Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

In the trailer it says that it's Trarantino's 9th film. But I thought this was his tenth? Am I counting wrong?

I assume he's counting Kill Bill as one.

Oh okay. I remember he said he didn't like Death Proof way back so I thought maybe he was discounting that one as a result maybe.

Heh, total coincidence I happened to just see this:

Said he was only going do 10. Seems to be really wanting to do a Star Trek movie which seems like a paradox. Tarantino directing a franchise movie. Must have grown up with the show.

Anyways he said he was out after his 10th movie. But seem to be open to a loophole of not counting a Star Trek movie in those 10. Whatever keeps him directing films I am for ha.

__________________
I came here to do two things, drink some beer and kick some ass, looks like we are almost outta beer - Dazed and Confused

101 Favorite Movies (2019)

His loop hole might involve him writing scripts but not directing them. I know he wants to write novels and stage plays.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

The IMDB has already rated this film as 9.5...I can count on one hand the number of films they have rated over 9.

Definitely a big recency bias thing with IMDB ratings in general. When something is really good it'll top out-and-out classics on there for awhile.

I just saw the movie. It was overall good, but I didn't get why the Sharon Tate plot was even in the movie, when she didn't even do anything that contributed to the story it seemed.

SPOILERS

I thought that she was going to end up being one of the victims, since she lived next to the house of the guys that the Manson family broke into, but it turns out they didn't even kill her. So she just becomes a target of them later on, by shear coincidence, that she happened to live next to a previous intended victim? It just felt like a gimmick to include her therefore, especially since she didn't even do anything, accept for go to a party, watch one of her own movies, then go out to dinner six months later, and that's it. So I felt it may have put a damper in the pacing, story wise, but what do you think?

sadly those are tarantino and dicaprio fanboys rating it 10s without even seeing the movie. Most of them are european and asian countries. Look at their filmographies. Most of their movies start very high and once general public starts watching the movie the rating drops pretty fast. It has nothing to do with quality of the movie.

Watched it twice. I think tarantino treated tate as an angel and didn't wanna touch her rising star either with Manson followers or with Rick and cliff. He wanted her to have a great career without interruptions. That said, all her scenes are stuff tarantino felt intrigued by her life. The scene with Mcqueen proves that. He is used for an exposition dump to tell the peculiar love triangle Tate had in her life. The theater scene was sweet. But it's tarantino obsessing about tate. It's not one of his better movies by a long shot. Definitely not better than Jackie brown.

Well I just don't get why you want to have a movie with Sharon Tate, and the Manson family as supporting characters, but never have them meet in the plot at all. That's like making a movie about say Lee Harvey Oswald, and have him coincidentally decide to kill John F Kennedy's next door neighbor before moving into the White House, and then just have the movie end right after that, and no plot connection at all between LHO and JFK. Wouldn't that be a randon let down?

There is also something about the movie that I found really really distracting. Whenever a character inhales a cigarette, they have this loud bacon sizzling sound effect. Now I can understand adding this sound, if you wanted to close up on a cigarette being smoked for a very dramatic moment. But this happens after every cigarette inhale I think, in every scene, even if the scene isn't even dramatic and just casual.

I found this to be a very weird artistic choice, and did anyone else find this distracting?

That sizzle smoking sound is the new thing. I posted about that in the Current Movie Cliches thread

Oh okay, but why would someone like Tarantino give into a new fad like that? He must have had an actually good artistic motive, other than it being a new fad.

Because he's got kitsch taste and is best at emulating other directors....(IMO) Tarantino is like the guy who use to work at an old VHS movie rental store that somehow got to make movies

But all the movies he is inspired by don't have those sizzling sounds. I don't think he drew any inspiration from the show The Crown, where it seemed to have started based on that cliched mentioning before.

SPOILERS BELOW:

It's Tarantino rewriting history, as he did in Inglourious Basterds. He creates a "what if" scenario. What if this Rick Dalton and his stunt double were neighbors with Sharon Tate and Polanski? What if instead of breaking into Sharon's house, the perpetrators broke into Rick's house? I don't think the break-in of Rick Dalton's house takes place before Sharon's murder. Rather it takes place in lieu of Sharon's murder. In Tarantino's version of history, Sharon lives and the Manson family is just some pathetic, stoned group of hippies that broke into a celebrity's house and got their asses whooped by his stunt double.

Oh okay, but if you are going to rewrite history, than why do more with Sharon Tate, since she had no barring on the rest of the plot? Or do less with her. Have her established as the neighbor but then cut out all her scenes if he going to the party, the dinner and the movie. Those scenes have nothing do with Dalton and Booth, so why include them at all, if Sharon is just an unnecessary character?

But isn't this kind of disrespectful though too, to rewrite it so that a murder victim lived? That would be like making a movie of OJ Simpson but have Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman live at the end, and OJ gets killed instead. Wouldn't that come of ass distasteful in a way?

It's a tweeeeiiiiisssssstttt!


I don't know his reasoning, but I felt the dread of not wanting to see pregnant Tate get butchered the whole movie. Then to subvert the expectation and not glorify or exploit the tragedy is refreshing.


If you know some backstory of the Manson family before you saw the movie.

View Spoilers

WARNING: "When that guy did the thing to the guy on the fence" spoilers below

The Manson family member he beats, did kill a stuntman on the ranch irl. Knowing that with the way Cliff behaves at the ranch would ratchet the already natural intensity of those scenes even more.

The Manson family member he beats, did kill a stuntman on the ranch irl. Knowing that with the way Cliff behaves at the ranch would ratchet the already natural intensity of those scenes even more.