Role.

Higly enjoyable!

All in all, a good story with good actors makes for a good film, if a bit slow in the end when we have to see the "heist" from multiple viewpoints despite its predictability.

The music is from the seventies and also quite slow and melancholic.

Extremely entertaining for such a straight foward plot.

Not as hip or memorable as in other Tarrantino movies, but enjoyable nonetheless.

Every popular style, no matter how original, prompts imitation until originality becomes cliché.

I thought, well maybe it was very involved, but it was the most slow moving, drawn out, movie I've ever seen.

Self-indulgent nonsense about characters I couldn't care less about talking about stuff that really doesn't matter.

The movie moves along at a slow pace, so you have to be patient when watching it.

All of the characters were uninteresting.

I rented Jackie Brown shortly after watching Pulp Fiction and I found it to be very enjoyable!

He is intense!!

A talented cast labors forty-five minutes too long to reach a predictable conclusion.

Entertaining, well-crafted crime caper (based on Elmore Leonard's novel Rum Punch) centers around a handful of characters and their connection to half a million dollars.

Another enjoyable facet was the music.

While peaking in the early 90's with masterpieces like Reservoir Dogs & Pulp Fiction, the mid 90's didn't show him the best light, as Four Rooms was a huge waste of potential (and Tarantino's segment was the most pointless in the film) & while From Dusk Til Dawn was a fun B-movie homage, that's all it was, and it was very forgettable in the process.

Really, don't waste your time.

The problem with the plot, however, is that it's so damn confusing...

", and it is a confusing twist.

I just got plain bored listening to a bunch of low-lives waffle on about themselves.

The director leaves out a few linking scenes that might have reduced any confusion we feel about what's going on.

Mesmerized once more by the style, technicalities & wit that Tarantino injects into his movies and characters which create a riveting & entertaining experience for us.

Just the idea of after making two adrenaline pumped movies going back and making this one, just say so much about how skilled and controlled Tarantino is as a director and that's why he will never do a bad movie.

De Niro is totally wasted in this film and the ending was very dull.

All six of the main characters each have different point of views, watching them do what they do is simply fascinating.

Yes there is some great dialogue with superb music and the acting is great with some moments of comic relief but it's far too long!

A very slick, entertaining caper .

The plot had enough turns to it to stay unpredictable and engaging.

Hot performances by the entire crew, good location shots, and some cool camera work, not to mention a taut, well written story gives the viewer a thrilling ride through the seamy gutters of crime.

On a slight homage to blaxploitation films of the 70's, he gives us a drab, seedy region in California, where we meet the most complex and colorful characters, including Ms. Brown.

The script is smart, clever, insightful, and talky in an entertaining and not annoying way.

In adapting the Elmore Leonard novel, Tarantino shows himself to be an expert story-teller, keeping the film consistently entertaining despite the long running time.

It dragged, and this being Tarantino & Elmore Leonard, I waited patiently to no avail, while enjoying Pam Grier.

But it's funny and compelling to watch after the plot kicks in, with the same attention to character Leonard has.

Jackie Brown has fascinating, well-defined characters who scheme and plot and think and act like real people.

What makes "Jackie Brown" so compelling is that the best scenes generally feature two characters trying to act clever, to make a decision, a move, to see through things.

really enjoyed it.

It's thrilling and it has an amazing cast.

With JB he rode two hobby horses (Grier and the music) that are not mine, nor were the dialogues as great as in his 2 classics, but it was a feast for the eyes and a very enjoyable movie nonetheless.

This is one of the most enjoyable movies in the last 20 years, with a wonderful soundtrack whcih contributes to the genuine 70's feel.

You have the pairing of Leonard and Tarantino, two masters of dialogue, two masters of entertaining plot lines that come together to give you a little gem of a film that you will never see the like.

Creating films which are full of pop culture references, always featuring an awe inspiring soundtrack and with magnificent characters, Tarantino has seemingly not put a foot wrong since 1992's perfect "Reservoir Dogs".

In 1994, hip director Quentin Tarantino made a splashy debut with the intense and funny crime story, "Pulp Fiction".

It is deep, suspenseful, leisurely paced, and unexpectedly humorous.

15 years after my viewing Jackie Brown, the story itself is pretty much gone, but I do recall that it was suspenseful, had interesting folks doing bad and not-so-bad things, and even had a smidgen of humor that didn't depend on John Travolta hitting a chuckhole and blowing some poor doofus' head off.

It makes this one of his most intriguing performances.

Elmore Leonard's books are full of snappy dialogue and cool characters.

(despite participating in the film's really only shocking and unexpected moment of the film).

I thought it was boring.

I highly recommend it.

It's the same thing for one single and quite boring sex scene.

The rest of the movie is very entertaining.

A stylish, witty, entertaining & rewarding flick.

Initially I was thinking the movie was realistically slow (too slow for today's criteria which I personally like), then the plot seemed that it was not leading anywhere (boredom at maximum).

If you liked Pulp Fiction, seeing this film is like having your eyeballs gouged out with a dull toothpick, only it takes longer and is more painful.

Definitely worth watching if you catch it or renting.

The characters are very diverse and each one is fascinating to watch, due to the great acting and the strong script.

A good hour could be cut from the 154 minute running time to make it quick, snappy and enthralling.

The Money-Grabbing is Intriguing Enough to make for a Good Heist Yarn, and while this is a Very Good Movie it is Nonetheless one of the Director's Lesser Films.

Standing at two and a half hours, the film teeters on the edge of losing momentum in several places, but it is consistently salvaged by some unexpected development, intelligent scene or well- placed soundtrack.

Put the point is : he takes this basic cliché character (though Grier's has some 'depth'), and focuses on it, and lets the full drama and being of the actor playing that character define the drama of the character.

For me, the qualities that make Quentin Tarantino such an obnoxious personality in interviews are exactly what make him such an enjoyable filmmaker...

If the film can be simplify some, completely give up those unnecessary dialogue with Tarantino's personal style that looks like imposed by himself, made it into a 120 - minute film, it will turn into a better entertaining story.

This choice of not adapting an original story is strange but it doesn't matter anymore after you have seen it, because it's still an entertaining film.

If the film is flawed in any way, it's in the fact that the characters are so multi-faceted that their actions become too hard to follow, we get lost and the film refuses to break the pace.

Some may call it a bore, I call it one of the best films of the last decade!!!

Even the scenes that "sound" boring on paper (like the ones at Bridget Fonda's apartment) are exciting and interesting because you just never know what's going to happen, and what these characters are up to.

Boring.. .

The only word to describe him is intense, and there are some moments - like the scene in the van when he closes his eyes and (correctly) deduces who has stiffed him - where he just burns up the screen.

It doesn't really push a lot of boundaries, or crackle with snappy monologue, or provide much tension or action.

This was the case in Pulp-Fiction, with the scene in the restaurant being quite dull.

A complete waste of time because it was a useless scene to begin with.

Second it has a very tight plot with some unexpected twists.

The 2 1/2 hour length may test some viewers, particularly given it's so dialogue driven while you're expecting ear-slicing, adrenaline-shooting, finger-chopping fun.

This was a wonderfully done, slow and methodical crime story.

While the large amount of subplots can make the film overly complicated and hard to follow at times, it is still interesting and keeps you on the edge throughout the film's duration.

Despite being his least stylistic film, Jackie Brown makes up for it with strong character development, an engaging story and a great script, creating Tarantino's most mature film to date.

Despite being somewhat underused, Robert De Niro gives an entertaining performance.

I highly recommend it.

Recently, I watched Inglourious Basterds in the theatres and that one, too, I had the problem with the drawn out scenes.

Jackie Brown is an entertaining, long (by about 20 minutes), and enjoyable movie.

It's fascinating to see a Director like Tarantino adapt someone else's work and make a high quality film.

This is worth watching, I would recommend this at all costs.

People act and talk like it was just a normal day, which makes it an absorbing experience, and will make you forget that the actors are actually acting, and that there's actually a film crew behind the scene.

Add in a Sid Haig cameo and there you have it: a typically offbeat, original and enjoyable Tarantino outing with a cast to die for.

The performances are dull, the movie drags, and I've had more fun sucking the sweat out of five day old gym socks.

Jackie Brown is without a doubt, and great, entertaining film, filled with laughs, and is Tarentino's best.

There's a bored blonde moll with too much spare time who has taken to drugs as a fillip.

The rest is great conversations, intriguing characters, style, class, some violence and a really good criminal masterplan.

However, it is done with depth (which critics didn't notice), flow (which bored critics), and refinement (which really made critics mad).

Boring, because no character with high morals are any fun in Tarantino's movies.

It all adds up to one of the most entertaining crime films ever.

Perhaps if I hadn't seen his other movies and didn't have higher expectations,I would have enjoyed it more.

Slow yet engaging .

Jackie Boring .

But the most entertaining turn in from the cast is Samuel L Jackson as the fast-talking, foul mouthed thug who isn't quite as clever of a criminal as he thinks he is.

The film moves at a slower, deliberate pace.

There's a huge set-piece late on in which takes place in a shopping mall that manages to be just as entertaining as the chop-em-up showdown of KILL BILL: VOLUME 1 even if the on-screen events are more laid back.

One of Quentin Tarantino's more mature outings, this is an engaging adaptation of the novel "Rum Punch" by Elmore Leonard.

The film though fails from that point of view and drags on far too long and turns out to be quite unspectacular or even boring at some points.

In addition, it is enjoyable because it is unpredictable.

The characters make the movie more engaging than the plot does, in my opinion.

The use of lighting and unique camera shots make this film very enjoyable.

Each scene is dragged out for longer than it feels like it needs to be.

Additionally the movie is entertaining because of the different points of view of the same scenes.

"Jackie Brown" is an awfully long, seemingly unwieldy film at approximately two hours and 35 minutes, but it's always hip, and funny, and entertaining.

The development of actual good characters beyond snappy dialogue is what impressed me the most and it sadden me to see him regress about a decade into style without substance with Kill Bill Vol. One.

Jackie Brown is an amusing and entertaining movie.

After an hour, I was bored.

The movie dragged because it was a copy of the book, only missing a few scenes.

It's a bit on the slow side and except for the title character, the personalities aren't especially memorable.

But in the end, the flick is just too long, too contrived, and a not-so-thriller that stales the popcorn.

I don't think he's one of the greatest directors of all time or anything, but he is a talented director with the capacity to make tremendously entertaining films.

The movie is quite slow going.

jackie brown is a slow movie,but a lot of the movie is entertaining.

As a story it fills the rather generous running time pretty well and is enjoyable throughout.

It's so evident in the slow, 70's style pacing, obviously Tarantino's favorite era of filmmaking - once you take away the cell phones & pagers the settings, cars, music, and wardrobe smack of the 70's completely.

Tarantino seems to have gotten too comfortable with the 70's black soul/funk genre, which results in an uninspiring, flat soundtrack.

highly entertaining .

That alone makes it worth watching.

And it was so slow!!

I don't know, I guess QT's magic works better if he's homaging movies after movies (ie, Kill Bill 1 and 2, Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction) This time around, Tarantino worked his way around an engaging script, a stellar cast and amazing acting courtesy of lead Pam Grier as the titular character, Samuel L.

His sensitive direction coupled with Pam Grier's top-notch performance combine to make Jackie one of the most compelling and honest female characters to hit the movie screen in recent years.

As she turns around looking for someone, Tarantino circles her with the camera creating a state of confusion, then instantly stops this as she calls out a name.

There isn't a single wasted shot, scene or line in it, and the two and a half hour running time passed in a thoroughly enjoyable manner.

Sure, themes and social commentary make good movies, but liking movies even though they have a lack of meaning doesn't (of course, it helps to know, however, many mindless movies are actually more boring than movies with subtle meaning).

The story for the most part is very engaging, as it keeps you guessing as to what is going to happen all throughout the film.

Suspenseful, hilarious and touching.

The most boring movie...

Effortlessly entertaining .

Dynamic performances, great dialouge, terrific yet confusing story and wonderful direction by Quentin Tarantino.

Wow, so so boring.

The running time is really long at 2 1/2 hours, but it does have plenty of entertainment values that keep this movie from ever becoming boring.

The scenes in the department showing the different times of the payoff from the three sides of the story, Jackie, Melanie and Louis, and Max is really engaging, The Simpsons even spoofed the same format.

All the dialogue was slow & dragged on and on pointlessly.

The often witty and hilarious dialogue exchanges between he, Bridget Fonda, and an unassuming Robert DeNiro as a bumbling, apathetic accomplice is amusing and carries the film deftly onward, even when it threatens to be dragged down by the slightly dry plot.

Part of what made Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs so compelling was that you had the feeling they were the work of a mad genius.

Entertaining .


He set out to create a stylish and enjoyable movie, and succeeded.

After Jackie's caught bringing $50 grand and a bag of cocaine into the country, she finds herself making a deal with ATF agent Ray Nicolette (a twitchy, entertaining Michael Keaton) and trying to scam both Ordell and the ATF while walking away with a half-million dollar payload.

Extremely enjoyable .

The DVD of this film is wonderful as well, with a trivia track (which in my opinion, are more entertaining than commentaries), interviews, documentaries, trailers for old Pam Grier films (which have to be seen to be believed) and my personal favorite- The complete Chicks who love guns video!

However to me this is a more satisfying film with an enjoyable plot and a more traditional delivery.

This movie has all of this in spades, with amazingly fleshed out characters such as the bored, middle aged and directionless two central characters who form a silent romantic bond with each other (Jackie Brown and Max Cherry), the sleazy, cowardly, cunning drug dealer Ordell, his smart-ass girl Melanie, his ex-con friend Lewis, whose laid-back characteristics conceal a fearsome dark side and troublesome detective Ray.

Its sumptuous to look at and quite compelling as you're swept along, particularly a long urgent take in the mall the second time around.

Jackie Brown is a real treat: a movie chock full of interesting and diverse characters that manages to be alternatingly funny and suspenseful while remaining even throughout.

Actually, I think it's a terrific movie, reinventing classicism and the art of slow pace, long forgotten in the mainstream movies industry.

The were some really nice long shots in the film (I'm a huge fan of artistically staged lengthy takes), the car pulling into the empty lot on the other side of the fence is a good example.

However, this film does provide an entertaining watch with a gripping story and is certainly not bad.

His character is intriguing to watch and develop as the film progresses into a more personal stage, but with the lack of action and suspense, the characters sometimes end up being a bit dull, all except for De Niro and Grier, who are the stars of the show.

Good acting, good action and a slow burn thrill that does not abate even after the end.

To me every character was boring and some were useless.

Consider the horrendous misfire that Burt Reynolds produced from Leonard's entertaining novel "Stick.

Tarantino slows down a little and shows his skill at plotting an entertaining tale that doesn't tax your patience.

Boring is not a word to describe this movie.

Despite the "realistic feel" (which on deeper examination seems carefully contrived), I cared nothing for any of the characters (in fact, I found most of them quite irritating, especially the two detectives) and I kept waiting for something interesting to happen (eventually, almost praying for something interesting to happen).

Jackson), the most dangerous and ruthless leader of the crime (and extremely entertaining) anyone can know.

My friend is one of those who watched it after watching Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Django, etc. and wasn't too keen on it because of its slow pacing.

Entertaining entry in the Tarantino canon.

I won't bother to spell out the ingredients of this particular style except to mention in passing cross-racial aggregations, plenty of obscenities, crime, diversionary discussions of things like hamburgers, unexpected explosions of blood, and an underlying feeling that what ought to be tragic is really ridiculously funny.

Solid and entertaining .

This film is effectively languid.

Nonetheless, once one adds in a typically splendid soundtrack, everything adds up to a movie far above the average crime thriller, and for all the breathtaking invention of his other movies, it's enough to make one wish that Tarantino didn't usually feel the need to try so very hard.

solid movie but very slow.

Not the best of Tarantino, but it is really entertaining from start to finish, keeping the good spirit of the films of the great Master.

Pros: -Pam Grier, Samuel L Jackson and Robert Forster are great in this -Nice soundtrackCons: -Drags on a lot with a lot of dialogue scenes that seem interesting at first but ultimately made me tired of all the slow pacing -De Niro was wasted on this.

Quentin Tarantino fills this movie with compelling characters played by charismatic character actors.

boring .

The star-studded, action packed, funny at times drama/action of the year is Here!

Not as weird, innovative and fascinating as QT's other works, but absolutely, positively worth watching.

Pam Grier is stunning, complex and and an overture in this role and is the foundation of the entire arc.

This film, unlike Pulp Fiction, is not so inventive, is slow paced, the characters are much less interesting and apart from a few interesting moments, the film just drags on.

DeNiro, Jackson, and Fonda make a great trio, and it's always entertaining when they are in the same room together.

An infinitely enjoyable experience.

Santa's Got a Brand New Bag and it's Empty .

Just boring.

That makes for some stunning pictures of the actors in it.

This is more of a slow crime story that focuses more on being cool than being shocking.

It moves at a much more stable pace than Pulp but is still entertaining and good to keep up with.

The music is exciting, the acting is spectacular (especially Jackson and Forster) and the directing is clever and engaging.

All of the characters are three dimensional and very compelling.

It contained many of those retro Tarantino tricks that I love - the '70's soundtrack; the unexpected cuts and fades; the tricks with the time-line.

I could even said this movie is quite entertaining and interesting to follow throughout the minute .