Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 11:45:58 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

Started by Wet Blanket, March 20, 2019, 02:35:01 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Mister Six

That's a fun interpretation, TrenterPercenter, I like that.

Alberon

Quote from: thugler on September 06, 2019, 12:07:04 AM
That was bad, apart from a few scenes. Tarantino is still a child really, still can't make anything serious or grounded.
The ending was fucking stupid revenge fantasy nonsense that didn't belong in this film.

The length was not justified so much superfluous guff in there.

Oh and i notice someone was supposed to be playing manson, were they even in it?

For about forty-five seconds. Literally.

Maybe Tarantino should have set eight films as his limit, not ten.

thugler

Quote from: Alberon on September 06, 2019, 07:56:48 AM
For about forty-five seconds. Literally.

Maybe Tarantino should have set eight films as his limit, not ten.

I know quite a bit about the manson stuff, and didn't even notice that. What is point.

Puce Moment

I went in with no appetite for seeing a pregnant woman getting stabbed to death, but the fact of the matter is that the real story is an incredible thing. Just the story of the Manson women drugging their lawyer with tons of LSD is a great scene in itself. The story Tarantino served up was just very unremarkable, regardless of what he might be trying to 'say' in the film by changing the ending. I do think that his egotism loved the reaction to the end of Bastards, and he just decided to do it again, albeit somewhat inverted.

I rewatched The Hateful Eight a few days ago and I have to say that the brutalisation of Jennifer Jason Leigh's character is a hard watch, but I guess Tarantino is just more comfortable with fictional violence against women, in which case he should maybe consider not overlapping his wet dreams with reality and non-fiction.

Alberon

Looks like there may be a miniseries version like with The Hateful Eight.

Quote"I think it's interesting that Tarantino took Hateful Eight and ostensibly repurposed it as a... series," Pitt told the New York Times.

"It's almost the best of both worlds: you have the cinema experience that exists, but you can actually put more content in the series format."

Pitt then confirmed that Tarantino has "talked about" a similar process for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, adding, "It's a pretty arousing idea."

https://www.radiotimes.com/news/film/2019-09-07/once-upon-a-time-in-hollywood-tv-series/

Does the idea of an extended miniseries version give you the horn too?

Mister Six

Can't see it working in that format, unless there's a dramatically longer cut with tons more material showing Tate et al. There's no central mystery or ongoing narrative tension, unlike hate, just a series of things more or less occurring one after the other until the build-up to the Family's attack. Don't see how you'd get a multi-part series out of that.

Mister Six

I wonder if Inglourious Basterds would work better as a miniseries though....

kidsick5000

Quote from: thugler on September 06, 2019, 12:07:04 AM
That was bad, apart from a few scenes. Tarantino is still a child really, still can't make anything serious or grounded.
The ending was fucking stupid revenge fantasy nonsense that didn't belong in this film.

The length was not justified so much superfluous guff in there.

Oh and i notice someone was supposed to be playing manson, were they even in it?

The Manson scene is very clear. And not too late in the film.
As for serious and grounded - do try Jackie Brown. A seriously good film.

Noodle Lizard

This is a relatively new thing I've noticed - every film that's slightly long, or perhaps feels a little episodic, there'll be some cunt saying "IMAGINE IF IT HAD BEEN A MINISERIES ON NETFLIX/HULU/HBO!" etc.  I don't know why it irks me so much - maybe because it shows a remarkably modern-consumerist attitude towards art.  Maybe because it shows a complete ignorance about how these things actually get made.  Maybe because there's little evidence to say something that wasn't designed to be a miniseries actually works better in that medium.  I dunno.

Goldentony

he needs to fuck off making episodes of his shite films and get the fucking full length full colour french subtitles Kill Bill out, why wont he just fucking do that instead of fucking around making Cheech & Chong films

Virgo76

I enjoyed it. Not without its flaws, but still amongst the director's best.
But:
Two scenes featuring beautiful women snoring loudly though. Er...why?
Is this another Tarantino fetish? Like the foot thing?

Sebastian Cobb

 I enjoyed it stylistically, and the story was OK, but by fuck it could've done with being edited down from nearly 3 hours to about an hour and a half.

Glebe

#312
Saw this t'other night... transparent spoiler text is a bit annoying, so just beware, *SPOILERS!*

I found it to be a quite a frustrating watch, because some of it is really good but it drags on a bit in sections, and I felt Rick and Cliff's character development was sort of derailed by the mad ending (he said, trying to sound smart and like a critic...). Several very funny scenes, and even some quite touching moments... I was actually a bit moved when Rick tears up during his chat on with the little girl on the movie set. Also, Sharon Tate's joy watching herself in The Wrecking Crew with an appreciative audience (interesting to see that they use the original footage of Tate instead of CGing Robbie in there or whatever). I though DiCaprio was fantastic in this, actually. Didn't feel that Margot Robbie was sidelined as some have suggested, she's quite present throughout. The feet thing is a bit odd, but I wonder if QT is deliberately winking at the audience with that here.

The brutal retaliation of the ending is a little troubling. Tex's speech in the car (anyone else think that actor resembles Adam Driver, btw?), as pointed out by TrenterPercenter, about Hollywood encouraging the younger generation to react violently... and the extreme violence meted out by Rick and Cliff... I dunno if there's a bit of a reactionary "fuck those pathetic hippies" thing, or what... like "this is the generation when everything went wrong". It's hard to know how seriously Tarantino expects us to take all this, but it is rather uncomfortable, given that it's based on real people and a real event. Does Cliff go so nuts because he's tripping on acid?

I took the Bruce Lee sequence to be Cliff imagining he had gotten the call on set (and thus just imagining Lee being such a cocky fucker), but some of the discussion here has made me reconsider... I guess it can just as easily be interpreted as a memory. There are brief flashes of Lee being smiley and helpful training Tate and that. By the way, Cliff with his wife on the boat... isn't that inspired by the death of Natalie Wood? Doesn't his wife actually mention that her name Natalie?

As usual with Tarantino, the soundtrack is a highlight... you're introduced to some great obscure (and not so obscure music). Couple of other little things... Michael Madsen playing a cowboy for QT again (Rick making margaritas with a mixer and drinking them out of jars is surely a nod to Madsen in Kill Bill, right?). Apparently, that's DiCaprio's genuine reaction when Rick tests the flamethrower. Clu Gulager as the bookstore owner! Toni 'that Mickey song' Basil apparently appears as a dancer... looking up Sam Wanamaker, I actually didn't know he was the father of Zoë Wanamaker!

Anyway... that's my two cents. I was a bit disappointed with it but there's plenty of good stuff in there, troubling as it is. Be interesting to watch continuing debate and people's interpretations of it.

Quote from: popcorn on August 22, 2019, 02:11:39 AMIt's his whitest film since Reservoir Dogs, isn't it? I didn't catch a single n-word. Makes sense really. It's all about westerns and old white Hollywood. But on the other hand sort of surprising considering the Masons were all about a race war.

Indeed... apparently Sam Jackson was mooted for an appearance... as it is, the only black folks I can recall being in it are a Playboy Bunny girl and one of the ambulance men at the end.

Quote from: Elderly Sumo Prophecy on September 01, 2019, 02:02:14 PMDid anyone stay for the mid credits scene? I didn't know there was one, but nobody seemed to be moving in the cinema so we stayed put. It wasn't anything decent, just a fake advert for Red Apple cigarettes.

Yeah, stuck around for that... 'Batman Theme' appeared in the song credits, was thinking, "Hang on, that wasn't used, was it?", then suddenly it comes on as part of a radio jingle that plays out over the very end of the credits! Pacino's Marvin Schwarzs mentions Batman in passing during a chat with Rick. 'Tim Roth (Cut)', heh!

Oh yeah, one more thing... was really surprized by the Mad magazine cover, having seen it on newsagent shelves (Mad magazine is wrapping up, of course, after a confusing failed 'relaunch'.)... more about that here.


Johnboy

Saw this last night.

Liked it - the time flew. Thought Di Caprio was great, I like him when he's vulnerable. Is his character Clint Eastwood - is the idea that he will go on to have a massively successful movie career now he's all friendly with his successful neighbours? (as someone mentioned I thought it was a bit odd that he went to their house leaving his wife in his house after such an attack)

Also there was that quirky editing of his chat with his male co star on the western - quick cuts of a quick chat - I liked the quirkiness of that but it was inconsistent with the rest of the film, just spoiled the flow a bit, but yeah bit odd flow wise generally but it's nice to see some style in the flicks these days



George White

No, he's supposed to be a contemporary of Eastwood.
One of the actors who followed Eastwood (and Van Cleef) in his wake, from US TV and minor roles as a studio contract player to Italian exploitation.
Adam West, William Shatner, James Garner (who was already a movie star by 1966, but still), Ty Hardin, Edd Byrnes, Guy Madison, John Philip Law, Chuck Connors (again, a bigger name on the way down), Cameron Mitchell (ditto), Mark Damon, the lesser known likes of Hunt Powers/Jack Betts, Brett Halsey, Craig Hill, Richard Harrison...
 

Dr Rock

I've thought about who I would rather play DiCaprio's part, and I've come up with.... James Franco. So there.

Mister Six


Dr Rock

I don't really like DiCaprio as an actor, though he wasn't too bad in this (compared to how wrong I thought he was in Django Unchained for example). But when I tried to think of another actor, about the same age who could be right for the role, I couldn't think of many. And if Franco did a great job it would be another 'Tarantino rescues a fading star's rep' thing.

So my challenge would be, say DiCaprio couldn't do the part because he fell down a well, who would you pick for the part?

PlanktonSideburns


Inspector Norse

Just watched this.

It's probably the best Tarantino I've seen since the '90s.

But I've only seen two others and neither was any good, so that's faint praise.

Still, there is plenty to enjoy here: the cast are uniformly excellent, from the stars down to the bits, the production is excellent and there are a handful of really amusing or smart scenes. Particularly good were the scenes of DiCaprio's Dalton acting: Tarantino does have a knack for getting these compelling, charismatic moments from his actors. The Spahn Ranch sequence had a good blend of silliness and creepiness, and I enjoyed (unlike others, it seems) the mock-ups of Dalton's film and TV appearances real and imagined. The subplot about Robbie's Tate gleefully making it was sweet, too.
In that regard, I can completely understand the ending, DiCaprio and Tate set for an exciting, optimistic future, but Tarantino being Tarantino, the violence of those scenes was disturbingly overindulgent. He really does leave the impression of being a sad, grubby individual.
There was also the issue of there being too much flab, particularly early on: overextended and dull scenes like Brad "Jeanne Dielmann" Pitt feeding his dog and pottering around in his trailer, or the many, many driving scenes that served no real purpose other than Tarantino's own cod-nostalgic fantasising. In his earliest films, these scenes might have been full of zippy dialogue or tight action but here they dragged.
These problems are overfamiliar now for the director and it's frustrating, because his eye for and creativity with shots and setups is particularly strong here and there's a lot that could have made this a really good film. As it is it's alright, but far too self-indulgent to be lasting.

Inspector Norse

#320
And, yeah, the foot thing.

Quote from: Johnboy on September 22, 2019, 09:11:44 AM
I thought it was a bit odd that he went to their house leaving his wife in his house after such an attack

She's there with Brandy the dog and had taken five sleeping tablets, she'd probably have passed out by then.

Mister Six

Also I imagine there would have been police knocking around the house and collecting evidence until morning.

a duncandisorderly

Quote from: Glebe on September 21, 2019, 06:51:19 PM
By the way, Cliff with his wife on the boat... isn't that inspired by the death of Natalie Wood? Doesn't his wife actually mention that her name Natalie?


he could've asked christopher walken about that....

Dr Rock

Quote from: Mister Six on October 03, 2019, 02:31:45 PM
Also I imagine there would have been police knocking around the house and collecting evidence until morning.

The ending credit underlines you're watching a fairytale, so I suppose there's that.

popcorn

I was a bit bothered by the lack wife at the end too. It contributes to the strange generally anti-wife sentiment of the film.

You can rationalise it by saying oh well she'd be talking to the police or whatever, but it seems like it would have been easily addressed by having Leo and his wife talk at the gate in the end. Then they get invited in as a husband and wife couple, meet the neighbours. That feels nice in my head.


phantom_power

Quote from: popcorn on October 03, 2019, 03:27:16 PM
I was a bit bothered by the lack wife at the end too. It contributes to the strange generally anti-wife sentiment of the film.

You can rationalise it by saying oh well she'd be talking to the police or whatever, but it seems like it would have been easily addressed by having Leo and his wife talk at the gate in the end. Then they get invited in as a husband and wife couple, meet the neighbours. That feels nice in my head.

Di Caprio's character is a bit of a selfish cunt though, so it is pretty much in keeping that he would leave his wife alone to chat with some people who might revive his career

lipsink

Quote from: Dr Rock on September 22, 2019, 07:27:11 PM
I don't really like DiCaprio as an actor, though he wasn't too bad in this (compared to how wrong I thought he was in Django Unchained for example). But when I tried to think of another actor, about the same age who could be right for the role, I couldn't think of many. And if Franco did a great job it would be another 'Tarantino rescues a fading star's rep' thing.

So my challenge would be, say DiCaprio couldn't do the part because he fell down a well, who would you pick for the part?

Joaquin Phoenix?

I'm sure that if they recast someone they end up changing the dialogue and script a little to suit the new actor, don't they?

Dr Rock

I'd have preferred him to Leo, yes.