NY Post Article : Quentin Tarantino’s exploitation has no place in Hollywood anymore

That’s interesting, because I reject some of Tarantino’s hypotheses, including the one about Polanski’s innocence regarding the sexual assault of a 13-year-old. (“Look. She was down with it … He didn’t rape a 13-year-old, it was statutory rape, all right? … She wanted to have it,” Tarantino said in a 2003 interview with Howard Stern, for which he was eventually shamed into apologizing.) I also question his having Thurman do her own stunt-driving in “Kill Bill,” during which she crashed and hurt herself, and his notion that dangerously strangling Diane Kruger on the set of “Inglourious Basterds” was the only way to get a genuine reaction shot from her. (Also, that using the N-word made him edgy.)

As a critic, I’m not immune to the charms of Tarantino’s cinematic grandiosity. I swooned over “Inglourious Basterds” and “Django Unchained” as near-masterpieces in spite of their faults. But “The Hateful Eight,” his last movie with Weinstein, was a comedown — a ridiculously long wallow in the spectacle of 70mm film with little regard for an audience’s patience or tolerance for grim violence. And “Once Upon a Time” marks a different low for the director: It’s kinda pointless.

In a world where we have an increasing number of heroic females — especially in films written and directed by actual women — it may be game over for male auteurs who create supposedly strong women on-camera and denigrate them from behind it. In 2019, we don’t need that type of guy anymore, especially one who thinks silencing Sharon Tate for most of his film is somehow a fitting homage.

Once upon a time in Hollywood, maybe, but not now.

[quote] “Look. She was down with it … He didn’t rape a 13-year-old, it was statutory rape, all right? … She wanted to have it,”

More elegantly expressed by Whoopi as the difference between rape and rape-rape.

Great. So now the New York (fucking) Post is the new Cahiers du Cinéma.

I really hope I don’t wake up tomorrow.

Well, not really, but you know what I mean.

I mean... The article's not wrong.

I'm going to read this while I do my bust exercises.

He committed the ultimate crime in my book.......he hired Lens Dunham.

Tarantino is possibly the most talented person in Hollywood. I love his films.

R6 that’s why in my Margot thread I posted a warning on a comment letting everyone know she’s in it before they see it lmao

If I don't want to watch a particular director's movies, I don't go to his movies.

It's really that simple.

I don't want to watch lesbian porn movies, so I don't watch those either.

Even though I like some of Tarantino’s films, I am aware that he is a huge creep. Insisting on choking actresses himself for his films? Weird.

Mira Sorvino dated him. How odd. Even Weinstein is less gross.

God I am sick to death of SJWs.

"It's twisty conclusion". Hm, I wonder if he rewrites history again and has Sharon live? Wouldn't we all love to see the Manson family horrifically massacred?

I agree with the Cahiers du Cinema quip. Who wants this sort of crap from NY Post for crissakes?

I think Tarantino's work has been steadily declining for some time now, but really - nobody needs pseudo-woke screeds from the NY Post.

The movie is brilliant, one of his best- if not the best.

“I just reject your hypothesis"

is a pretty good insult. I think I need to start using that.

I'd actually like to see the story but Leonardo is just intolerable to me. If I can go without ever watching Titanic I can do without this one as well. Particularly knowing the advertising overkill we are about to endure.

What a load of nonsense and I'm speaking as someone who doesn't care for Tarantino's films. If people don't want to view them - fine don't watch them but there are people who enjoy them and go and see his films and that is their right.

I can't wait to see it.

The majority of the reviews are pretty rapturous.

Anyone who refers to a review from The Post to make the case for a movie clearly doesn't have any taste in movies.

I just got back from seeing it. A standing O and cheering in a multiplex!

Yes my theater clapped r22

The linked NYPost article is not a review, rather a SJW screed.

"The linked NYPost article is not a review, rather a SJW screed."

ahhh, I see...I dint click on the link because I refuse to give that racist, fascist rag the traffic.

I do like that one of his influences was apparently Jacques Demy's Model Shop. That's a great late 60s LA film.

I'll be cautiously optimistic, even though I really haven't enjoyed his last few movies much.

I wonder if Robbie's part was originally meant to be more involved, but they just couldn't replicate Sharon? Tate wasn't a master Thespian or anything, but she had an almost perfect appearance and unique speaking voice.

It's not an "SJW screed."

Some of you just drool "SJW!" every time someone says something you disagree with.

Actually, QT added more scenes with Robbie after Cannes.

Some of his movies are classics. Brilliant. But many of them are not.

[quote] Quentin Tarantino’s new movie, “Once Upon a Time in . . . Hollywood,” is a love letter to the film industry days of yore — the late ’60s, to be exact. Men were men, female actors were “starlets” and

Ugh. Interesting analysis because I never thought of Dicaprio as being a man's man. Not then and not now.

[quote] the words “Me too” had yet to be hashtagged.

Metoo is dying down too. The climate has sufficiently changed again where men who have been falsely accused are finally able to tell their stories.

[quote] There was a time and place for Tarantino, who gave us his share of strong female characters — Uma Thurman’s Beatrix Kiddo in “Kill Bill,” Pam Grier’s fierce “Jackie Brown” — but never strayed far from his urge to exploit in his films, fetishizing the N-word and relishing the sadistic treatment of women.

Many of the most famous leading roles for women show them triumph over adversity. Without any struggle or vulnerability, people won't identify with the woman or care if they live or die. This author is probably one of those who argued that the horror and slasher films of past eras were exploitative when they actually made many women stars and were the early precursor to women action heroes.

Well, the other critics are raving about it.

5.8 million for Thursday previews, above expectations.

I can't wait to see it

Does this bitch realize where she works? Does she realize that the only reason the NY Post is still publishing is because Fox News funds the whole Murdoch empire? And that that place was something of a sexual harassment Nirvana? Does she really think the Post readership (i.e. plumbers masturbating in the back of their trucks) give a shit about her intersectional nonsense? Fuck her.

Robbies role was expanded after Cannes.

She was always supposed to have this mythical presence that almost never interacts with anyone etc. but is there, looking striking and and glammed up etc.

PS I think Robbie is prettier than Sharon Tate. She was more glamorous but to say beautiful? Meh.

[quote] Those flicks were endlessly quotable and addictively over the top but, in the end, made you feel as if you’d just spent a couple hours with a film geek who rarely got out of the video store

Um, not really

Margaret Cho dated him, too.

Saw it at The Cinerama Dome yesterday (which is featured in the film!) and it's his best work, in my opinion. It's funny and sad and bloody as fuck. I've never been a fan of Leo or Brad but I liked them both in this-esp Pitt. Margot's Sharon walks through the film as an angel of sorts and didn't need many lines. I just loved it and can't wait to go back. The costumes, sets, all the cool old LA neon signs-just perfect. I loved the ending but people will hate it. Fuck them.

R39 omg I loved that Margot had so few lines. It’s made her presence less human and more “angelic” and “mythical” than anything.

She’s there but it’s like she’s just there floating through as opposed to in the moment with everyone else.

Love the scene in the Playboy Mansion where she’s running through and dancing with everyone else dancing around her, almost as if she’s not even really there because she’s not speaking, just dancing and smiling, while looking stunning, with others speaking about her around her.

At the Playboy party I could have sworn Dreama Walker was supposed to be Joey Heatherton-she looked like her twin! But she was playing Connie Stevens. What a great a scene. From the snakeskin trench she rides in the MG to her dancing with Micelle Phillips-so good.

Prediction- Brad Pitt, Best Actor. Would bet my balls on it.

R42 I feel they are gonna do category fraud with him amen pit him Supporting

They are going to push Leo Lead and Brad Supporting

It's fashionable for critics to "rave" about Tarantino's movies. It makes them feel so edgy and hip. But his movies are trashy and repetitive; gratuitously violent, female character treated with disdain and frequently physically abused. Tarantino is a hack, a repulsive, disgusting creep. His movies reflect his personality.

R44 this one was actually good

R44 I can’t wait to see it

At least he's way more talented than Oliver Stone.

Has Oliver Stone done anything since Savages flopped?

[quote]I loved the ending but people will hate it.

The fact that this is a Datalounger's opinion most likely means I will love the ending as well.

I saw Once upon a time today............its a brillant movie. I have NEVER seen a quentin Tarantino film before. I havent been to a movie at a movie theatre in 4 years. It is intense, tightly put together, extremely well acted. I am not a Pitt fan nor a Leonardo fan but both were epic in the movie. I DO have something of an encyclopedic knowledge of the Manson murders. I have always been way way more interested in the victims and never really gave a crap about Manson or his followers. So thos movie catered more to me.

I was offended by Margot Robbie protrayal of Tate. SHe was abouot 20 lbs too heavy and her legs were fat .Usually acting can overcome the physical differences but Sharon tate portrayal was fairly brief and I didnt think Robbie was believable at all. SHe got the sweetness of sharon right, but overplayed the hippy aspect and I couldnt get past the wrong look.

On an elementary level the most satisfying thing was the hero ending to sharon tate and her friends (they lived).the killers were all brutally killed in violent fashion and it was a crowd pleaser. Tarantino made fun of the real killers for example he went out of his way to ridiucle CHarles Tex watson s name tex..............calling it corny and dumb in the movie......he brought the killers down to size as just hippie violent dumb losers. Loved that.

This movie will break all boxoffice and will be the box office winner of 2019 easily.

Thank you for spoiling the ending for the rest of us.

I hate QT with the heat of a thousand h-bombs and agree with others assessments that he’s only comfortable with female characters if they’re being beaten or tortured and that he’s a film school geek ripoff artist, but I have to admit, this movie looks great. And while I find his personality repellent, his films are entertaining and well made. I generally like every other one of his movies, and I hated H8, so I’ll likely love this one.

“Look. She was down with it … He didn’t rape a 13-year-old, it was statutory rape, all right? … She wanted to have it,”

Anybody read the victim's interview in Vanity Fair about 20 years ago? Samantha Geimer. She was NOT into it. He was drunk, and he gave her quaaludes which made her physically weak and unable to fight off his advances He also sodomized her. I doubt any 13 yr old girl would have agreed to that.

Who is this weird "Margot Robbie is fat" troll? Jesus Fucking Christ, no wonder so many people have eating disorders.

The best QT movie was Reservoir Dogs. Nothing will ever top that.

He's a very strange man. Many of his films are long, boring, drawn out, stylistically interesting, but ultimately underwhelming. He literally says his job is to jerk off the audience. I wish he'd stop opining about it and actually do it like with Res Dogs, but I doubt anything he will ever make will top that again. I mean I've seen Twilight Zones episodes that are more gripping than the stuff he puts out.

Yet he seems to think he's a living God to film making. I wonder how many people could surpass whatever he's done on film. There are people out there who probably are very gifted with a camera, cinema, or have unexplored creative vision that never came to pass because they weren't ego maniacs like that. So crazy how that isn't found distasteful but it rewarded.

How is Austin Butler in this?

[quote]...gratuitously violent, female character treated with disdain and frequently physically abused...

The only women treated with sustain and physically abused in this film are the two Manson girls.

And you are as much an idiot as the reviewer in the OP.

Wasn't Uma Thurman really angry with him? Wasn't she almost killed?

Oh then that lady he had a date with talked about how he had a creepy foot fetish. The guy is lame.

I never liked how he thought he was so cool and edgy for saying "dead n@#$@# storage." Like really? Really?

Kill Bill was shit. It could have been good, but it wasn't.

But now, Uma and QT are having talks about finally doing the 3rd Kill Bill? They must have made up.

I saw the new movie last night and it's easily one of this best. The finale was thrilling and weirdly cathartic. I'm not big Leo fan, but this is easily his best work since Gilbert Grape. Otherwise, I've never understood why he was mentioned in the same breath as people like Phillip Seymour Hoffman.

[quote]How is Austin Butler in this?

Very good. Charismatic as hell and appropriately scary. He probably doesn’t have more than 15 minutes of screen time, though.

Leo is not a very good actor. He's very one note, play it safe. I don't get lost in his performance. He doesn't take me to another world or make me believe he's anyone but Leonardo DiCaprio. Johnny Depp did, but Leo nope.

Quentin who?

"This movie will break all boxoffice and will be the box office winner of 2019 easily."

Shut up Quentin, you annoying, repulsive fuck.

[quote] But anyone who dared to ask why Roman Polanski’s actress-wife Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie), the ostensible heart of the film, is reduced to an almost wordless entity was summarily dismissed

Words are overrated.

[quote]Interesting analysis because I never thought of Dicaprio as being a man's man. Not then and not now.

He's about as far from a man's man as it gets, but ever since Titanic he's been desperate to be perceived as one, which is why most of his performances in the last 20 years were cringeworthy to watch.

R64 Not all of them. He was still able to pass for a lot younger for awhile after that and in Wolf of Wall Street and Catch Me if You can, he's basically playing a man child or savant. But he felt miscast in The Revenant and Inception but not so much where his presence ruined the films. I'm not buying him as a classic Hollywood actor in the style of Steve Mcqueen or Charles Bronson (actors who oozed masculinity) based on the trailers, but I'll reserve judgment until I see the movie.

Always meant to see Gangs of New York but the clips of Dicaprio didn't really grab me. Heard that the only good thing about that one was Daniel Day Lewis. Liked him in the Departed and in everything before Titanic.

Hey his acting comes from the need to be loved, now. All that talent. That's where it comes from.

Did anyone see that video of him being grabbed by that convicted pedophile on the set of Growing Pains? The behind the scenes shot of the man grabbing underage Leo and his hand lingering there like a lover and Leo pulling away. Made me feel real bad for him.

I didn't say all of them, but most of them, R65. I agree that he was believeable in Wolf of Wallstreet and Catch Me If You Can. But I HATED him in roles like Gangs of New York or The Departed that required him to come across tough and masculine. I'm not even saying he doesn't have that in him. But he seems so desperate to prove he CAN do it that he tries way too hard.

Gay or not, the vibe I get from him is that he doesn't feel like 'a real man', and that that feeling of not being masculine enough interferes with his acting.

His films are too violent and gory for me, but I want to see this one. The Pulp Fiction dance scene is one of my favorites - the rest of the movie? Garbage.

When she drew a square, that was the coolest part of the movie. And when they stabbed her heart.

R50, you deserve to die a horrid death. Spoiler Alert is a common term, fuckface.

SPOILERS

I teared up a few times. The montage of the neon signs lighting up with all my favorite beautiful Los Angeles places, including the one I was sitting in watching it.

And the end. When Sharon was ok. It reminded me of the end of Star Trek III Search for Spock.

And, in retrospect, it IS wonderful that QT got a theater full of people to ridicule Tex Watson's corny line, one that heretofore has brought people chills. Watson is still alive, and I hope he hears about it.

[quote]I'm not buying him as a classic Hollywood actor in the style of Steve Mcqueen or Charles Bronson (actors who oozed masculinity) based on the trailers

Well, that’s good, because that’s not who he plays. His character is a failed never-quite-was, not a star.

[quote]Gay or not, the vibe I get from him is that he doesn't feel like 'a real man', and that that feeling of not being masculine enough interferes with his acting.

This is actually a very accurate description of Leo’s character in this film.

[quote]The montage of the neon signs lighting up with all my favorite beautiful Los Angeles places, including the one I was sitting in watching it.

I saw it at the Dome too!

God I miss LA. I love it so much. I make sure to go to the Dome every time i am there visiting. I saw Rocketman and Aladdin there.

This movie is WONDERFUL.

Brad Pitt was phenomenal. May be his strongest performance ever.

So Sharon Tate LIVES at the end of this movie? Jesus, how stupid.

I think some of you are just experiencing nostalgia or feel bad because Tate is dead, but Robbie is not fat nor “not pretty enough” to be Tate.

R75 watch it. It’s great. And like the Margot Robbie thread warns, this film is fantasy, it’s not a documentary. It incorporates real shit to the fantasy, but ultimately a fantasy.

And the ending is very what if. Like what if the killers broke into the wrong house and got killed instead? We see that and Sharon lives. Then the words “Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood” show up on screen, almost as reminding you it’s “Once Upon a Time”, aka a fairytale

You spoilers are worse than Hitler.

Robbie is conventionally prettier than Tate was and is “hotter” but Tate was more modelesque and high fashion. I think that’s why DL favors her look.

R75 Fuck you

I know I'm in the minority, but i don't mind spoilers. Good movies can withstand spoilers. In fact I'm the kind of shitheel who will sometimes read Wikipedia plot synopses in advance, just to get that part out of the way.

R81, your in the minority.

R81 It's frustrating beyond belief to avoid leaks for months in advance only to have a huge part of the film spoiled the day of release on a thread about an op ed.

R50 should die.

Go fuck yourself, R80. What's the matter? Upset at me for letting go with a "spoiler?" Well, it was another poster before me who revealed Sharon survives at the end, you dumbass.

Why aren't any of you bitches even mentioning that DL fave Brenda Vaccaro is in this movie? You're slipping.

And these pearl-clutching critics who are having a case of the vapors over exploitation in a Tarantino movie would spontaneously combust if they ever watched a Japanese exploitation movie like Mutant Girls Squad or Tokyo Gore Police.

The soundtrack to Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is 31 songs.

Great one.

Why were there so many southern accents in this movie?

Who does Brenda V play ?

If you don’t want it spoiled, why are you reading a thread about the movie on DL?

I loved it. Brad at his best. I loved how his character held his own against against Bruce Lee and three members of the Manson family one being the meanest one Tex. I loved how QT didn’t hold back on the brutality of the Manson girls because they deserved it.

What kind of dog did Brad have ?

I saw it last night too and can't stop thinking about it. It is brilliant. I loved every frame!

R90 Read the title of this thread. The person who posted spoilers hijacked this thread. Nevertheless, others who contributed who wanted to discuss the film at least marked their post for spoilers, but then some asshole posts a major plot detail with no warning and so here we are. The reason I came back to this thread is because I actually contributed to the discussion as it relates to the OP. If people want to spoil the movie they should do it on a relevant thread for one, and use common courtesy and mark for spoilers if the movie hasn't even been out for more than 24 hours.

I learned the hard way that on DL there are no spoiler warnings. All it takes is one user's big mouthed negligence to ruin it, and that user will arrive. I make it a point to avoid any movie related DL thread until after I see the film simply because I can't trust any of the fuckers on this site to be decent.

That being said, I wish I loved this film more. I should have... but I didn't. I didn't dislike it at all, but I spent a great deal of time wondering what we were doing up until the finale. There was a lot of heat between Brad and Leo. Their characters were so lonely, and in some ways they only had each other. I wanted them to kiss... and that's not me exerting my gay wish fulfillment... I'm not even all that attracted to these actors, but there was something electric between the two of them.

[quote] I learned the hard way that on DL there are no spoiler warnings. All it takes is one user's big mouthed negligence to ruin it, and that user will arrive. I make it a point to avoid any movie related DL thread until after I see the film simply because I can't trust any of the fuckers on this site to be decent.

I already avoid a lot of list oriented or best of type threads for this very reason. It's a shame because I do enjoy contributing to those threads, but it's just not worth it.

Robbie IS fat, and always seems desperate to be liked. Oh, and she is a shit actress

If there’s something in popular culture that I don’t want spoiled, I don’t even log into DL. People here put spoilers in thread titles.

It annoys me too. But expecting DL to change for your convenience is just dumb. It’s not going to happen, no matter how much you scold them.

R94 lonely straight men that are best friends exist. They were best friends.

Not lovers or potential lovers.

Again, WHY DID ALMOST EVERYONE HAVE A SOUTHERN ACCENT!?

Was every fucking person in the movie originally from the south? No native Californians?

There are no natives Californians. Everyone moves here, but nobody is born here.

[quote]How is Austin Butler in this?

r56 Impossible to place as Austin Butler. I had to look Tex up on IMDB when I came home.

California has people born there stupid ass.

I haven't seen it because I can't get over DiCaprio's ridiculously dated hairstyle.

[quote]California has people born there stupid ass.

Nope, it’s illegal to give birth here.

It’s true. California has mandatory abortion.

And it’s retroactive.

I cant with another revisionist historical drama, What do I do with Hitler? Kill him! What do I do with the most infamous murders of the century? Make them NOT happen! I'm surprised Polanski wasn't made into husband of the year given his affinity for him.

Margot is beautiful but she's not a Sharon look alike. The closest actress to have Sharons look was Rose Byrne 10 years ago.

Well actually, the Dust Bowl and the crop failures and the locust eating of the Great Depression forced a lot of people on to move out west to Californy so a lot of those blonde Californians do come from the settlers that first settled in the south but were forced to move.

They were economic migrants.

I wonder how he got Tate's sister to go along with the film. Is it because Tate lives? Her sister was at first saying that Robbie wasn't pretty enough to play her sister.

This is the sister that confronted that awful Trent Reznor for buying the mansion she was murdered in and displaying the Helter Skelter door (the one written in her blood or something?)

You've got to admit there's something just a little sick about the obsession with the murders. As long as it serves as a replacement for the real acts, I'm fine with it, so I don't think it should be limited, artistically.

R27

Thank you.

Always a rare pleasure to watch Sharon Tate.

Sharon's sister obviously came around. She loaned Robbie some of her sister's jewelry and was on set the day they filmed the movie theater scene.

Tex Watson will be pleased to be remembered in a mainstream film. All of the mansonoids love any attention.

I've had my problems with Debbie Tate over the years but I'm pleased for her that she loved the scenes with Sharon in the movie.

I mean isn't it supposed to be some kind of fairy tale, where Tate's gruesome fate is avoided and the cultists get their comeuppance, and Hollywood is redeemed?

Rick Dalton specifically said he was from Missouri. He lamented having to go back there if his career dried up. I'm not entirely sure where Brad Pitt's Cliff is from. They may have said in the film, but I don't remember.

I place Once Upon A Time... In Hollywood as my second or third favorite Quentin Tarantino film. I say "favorite," I think his best would be a different list. I place it either second behind Pulp Fiction or third behind Reservoir Dogs. For me, he's never really come close to Pulp Fiction. I could watch two hours of dialogue between Vincent Vega and Mia Wallace and be satisfied. If I could interview QT, I would ask him why Dicaprio's scene in Lancer (the TV series in which he plays a villain) went on for so long. I get the importance of it, but for me it hurt the pacing of the movie overall. Now, there may be a justification for it that I will understand better on later viewings, but for now I gotta say, I think it was an odd choice.

That said, I adore this movie. It's basically Tarantino's stylized fantasia of what Hollywood was in 1969. Lead actors in TV westerns had a rough time of it when the genre fell out of favor. For every Clint Eastwood there were a dozen James Drurys (lead actor in The Virginian, who, after his series was cancelled, could never find Hollywood success outside of that western milieu.) Rick Dalton is on his way to becoming another Drury when the deus ex machina of the "family" intervenes like the frogs in Magnolia. Rick gets in with the Roman Polanski crew, a few Spaghetti Westerns under his belt, and maybe DOES become another Clint Eastwood. Sharon Tate lives, and maybe Polanski never strays from her. Many possibilities are suggested. I love what this town was at its best, and that's what Tarantino was celebrating. How could I not adore this movie?

Oh BTW Austin Butler was hot as shit as Tex Watson.

The real life murderers are enjoying the attention.

r116 what attention?

R115 That was a good write up. I wish I loved the film more... as I said above, I kept wondering what the purpose of everything was in the moment. I enjoyed the sequences well enough, but I wish that I was as viscerally involved in them as some other people seem to be. I didn't necessarily have a problem with the length of certain scenes, so much as their purpose. I'll probably need to think on the film and watch it again to see how I truly feel about it... but after it was over I was ranking it pretty low in Tarantino's filmography.

I agree about the Spahn Ranch scene though... Dakota Fanning killed it. I kept expecting something worse to happen, but it never did. The dread was all the scene needed, and oddly the fact that nothing too consequential happened, save for the flat tire, that made it all the more compelling. Just the presence of this family in this ranch was enough. Loved the bit with the dying rat stuck to the glue trap. Tarantino would direct one hell of a horror film.

Also, is this the youngest cast Tarantino's worked with?

Such HARD selling here with the publicity people telling people that they are too dumb to understand a boring movie. Telling HOW to understand the film. It isn’t an opera that needs a libretto.

[quote] Oh BTW Austin Butler was hot as shit as Tex Watson.

Looks like he'll have no problem shedding his image as a tween idol with the sweet, angelic features.

Which is Austin Butler's natural hair color, the blond we've seen before or brunet Tex?

This movie is like 3 hours long? I can't sit that long.

R118 it's partly because I love Los Angeles. I love her history. I just enjoyed being transported to 1969 Hollywood for a few hours. As for the purpose? I guess Rick Dalton was in danger of fading away, and we were watching his struggle to stay relevant.

It’s purpose was simply to tell a story of Hollywood, 1969 and uses some characters to do this.

Hollywood was the main character of the film.

PS r123 I love Los Angeles also. I go every year for two weeks in May. My favorite city to party in and meet people.

"I wonder how he got Tate's sister to go along with the film. Is it because Tate lives?"

I think that's exactly why she agreed to this film. Tarantino devises a Hollywood fairytale ending for her poor murdered sister.

The film is boring as fuck.

Tate’s sister didn’t feel Robbie was right at first and not pretty enough, until she saw some footage and then felt comfortable. Then she was brought on during the day that the movie theater scene was shot and she loved it and her as Sharon. She even lent her some of Sharons jewelry.

[quote] This movie is like 3 hours long? I can't sit that long. —Millennial

Uh, Millennials binge watch 13 hour long episodes worth of shows, hon.

[quote]Uh, Millennials binge watch 13 hour long episodes worth of shows, hon.

In the comfort of their own homes where they can pause the action anytime they want, hon.

Sell sell sell

I do not care if Tarantino is a cokehead and a creep, I absolutely love his films for the most part.

I still want to see his new movie, will wait until it's online/cable

That Post article is retarded as fuck. It's a great film. You'll love it.

I don't love or hate Tarantino films. Like the comic book genre movies they resemble, I enjoy them when I'm in the mood for one. Summer is good timing, maybe some evening in August we'll catch this one.

I understand Pitt is playing a legendary stuntman Hal Needham character and DiCaprio is playing Needham's real life bestie, a semi-version of Burt Reynolds.

They lived together at Burt's house for twelve years after Needham's wife threw him out.

Tarantino is hit and miss as a filmmaker, but the author of this article is a cunt 100% of the time.

Pulp Fiction was a terrible film with this too cool for school vibe that was nauseatingly self conscious. And the rape scene involving the black gangster by the white racist hillbillies was beyond offensive. Can’t stand Tarantino.

I generally don't bother with Tarantino movies, but I wanted to see this one because of the '60s, Los Angeles, the music, the Tate murders. I liked it.

For smallest loss of continuity, if you need to take a bathroom break, go while Rick is starring in the western movie.

The Rick scenes shooting “Landers” were too long.

The New York Post is a Murdoch property. He wants to get rid of Tarantino because he hates anything that promotes multicultural values or is beloved by liberals. NYPost does not give damn about race, these are some of Trump's number one cheerleaders. Do you actually believe they would fight Tarantino because they thought he was a racist? No they would work hard to boost him if they believed that.

Some anachronisms:

[quote] there are some glaring errors, that I am surprised made it into the film.Three that jumped out at me:

[quote] When Brad Pitt goes to his trailer near a drive-in, the movie playing has a GP rating. In 1969 the ratings were GMRX (they even had a trailer with a song Gymrix, what's Gymrix that played before the feature to explain the new rating system.) It would have been rated M for mature audiences, as was "The Wrecking Crew." M was replaced by GP in 1971 and by PG in 1972 . [quote] All freeways had ONLY white lines in 1969. There were no yellow lines. The only yellow lines were solid yellow no passing lines on two lane roads. When the interstates were built in the 50's the Feds declared that all lines would be white, to replace the mixture of white, yellow, and sometimes red. In 1972 they went to the Yellow/White combination in use today.

[quote] The weather on the radio stations playing in the Caddy is all wrong for the dates. It would have been simple to have the right temperatures.

All I noticed was that the Fiestaware mug Rick was drinking from in makeup was obviously part of the post-1986 Contemporary collection, and that color, Sunflower, did not appear until 2001.

R140, (and whoever you copied up thread) evocation in art is not documentary. Even more relevant is that the movie itself plays fast and loose with reality versus desire as a theme.

So, though your career as an actuary is I’m sure very successful, your skills probably don’t effectively translate to film criticism.

(Typed by the telephone poles in High Noon)

BTW R140, very funny!

"Sharon's sister obviously came around. She loaned Robbie...."

WHO GIVES A FUCK? This isn't a documentary (do you know what that is?) . Deal with it, they hired an actor to assimilate a character based on Sharon Tate, it wasn't supposed to be an IMPERSONATION of Sharon Tate - a little known starlet at the time.

I liked it for the sheer Hollywood geekery. That era of Hollywood was very interesting between the rock stars, the movie stars and the hippies who travelled among them. As much as QT is self-indulgently whacking it over his meticulous attention to detail and bare feet, it’s a fun, weird story about the underbelly of evil in a magical town where your fortune can turn on a dime. I liked it more than I thought I would.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

This movie is extra-special if you grew up in LA, even a decade later.

Does anyone remember a Mexican restaurant at the corner of 4th and Rose in Venice, late '70s?

I didn't recognize Emile Hirsh. I've never found him remotely attractive, but when his character was onscreen I kept wondering "Who is this hot guy?" When I got home and looked it up I was shocked.

Loved it. Probably my fav Tarantino film. Haven't liked the last three or four he's done, this one redeems him completely. Instant classic.

I used to love Emile Hirsch. I rented all his movies up to a point, what, ten years ago. Then he kind of dropped away. Did he become a rapist? A homosexual?

Didn’t he beat up a woman?

Agree with everything you wrote, R149! This is his best film in my opinion...

R151 Yeap.

For some reason Hirsch gets a free pass. But he is not the only one (see Gary Oldman, Alec Baldwin, Sean Penn, Michael Fessbender all come to mind too).

Emile didn’t get a free pass. It’s been years since he’s done much of anything.

Brad Pitt has a lot of long scenes where he has little to no dialogue. And most of Leo's scenes have him never shutting up. Maybe that's why people think Brad will be in supporting. There is a lot of looong rides in the movie like Brad going home to his trailer behind the drive- in then Polanski and Tate's drive to the Playboy mansion. What was that all about? And the Lancer pilot scenes went on too long. This movie did not have to be so long.

But I agree with the poster upthread: That definitely looked more like Joey Heatherton than Connie Stevens. And Damian Lewis didn't look anything like McQueen to me.

Interesting film, but Oscars?

I loved seeing Polanski and Tate going to the Playboy Mansion because then they went in it and partied. It’s not like we saw them going there then never saw them in.

Brad speaks plenty. He has more quiet moments because he’s alone a lot more often than Leo is and that shows the differences between the two friends. One is a loud chatty Actor that is self obsessed, selfish and lives in the Hollywood Hills while the other is a quiet, brooding struggling Stuntman that is very selfless, caring and lives in a trailer.

AGAIN... how often do people get cast that actually look like the figures they’re portraying?

[quote]...while the other is a quiet, brooding struggling Stuntman that is very selfless, caring and...

...who murdered his wife

R160 that has nothing to do with the relationships he has otherwise.

She was a raging cunt.

We see ten seconds of her, probably right before he killed her. Hardly a character study.

And “She was a raging cunt” is not a defense to murder.

She’s trash. She deserved to die.

Can’t wait to be on the jury for your inevitable murder trial

****SPOILER ALERT*******

We (the audience) never know whether he actually killed his shrewish wife or if it was an accident; the lead up to the event is shown and then the camera cuts away purposefully before definitive proof is given either way...

Leo’s character also claims that Pitt didn’t murder her and that it’s just “a nasty rumor” (or something like that)...

The post article is out of touch and pure garbage. The film was brilliant

Agree, R166.

[quote]But now, Uma and QT are having talks about finally doing the 3rd Kill Bill? They must have made up.

That little tidbit came out just in time for the movie to open in the US, and was clearly designed to make people who were hesitant to watch a QT movie feel like everything must be okay if Uma wants to work with him again.

I wonder what the truth was. Did it even happen, or did he text her once and say "we should do KB3"?

I really liked his latest movie.

r153, dude was supposed to be next thing and now he is unrecognizable in this film.

He has lost a career.

[quote]Loved it. Probably my fav Tarantino film.

Yikes!

Oh, please, r153, Jameela Jamil is a mentally ill hypocrite who needs to be put in an insane asylum.

I am so sick of anyone telling artists (or anyone, really) what they can and can't do. If a film has subject matter you find offensive? Don't watch it. I am a 100% advocate of free speech. And that includes right wing assholes. Let people hang their own noose. If someone chooses to read Breitbart, for example, that's an assertion of their free speech/association AND an indicator of who they really are.

R156

Tarantino likes to waste a lot of time with walking and driving scenes. It's especially ridiculous in a movie like OUaTiH that's already running almost three hours.

The walking and driving works in this movie.

[quote]apologizing.) I also question his having Thurman do her own stunt-driving in “Kill Bill,” during which she crashed and hurt herself,

Have to call bullshit on Uma’s attempt to glom onto #metoo. He asked he to drive down this straight road. She didn’t want to but when he kept saying it was just driving down a straight road she eventually agreed. At one point the road curved a bit. But she had been told it was a straight road so she kept driving straight, despite the modest curve in the road, and went off the road and hurt her neck. Why? Because she is literally too feeble to live.

Tarantino really had me convinced he had mended his ways and finally stopped making adolescent revenge fantasy movies until the end of OUATIH. Then it morphed into another nose picking teen boy revenge fantasy. I’m done with him.

Tarantino is racist but this movie was good.

I hate this world that we live in now. Everyone is so sensitive, all the time. It’s like living in a world controlled by toddlers and for some reason, we are all supposed to bend to the toddlers’ needs. It’s a movie. See it or don’t. Everyone will have forgotten it existed in three months anyway.

Fuck off r178

R17 I agree, I like the sound of that too, and it should shut them the fuck up and I can go on my merry way.

Went to see this film with an expectation of an overindulgent, excessively violent, much too long, cocaine-fueled Tarantino mess. Actually, I only went because a friend whose opinion I trust recommended it. Thanks, Kevin.

Wow, was I wrong. Yes, I LOVED the film. Not a fan of Leo, but this was his best performance ever (as was Brad Pitt's performance). And so many wonderful cameos. Who was that little eight-year-old child actress who appears in the spaghetti western with Rick? Why did I not recognize Luke Perry? Why was Bruce Lee portrayed as such a shallow blowhard? Tarantino's overindulgence combined with judicious editing made for a film that never felt to long or too much. Yes, it was like a fairy tale that you didn't want to end.

Although I spent only a brief few months in LA in 1974 (my ex was a producer at Paramount) , I loved the fantasy view of the City of Lights. I actually knew someone who lived near the Polanski house on Cielo Drive. The film brought back all those memories.

And I agree that this film should garner several award nominations, including Best Actor for Di Caprio and Best Supporting Actor for Pitt. It's the wrong category for Pitt, but it's the one I'm guess they'll lobby for to ensure that both actors win awards.

It’s a a MOVIE asshole!! Tarantino is the best director of our generation. If you don’t want to watch, then FUCK OFF!!!

My daughter saw it last weekend and said it was too long, very exploitative (in particular women's asses and feet), and made Bruce Lee look like a bitch. I think I'll skip it.

Liked the movie, thought Pitt was great - don't get the award speculation for DiCaprio. I thought his acting was kinda phony. I didn't buy his getting choked up about his career (cringey) and was bored with the long pilot tv series footage.

But Pitt was great in a role with looong silences.

I don't think the long drive to the Playboy Mansion added anything, he could have started the scene at the mansion and it would have played just as well. But that's Tarantino's 'style' (eye-roll)

Sharon as ostensible heart of the film? Then that wouldn't be a Tarantino film would it. Now I want to see the film and not read this review

[quote]I don't think the long drive to the Playboy Mansion added anything, he could have started the scene at the mansion and it would have played just as well.

You may be right, but after learning that the long drives were filmed with real cars and scenery (not CGI or other fakey studio nonsense), I was amazed that Tarantino was able to accomplish this and any meaningful way. How did he get permission to film on the Hollywood Freeway in the middle of the day? How did he transform the fronts of so many buildings and theaters back to their 1969 roots? Even the El Coyote restaurant looked authentic. And the Playboy Mansion was superb.

The long drive you are bitching about to the Playboy Mansion wasn’t even a full minute long.

Take that away and you took one minute off the film. Big deal.

Quit crying.

this was a riveting movie and Terantino is responsible for that. His assoc with Weinstein was not pretty and he might be chauvinistic and many other things but I hope he continues making movies altho I believe he said this was his second to last film???

Lots of actors were born in CA. I was born in CA. My whole class was wanna-be actors. I went to school with Kay Lenz. She was born in CA.

R189 also likes the color blue.

I went to school with Batina! She wanted to be a ballerina

I was molested!

I find it funny how many scenes involving Sharon Tate were cut from the movie but used in the trailers.

The film is unbelievably boring.

Always interesting as a filmmaker. I prefer him to many greats of the preceding generation like Scorsese, Spielberg and Coppola.

Tarantino is a GOD. He’s the greatest filmmaker of our time

Not my taste, and I think he’s a creep, but he’s brilliant.

I enjoy lots of Woody Allen’s work, too.

I’d blow him

Well then I guess you’d blow literally ANYONE

[quote]My daughter saw it last weekend and said it was too long, very exploitative (in particular women's asses and feet),

How can an actress's feet be exploited? They're just feet.

Are Margot Robbie's feet going to have to do porn now because they were "exploited" in the movie?

R199 Not you, Doll!

If woman’s asses and feet were exploited in this film then I guess Brad Pitt’s entire fucking body was exploited! This double standard some women have make me insane

R201 - oh honey, you’d DEFINITELY blow me. I’m 6’2”, white, hazel eyes, chestnut hair, and I work out regularly.

Loved the film- references to the 70s were loads of fun- the usual twist of fate in the right direction and an absolutely wonderful turn by Brad Pitt.

SUREEEE r203

R203 I’ve always been a fan of your comedy

R108 while I share your disgust with the obsession over serial killers it's only fair to tell you Trent had no idea of the home's history until after he bought it to record TDS.

I wanna see this wonderful film again. I miss it.

They can try as hard as they want, great directors will never be #cancelled. Society’s mood changes with every status update, but art lives forever.

Look at Polanski.

Tarantino is a super sadist. Super mysogynist. Super egotist. Super chauvinist. His films have no replay value. Most of them are crap if you really break them down. Kill Bill should have been one movie. Half of the movies dialogue should have been cut. The fucker should have been charged with attempted murder for purposely trying to hurt her with the car scene. He should have been charged with assault for spitting on her. There were only a few cool things about the movie. The soundtrack was killer. The fight with Vivica Fox was cool. An 8 year old playing a 4 year old beyond stupid. Beatrix being raped by hundreds of guys while in a coma was revolting. The final line - the mama bear is back with her cub was super fucking stupid! Anyway. I could make a thousand complaints against how badly written and conceived it was but why bother.

Speaking to a Tarantino fan is like talking to a zombie.

Speaking to a Tarantino fan is like talking to a zombie.

I loved his use of Robbie in this.

[quote]Tarantino is a super sadist. Super mysogynist. Super egotist. Super chauvinist. His films have no replay value. Most of them are crap if you really break them down.

The tragedy of Tarantino is, the first half of what you were saying is totally right. The second half of what you were saying is completely wrong, though -- his films are amazing, despite his sadism, misogyny a and egotism.

R214 Takes one to know one, sicko. I'm sure all the horrible things he did to poor Uma creams your pants.

If she’s over it, r215 then perhaps it’s time you let it go.

That whole situation with Uma was weird. I don't really understand what her point was.

The rape scene in Pulp Fiction was disturbing on so many levels. Don’t know where to start. Quentin relies too much on shock value for hipsters. He thinks that he’s being artistic but he’s not.

Yawn.

I loved the movie, it's expertly made, and very entertaining.

This was awesome.