Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019)

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
Posts: 54139
Joined: May 2010
Bacon wrote:
August 15th, 2019, 6:53 pm
With all due respect, I don't think I could disagree more.
Sharon is being presented as a glowing reflection of what makes Hollywood special. Her not being anywhere near the violence is her getting her cinematic justice. She has no reason to ever encounter them just as there was no reason for her to be murdered. QT gives every protagonist a fairy tale ending, hence the title, letting the traumatic and troubling stuff happen to the two protagonists (one of which has a direct connection with the murderers). Sharon's fairy tale ending is that she never encounters anything except the joy and love of her friends, free to live the life she was robbed of.
Well, I gotta say man, none of my passengers tonight had anything even remotely close to say in her defense similar to you here and you might’ve just convinced me of a good enough excuse. Something to think about for sure. :thumbup:

Posts: 42100
Joined: May 2010
I knew Sharon wouldn’t die but I was surprised and delighted she was never in danger tbh.
M4 check your PMs soon.

Posts: 54139
Joined: May 2010
Allstar wrote:
August 15th, 2019, 7:00 pm
I knew Sharon wouldn’t die but I was surprised and delighted she was never in danger tbh.
I just felt...
...you know what? Movies are for sure cool. I’ve been a cinephile since forever. A little bit of cinematic justice won’t hurt anyone, damn it. But there’s also real life, that everything other than cinema that you start feeling when the spots stop twinkling before your eyes after exiting a particularly dark theatre... and in that real life some crazy evil shit has happened to this person. And I feel like, if he somehow got her closer to the knife, Shosanna’s revenge style... I would’ve feel (even) better, just for a second or two. And perhaps that’s predictable and perhaps he did it better. I certainly have more appreciation for Bacon’s viewpoint now and will think about it tomorrow and the next time I see this movie... but still there’s both a large chunk of audience in the dark about the whole (true) story, and there’s this feeling inside me like he could’ve done more with the character, in more than just one way that I blurted out here. And it’s Margot Robbie, come on. Give her at least more QT dialogue. Let her talk about Polanski in bed or some shit. Anyway, alas, what a great movie still.

Posts: 42100
Joined: May 2010
I understand that feeling to a degree in regards to Tate/Robbie but on the other hand I really admired his restraint. I can’t really speak for people who went in totally unfamiliar with Tate and the Manson murders, I understand the movie won’t have the same impact or really work in that case.

Posts: 54139
Joined: May 2010
Allstar wrote:
August 15th, 2019, 7:13 pm
I understand that feeling to a degree in regards to Tate/Robbie but on the other hand I really admired his restraint. I can’t really speak for people who went in totally unfamiliar with Tate and the Manson murders, I understand the movie won’t have the same impact or really work in that case.
Like I said, bro didn’t get the point of her character since he wasn’t invested in reality of the story and gf felt the same even though I told her about the whole case prior to seeing this. Then there’s my other brother who knew and still disliked the way he did it. All of us loved the finale per se though, the way it was shot and all. Anecdotal but also true for (at least) my group.

Restraint... different choice for QT for sure. Evidence building up for at least a bit more admiration from me, even if I wanted to see it differently. After all I ranted about Django and H8 finales extensively. And here it was done with both directorial skill and just the right dosage.

Posts: 25450
Joined: June 2011
Give her at least more QT dialogue. Let her talk about Polanski in bed or some shit.
No offense, man, but this is definitely the opposite of giving Sharon Tate "cinematic justice." :?

Sharon Tate isn't a traumatized individual like Shoshanna. She was an innocent woman unjustly attacked and brutally murdered in real life. In this film, she's what she should have been: free and pure. Left untouched by the horror. Putting her in the violence or having her deal out "revenge" would be practically antithetical to the actual person of Sharon Tate and to the point QT is making in the film by including her.

Posts: 42100
Joined: May 2010
Bacon, relax. He already said he’s reflecting on his initial viewpoint and has appreciation for what we’re saying. You’re being way too aggressive, his initial reaction can be whatever it is.

Posts: 25450
Joined: June 2011
Allstar wrote:
August 15th, 2019, 8:01 pm
Bacon, relax. He already said he’s reflecting on his initial viewpoint and understanding what we’re saying.
Relax about what...? I'm not worked up. I'm just not really getting his initial viewpoint is all. He gave a pretty in-depth explanation and list about his understanding of certain things, but it seems like he's contradicting some of that with his opinions of what he was hoping for. I don't think he's being disrespectful and I'm certainly not trying to start an argument, I'm just trying to clarify why I don't get what he's getting at.

Posts: 42100
Joined: May 2010
I just think the “no offense” that always means offense... and the confused face smiley is not needed. He thought Sharon was going to have more agency in the story, for people going in blind thinking that and coming out feeling underwhelmed I can understand to a degree. The movie works better knowing what QT was tying to achieve and that can really only be fully appreciated on reflection and re-watch, not initial reaction. Also, if it doesn’t click with someone, that’s okay too.

Posts: 19703
Joined: June 2011
Location: The Ashes of Gotham
My problem with the ending...
... is that it is predicated on the audience knowing exactly what happened in real life. I can understand why some people found it cathartic, but I can't seem to justify why it had to be so violent except for QT wanting to have a bloodbath wetdream by massacring those members of the Manson family. Believe me, I love when QT is gleefully dosing his characters in red cornsyrup, and some of that enjoyment is experienced here, but when you look back in retrospect on how it felt with the rest of the movie, so problems start to float to the surface.

Rick Dalton is probably the first protagonist since probably Jackie Brown to not have that thirst for carnage and violence, so when he decided to pull out a flamethrower and burn the "witch" in the pool, it felt utterly out of character. I can understand how Booth reacted the way he did, even then I have some problems with what killing those people meant for his character, but for Dalton, who up until that point displayed no violent inclinations whatsoever except for when he's in character for the TV Show, it did not feel consistent with his character. It was as though QT was living out his violent fantasy through his characters.

It worked with Inglourious Basterds because it revolved around an event that never actually occurred, and Hitler's death was committed by character's whose superobjective was his death and the end of WWII. If you didn't know who Sharon Tate or the Manson family was and what they did in real life, that entire last 30 minutes must have felt like stepping inside an entirely different movie.

Post Reply