Originally Posted by RoseCity07
This film suffered from a really bad job editing job. I was reading some other reviews online and one person commented that there might be a good movie somewhere in this drawn-out mess of a film. I think that could be true but we'll never really know.
You know how I know that nobody should take your opinion seriously? The fact that you didn't think it was poorly edited before reading some other person's opinion, and the fact that you didn't know who Sally Menke was yet claim her absence was tangible.
I'm sick of people saying the editing was bad. I guarantee 99% of them have no film criticism and analysis background, have no opinion on how to edit differently (other than something general like 'make some scenes shorter'), and can't even be bothered to learn the name of his past editor even though they're putting her on some pedestal. Raskin, who edited Django, has worked on Boogie Nights, Punch-Drunk Love, and worked under Menke on Kill Bill 1&2. He's clearly not a hack.
I saw people claiming some of the bounty hunting scenes were too fast and jarring... Oh yeah? Like that couldn't be an auteur choice to edit a scene to make it feel fast and jarring like a gunfight would be?
Did the editing blow me away? No. Were there a few small things I'd change? Sure... But at the end of the day QT had the final decision anyway. The editing was serviceable since you understood the plot, and knew what was going on.