The long-running case against Lindsay Clancy has reached another uncertain point after jurors were unable to agree on a verdict. After weeks of testimony and seven days of deliberations, the jury told the court Friday that it could not reach a unanimous decision, prompting the judge to declare a mistrial.

RELATED: Lindsay Clancy Jury To Return For Sixth Day Of Deliberations In Case Of Mom Who Killed Her 3 Kids (UPDATE)

Jury Deadlock Leads To Mistrial After Defense Appeal Is Denied

The jury sent Judge William Sullivan a note saying, “It is with a heavy heart to report that we haven’t come to a decision and are unable to do so.” After jurors reported for a third time that they could not reach a unanimous verdict on whether Clancy was criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children, her defense team filed an emergency appeal seeking to delay the mistrial. The request for an emergency stay was denied, clearing the way for Sullivan to formally declare a mistrial Friday.

The mistrial leaves the charges unresolved, and prosecutors have not yet decided whether to retry the case. They could pursue a new trial, dismiss the charges or negotiate a plea agreement with Clancy’s attorneys. Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz said there would be no immediate decision. “This was and has always been about getting justice for those three little babies,” he said.

Defense Challenges Juror Over Reasonable Doubt

The defense had asked the judge to poll jurors about whether they had reached agreement on any charges or lesser-included offenses. Attorney Kevin Reddington also accused one juror of disregarding the reasonable-doubt standard and asked that the juror be removed. Sullivan declined. Before the mistrial was declared, the judge questioned jurors privately and reminded them that proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt. He later thanked the panel for the weeks of work it had put into the case.

What To Know About The Charges Against Clancy

Clancy, 36, is charged in the 2023 deaths of her children, Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months. She has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, with her defense arguing that she was experiencing postpartum psychosis and was not criminally responsible for her actions. Prosecutors have argued that she understood what she was doing. Clancy does not dispute that she strangled her children with exercise bands before attempting suicide by jumping from a second-story window. Moreover, the attempt left her paralyzed and using a wheelchair. Prosecutors have also argued that she deliberately sent her husband on errands before the killings. The mistrial means the central question of her criminal responsibility remains unanswered.

RELATED: Massachusetts Mother Posted About Postpartum Depression Before Reportedly Killing Her Kids

Quiet luxury may have dominated fashion conversations for the past few years, but a new aesthetic is taking over, and it has a lot more personality. Dubbed ‘rich divorcée’ style, the trend blends timeless tailoring with glamorous accessories, silky fabrics and confidence-first dressing that looks effortlessly expensive.

The beauty of the trend is that it’s less about designer labels and more about choosing elevated basics that feel polished and powerful. Luckily, Amazon is filled with luxe-looking staples that channel the aesthetic without the luxury price tag. From fluid blouses and wide-leg trousers to sculptural gold jewelry and sophisticated accessories, these 13 finds make it easy to embrace the look.

13 Amazon Pieces That Nail the ‘Rich Divorcée’ Aesthetic

1. Our Favorite: A silky button-front blouse instantly makes every outfit look more polished, and this one delivers that expensive-looking finish without the splurge. Pair it with wide-leg trousers during the day or dark denim and heels for dinner.

2. Runner-Up: These flowy palazzo pants strike the perfect balance between relaxed and refined. The high-rise silhouette and sweeping legs create the illusion of longer legs while serving effortless ‘summering on the Amalfi Coast’ energy.

3. Celeb-Approved: Chunky layered gold necklaces are practically synonymous with this trend. This waterproof set instantly elevates a simple white tee, button-down or slip dress with minimal effort.

4. Designer-Looking: A structured faux-leather top-handle handbag gives every outfit a polished finish. Clean lines and rich neutral shades make it look far more expensive than its price tag.

5. Everyday Essential: Oversized square sunglasses add an air of mystery and sophistication. They’re the quickest way to make jeans and a white shirt feel celebrity-worthy.

Related: Almond Milk Manicures Are Trending — 11 Polished Dresses That Match the Style

The almond milk manicure has quickly become one of the biggest beauty trends of the season, and it’s easy to see why. The soft, creamy neutral feels understated, expensive and effortlessly chic, which is exactly the kind of aesthetic that’s fueling fashion’s ongoing quiet luxury obsession. Naturally, it’s inspired me to reach for dresses that […]

Advertisement

6. Best Blazer: A relaxed linen-blend blazer instantly sharpens tanks, dresses and matching sets. Toss it over your shoulders for an effortlessly chic finishing touch.

7. Best White Shirt: An oversized cotton button-down is the ultimate wardrobe multitasker. Wear it tucked into trousers, open over a swimsuit or knotted with linen shorts.

8. Best Shoes: Sleek pointed-toe loafers offer timeless polish without sacrificing comfort. They transition seamlessly from the office to weekend brunch.

9. Best Belt: A leather-look belt with a bold gold buckle instantly defines the waist and makes simple dresses and trousers feel more intentional.

10. Best Dress: A sleeveless knit midi dress creates an elegant, streamlined silhouette that’s equal parts comfortable and sophisticated. Add gold jewelry and kitten heels to complete the look.

11. Best Scarf: A satin square scarf is one of the easiest ways to embrace the aesthetic. Tie it around your neck, your ponytail or the handle of your handbag for an instantly elevated outfit.

12. Best Flats: Pointed-toe ballet flats bring together comfort and quiet sophistication. They look just as chic with tailored trousers as they do with a slip skirt or jeans.

13. Best Statement Earrings: Chunky gold dome earrings are the finishing touch every ‘rich divorcée’ outfit needs. They add just enough drama to make even the simplest outfit feel fashion-editor-approved.

UsNow Fall Sale Alert: These chic fashion finds are up to 60% off – plus free shipping

Welcome to fall with our biggest sale of the season. Our favorite dresses, tops, handbags, and shoes are all on sale + free shipping. Inventory is limited so hurry before they’re gone.

Shop the UsNow Fall Sale —>

An Alabama deputy charged with human trafficking, rape and other offenses is accused of threatening his then-girlfriend and blackmailing her into sexual servitude.

Robert Lisle, 47, a Jefferson County deputy, was arrested in Blount County on Monday, August 31, records show. He is also charged with unlawful imprisonment and domestic violence/harassment.

He was released from custody the morning of Friday, September 4, according to jail records.

Lisle allegedly threatened to call immigration authorities on his girlfriend and used “blackmail to extort the victim into fulfilling sexual fantasies” in July and August, per charging documents obtained by AL.com.

Related: Police Chief Arrested For Assaulting Woman Over Cheating Allegations

An Alabama police chief was arrested in Tennessee after police said he beat and strangled a woman he was dating during an argument over “alleged cheating,” Us Weekly has learned. Stephen Malone, 32, the chief of the Collinsville Police Department in Alabama, had been visiting the woman at her Nashville home when the assault unfolded […]

According to a criminal complaint, Lisle raped the woman on July 15 and also confined her to a bathroom on August 14, when he had her delete videos that were on her phone, the news outlet reported. He is also accused of physically assaulting the woman on August 14.

The complaint accuses Lisle of grabbing the woman’s ponytail and her throat while trying to gain access to her phone, WBMA reported. Additionally, he allegedly shoved her and hit her despite her having undergone recent surgery.

The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office has placed Lisle on leave while the agency conducts an administrative investigation, Chief Deputy Henry Irby III confirmed to the TV station.

The Blount County District Attorney’s Office on Thursday, September 3, had requested for Lisle to be held without bond, WIAT reported. Prosecutors said the victim feared she’d be retaliated against for alerting law enforcement to what she allegedly endured.

Lisle’s defense attorney David Luker said “I think it is a very serious [allegation] and there are two sides,” per the TV station.

At a hearing on September 3, Lisle’s bond had been set at $80,600, the TV station reported.

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

Advertisement

Related: Deputy Allegedly Used Databases to Find Woman He Met on ‘Bad Monkey’ Set

A Florida deputy was arrested after authorities said he accessed law enforcement databases to locate a woman he met while working a security job on the set of “Bad Monkey,” a TV show featuring actor Vince Vaughn. The now-former Monroe County Sheriff’s Office deputy, Lamar Eliseo Roman, was fired in addition to his arrest on […]

“You’ve got a really good judge that’s handling this case and you’ve got good prosecutors,” Luker said, according to WIAT. “And we’re all trying to do our job the best for our clients. Prosecutors representing [the] state of Alabama and me representing Mr. Lisle, so it’s one of those cases where it’s just going to take a little time for it all to filter out.”

Ahead of Lisle’s arrest, he sought a protection order against the woman, who he described as his ex, and accused her of mental instability, according to records viewed by AL.com.

Lisle and the woman must stay 1,000 feet apart from each other as part of a restraining order issued by a judge, per AL.com.

When Ready or Not released in 2019, it was an immediate success. From thriving at the box office to launching Samara Weaving into the spotlight, this horror comedy was a hit. Seven years later, the film is finding new life on streaming. Since its recent addition to Netflix, Ready or Not has been charting in the top 10 of movies watched. Audiences can relive the hype of this gripping thriller, as well as jump straight into the sequel, Ready or Not 2: Here I Come.

Directed by Tyler Gillett and Matt Bettinelli-Olpin, Ready or Not is a brutal thriller that isn’t afraid to get bloody. Reminiscent of Richard Connell’s The Most Dangerous Game, the film quickly defies expectations and delivers a hunt unlike any other. Starring Adam Brody, Andie MacDowell, and Mark O’Brien, Ready or Not is full of stellar performances, gruesome deaths, and a shocking twist that will leave audiences horrified.

‘Ready or Not’ Turns a Childhood Game into a Nightmare

Image via Searchlight Pictures

Grace (Samara Weaving) thought that marrying into her fiancé’s family would earn her new kin. Turns out, her eccentric in-laws have a tradition for the happy couple’s wedding night. As an initiation, Grace is instructed to pull a card from an ancient family heirloom, which will decide what game the family plays. When Grace pulls out a card that reads ‘Hide and Seek,’ the family turns on the bride, intent on hunting her down. As she hides from her murderous in-laws in their expansive mansion, Grace finds out the truth behind their traditions and figures out a way to foil their plans.

Violent, absurdly rich, and a little bit chaotic, the murderous family doesn’t hold back and neither does Ready or Not. As the stakes rise and Grace’s survival seems less likely, the film pushes the limits. New viewers will find themselves shocked at the lengths the family will go to in order to capture Grace.

Samara Weaving Gives an Outstanding Performance as The Bride

Sometimes horror protagonists can get lost in the chaos, but not Grace. Samara Weaving’s performance refused to be ignored, truly skyrocketing the Australian actress’s career. While she starts the film off confused and unbothered, Grace quickly wises up to her deadly circumstances and finds the determination to survive. By the end, audiences are rooting for her because of Grace’s blatant refusal to die. Grace’s unearthly scream alone is enough to cement Weaving as a horror star.

With Samara Weaving’s recent casting as Emma Frost in Marvel’s upcoming X-Men projects, it’s clear to see how Ready or Not laid the groundwork for her future success. Weaving is a bold and determined protagonist who stands out as the film’s blood soaked ‘final girl.’ With the success of both Ready or Not films, audiences can look forward to seeing more of Weaving in the years to come.

In terms of horror. Ready or Not takes the familiar tropes of the genre and gives them new life. With its popularity on Netflix, the film has the chance to gain new appreciation. With the unique plot and inclination towards bloody demises, Ready or Not is a fun and terrifying addition to the horror genre that truly deserves further praise.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Release Date

August 21, 2019

Runtime

Advertisement

95 minutes

Director

Matt Bettinelli-Olpin, Tyler Gillett

Advertisement

Writers

Guy Busick, R. Christopher Murphy

Advertisement

Producers

James Vanderbilt, William Sherak, Bradley J. Fischer, Tripp Vinson

Advertisement

• 
• 

  Mark O’Brien

  Advertisement

  Alex Le Domas

Advertisement

Advertisement

The judge in Lindsay Clancy’s controversial triple murder trial shocked court observers by officially declaring a mistrial after more than five days and 30 hours of jury deliberations.

Judge William Sullivan was informed by a 12-person jury that it was deadlocked on Friday, September 4, after one lone juror remained in disagreement with the remaining 11. The mom faced three first-degree murder charges — among other charges — related to the 2023 deaths of Clancy’s three children — Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months.

Clancy has admitted to strangling her three children to death before jumping out a second-story window in an alleged suicide attempt. Her defense team argues she should not be held criminally liable for the deaths because she was suffering from postpartum psychosis before and during the killings.

Prosecutors insist that despite her documented mental health struggles that she was aware of her actions — and able to differentiate right from wrong — when she killed her three children.

Public intrigue over the case reached a fever pitch when Judge Sullivan allowed Clancy’s defense team one hour to petition for an appeal from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Friday. After the high court declined to order an emergency stay, Judge Sullivan formally declared a mistrial before formally dismissing the jury.

The mistrial ruling raises questions over whether Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz will attempt to retry the case. Lawyers on both sides are due back in court on Tuesday, September 29, to consider next steps.

Keep scrolling for more information on whether double jeopardy applies in this case and what may come next in the courtroom.

What Is Double Jeopardy?

The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution deals, in part, with how criminal trials are — and are not — allowed to be conducted. The amendment lays out “double jeopardy” as a procedural defense to prevent a person from being tried twice for the same crime, provided they are either acquitted or convicted in a court of law.

A relevant clause in the Fifth Amendment reads, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

What Is a Mistrial?

A mistrial occurs when a verdict in a criminal trial cannot be reached or the trial itself cannot be completed, per the American Bar Association. Possible causes for mistrials include the death of a juror or attorney, a prejudicial error that impacts a jury’s ability to judge a defendant fairly or juror misconduct.

One other common circumstance for a mistrial in criminal court occurs when a jury cannot reach a unanimous verdict.

In Clancy’s case, jurors deliberated for more than 30 hours before informing Judge William Sullivan that they were deadlocked 11-1 on the three counts of first-degree murder. (Clancy’s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, asked Judge Sullivan for a chance to poll the jury on whether they’d reached consensus on any of the lesser charges. His request was denied.)

Judge Sullivan allowed the defense one hour to petition for an emergency appeal from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court before formally declaring a mistrial on Friday when the high court declined to intervene.

Can Double Jeopardy Be Used in Lindsay Clancy’s Case?

Since no verdict was reached in the Clancy trial, double jeopardy restrictions do not apply — meaning Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz is legally allowed to retry the case.

What Happens Next in Lindsay Clancy’s Case?

Once a mistrial was declared, District Attorney Cruz wasted no time in addressing his option to retry Clancy while speaking to the media outside the Plymouth Superior Court.

“I do know that one of the questions that’s out there right now [is] regarding retrials,” he told reporters on Friday. “I will let you know that there will be no decision today. I am going to be meeting with my team and will address that [option] further at the appropriate time and in the context of an official court proceeding.”

Defense lawyer Reddington previously expressed his concern that his client would not be able to endure a retrial. However, he assured the media following Friday’s hearing that Clancy will “be ready” if prosecutors proceed with a retrial.

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

“Judge Sullivan is indicating that we are looking at sometime in the fall,” Reddington clarified.

Judge Sullivan has scheduled a court hearing on Tuesday, September 29, to address next steps in the case.

If you or someone you know is struggling or in crisis, help is available. Call or text 988 or chat at 988lifeline.org.

Quentin Tarantino is a unique filmmaker, and his films are greatly lauded and applauded. He’s often considered influential, especially to newer generations of directors, and he himself has been claiming influence from global cinema. Another interesting thing about Tarantino is that he promised to retire after making his tenth film—that film was Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, and truly, since then, Tarantino hasn’t directed anything except a short film related to his hit movie Kill Bill.

Ranking all ten of Tarantino’s films can often feel like a sport, but there are no wrong answers, only endless arguments, which is what makes it so fun. At least half of his films are legitimate candidates for the best film of whatever decade they landed in. And while we won’t try to settle anything here today, we will be making the case that only six symbolize a time when Tarantino was operating at a level where no individual element, line of dialogue, shot, casting choice, or needle drop needs improvement. Here are six Quentin Tarantino movies that are 10/10, no notes.

‘Reservoir Dogs’ (1992)

Image via Miramax Films

Reservoir Dogs is Tarantino’s feature film debut; when it premiered at the Sundance Film Festival, over a dozen people walked out, citing excessive realistic violence. This is fun since, knowing where Tarantino’s films have gone from there, Reservoir Dogs seems tame in comparison today. This film has everything a modern masterpiece needs—pop-culture-infused dialog, a non-linear structure, and excellent needle drops (“Stuck in the Middle with You,” we’re looking at you)—and it immediately established that a new voice had emerged in American cinema. Harvey Keitel, Michael Madsen, Steve Buscemi, and Tim Roth have fantastic chemistry, making the ensemble work feel effortless.

Reservoir Dogs follows six unnamed professional criminals (nicknamed for different colors) who are recruited by mob boss Joe Cabot (Lawrence Tierney) to carry out a diamond heist. However, the heist immediately goes horribly wrong, and the film begins with the bloody, fractured aftermath, with the survivors regrouping at a warehouse and attempting to figure out which of them is working undercover for the police. Tarantino shot almost all of Reservoir Dogs in one location, which feels like a stylistic choice rather than a budget constraint—demonstrating how to work with what you have. He claims inspiration for it from various crime films, including Stanley Kubrick‘s The Killing and Jean Pierre Melville‘s Le Samourai; many critics have also noted similarities between it and the Hong Kong action film City on Fire, starring Chow Yun-fat.

‘Kill Bill: Volume 2’ (2004)

Image via Miramax Films

There was some thought about combining Kill Bill: Volume 1 and Volume 2 into a single entry (or The Whole Bloody Affair), but Tarantino himself stated that Vols 1 and 2 should be treated as separate films, which they are, with the exception of the cast and main storyline. Because, whereas Vol. 1 was a pure action film, Vol. 2 is a Western and a character study, following the Bride (Uma Thurman) through the last few names on her revenge list in a style that has more in common with Sergio Leone than Bruce Lee. Vol. 2 rewards the patience that Vol. 1 requires, so the two form something larger and more complex than either could be alone but still stand on their own separately.

Vol. 2 takes The Bride straight to Bill (David Carradine), her ultimate target, who emerges from the story’s edges to take center stage. Carradine, who was 67 at the time and hadn’t been a major Hollywood presence in years, delivers a performance of such magnetic, unhurried menace that the film essentially revolves around him. The Pai Mei training sequence is as funny as anything Tarantino has ever written, the Budd chapter is a thrilling sequence of slow-burn dread, and the final confrontation between the Bride and Bill, resolved with some truth serum and a deadly move known as the Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique, is one of the most emotionally satisfying endings in Tarantino’s filmography.

‘Kill Bill: Volume 1’ (2003)

Image via Miramax Films

Vol. 1 outperforms Vol. 2 in that Tarantino is working in full cinephile mode here, with stylistic nods to spaghetti westerns, Japanese samurai films, anime, and 1970s exploitation cinema, all filtered through a sensibility so specific and personal that the resulting film could only have been made by this director. Sonny Chiba, Chiaki Kuriyama, and Lucy Liu round out an excellent supporting cast, and the anime sequence depicting O-Ren Ishii’s (Liu) backstory is one of the most daring formal swings in any mainstream American release of the time. Tarantino is operating on pure imagination, and it works so brilliantly that we still watch Vol. 1 and gasp in awe of his enthusiasm.

Vol. 1 introduces us to The Bride, who awakens from a four-year coma to discover that her wedding party has been massacred, and her unborn daughter is presumed dead. She has a list of five names—and those names belong to members of the Deadly Viper Assassination Squad; they are the ones who put her in that hospital bed, and the first volume covers The Bride, crossing off the first two names on her list: O-Ren Ishii (Liu) and Vernita Green (Vivica A. Fox). Vol. 1 features the iconic showdown at the House of Blue Leaves against O-Ren’s deadly squad known as the Crazy 88, which is still one of the most purely, joyfully choreographed action sequences in American cinema of the 2000s.

‘Jackie Brown’ (1997)

It seems like Jackie Brown is the most overlooked film in Tarantino’s filmography, but it’s a movie that is a complete 10/10. It’s unsure if the film went under the radar a bit because it followed Pulp Fiction and audiences expected another maximalist explosion, or because its pleasures and payoffs are much slower and more patient than anything else he’s made. Jackie Brown really is a tribute to 1970s blaxploitation cinema and a love letter to Pam Grier, who was largely absent from mainstream Hollywood at the time; by hiring her as the titular character, Tarantino handed Grier her best role in twenty years (and this is one of his trademarks). Robert Forster, similarly, gives the performance of his career as the bail bondsman Max Cherry, and the unspoken romantic tension between the two is genuinely moving, giving us little by little with each new scene. Joining them is Robert De Niro in one of his “most chill” roles ever, stepping away from the kinds of stuff he made during the 1990s.

Jackie Brown (Grier) is a middle-aged flight attendant who supplements her income by smuggling cash for arms dealer Ordell Robbie (Samuel L. Jackson). When the ATF apprehends her in the middle of her run, she becomes the pivot point in a three-way con involving federal agents, a bail bondsman (Forster), and Ordell himself, all of whom believe they are in charge. Jackie Brown, like Reservoir Dogs, has a fractured structure that bears the hallmarks of a modern masterpiece; this is most evident in the central money-switch sequence, which is shown three times from three perspectives and remains one of Tarantino’s most brilliant pieces of editing.

‘Pulp Fiction’ (1994)

Image via Miramax Films

Pulp Fiction is so good that it still inspires all other anthology films with interconnected characters. It’s even used to describe films with similar structures as a compliment and a point of comparison. But Pulp Fiction is more than just a film; it has a number of recognizable elements that make it iconic, ranging from the resurrection of John Travolta‘s career (the previously mentioned trademark), Samuel L. Jackson’s monologue, and the Royale with Cheese conversation to the adrenaline shot to the heart and the diner dance. The film is so full of iconic moments that it’s easy to forget how well-executed it truly is.

Pulp Fiction is made up of a few interlocking crime stories set in Los Angeles, told in reverse chronological order; it follows a pair of philosophical hitmen (Travolta and Jackson), a mob boss’s wife (Uma Thurman), a fading boxer (Bruce Willis), and a pair of diner robbers (Amanda Plummer and Tim Roth), whose lives continue to intersect during a single, and eventually uncovered to be a very bad day. Pulp Fiction followed Reservoir Dogs, but it was the film that proved Tarantino would be remembered for decades. The non-linear structure and intertwining nature bear the film’s weight, with even the characters getting unexpected endings, breaking conventions once again. Pulp Fiction won the Palme d’Or at Cannes and changed the course of American cinema, and three decades later, people still quote it.

‘Inglourious Basterds’ (2009)

Image via The Weinstein Company

In terms of non-linear, intertwining narratives that lead to a single cohesive conclusion, many consider Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction to be the pinnacle, but Inglourious Basterds has a little more spice, zest, and bite than its predecessor. Everything in Inglourious Basterds is so perfect, from the dialogue to the performances, which range from thriller to comic relief, that all the characters’ talking goes by quickly. There is a lot of dialogue here, but the delivery and tension make it extremely entertaining. Christoph Waltz takes on the role of a lifetime as SS Colonel Hans Landa, winning every single award for it, and Brad Pitt has never been better than as Lt. Aldo Raine, leading a contingent of vengeful, Nazi scalp-hunting soldiers across Germany during WWII.

In 1944, two parallel plots to assassinate the Nazi high command converge on a Paris cinema: one led by Lt. Aldo Raine and his squad of Jewish American soldiers who scalp their kills, and one by Shosanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent), a young French-Jewish woman whose family was murdered by SS Colonel Hans Landa years earlier and who has spent every day since plotting revenge. Tarantino had been working on the script since 1998 and had set it aside several times when he couldn’t figure out the ending, but the ending he eventually discovered is one of cinema’s greatest acts of cathartic alternate history. It’s the film in which every aspect—performance, script, cinematography, score, and pacing—comes together flawlessly. It’s easy to argue that it’s the best film of the 2000s and Tarantino’s magnum opus, coming in bolder, braver, and smarter since crafting his beloved sophomore feature.