The ending of "Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood" (SPOILERS!)

Dude. We have TWO threads dedicated to the movie already. No need for this.

I was caught happily flatfooted by the ending. I sho0uld have known because of the similar ending to "Inglrious Basterds," but it really caught me by surprise. I did suspect something was up, though, when Tarantino was being so historically accurate about the four inside the house (even down to which novel Abigail Folger was reading that night in bed) but did not include anything about Steven Parent being parked in the driveway. Parent was of course the first person the Family killed that night (he just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time), but since he's not a key part of the mythology Tarantino was depicting--of the innocent wealthy foursome in the house being viciously killed by the invading hippies--there was no point in including him).

I thought it was hilarious, and so did the audience I saw it with. But even though it did not bother me, I will bet you money right now Tarantino will take a iuge amount of flack for the fact that two of the three home invaders brutally killed by the two stars are women. It really bothers feminists when women (even Susan Atkins and Patricia Krenwinkle) are brutalized by men onscreen, and since neither "Sadie" nor "Katie" kills anyone in the movie's reality--indeed, "Sadie" doesn't even threaten DiCaprio's life, since she only shoots her gun up into the air before he kills her--there will be protests. The violence visited on them and "Tex" was pretty hilariously cartoonish, but I have a good sense for what feminists are going to hate.

To me this was the best Tarantino film since "Jackie Brown," and the only one of his I've really liked besides "JB". I thought the Spahn ranch sequence was memorably creepy (Dakota Fanning was terrifying as a controlling and menacing Squeaky Fromme), and the scene with Margot Robbie as Sharon Tate watching herself in "The Wrecking Crew" was so sweet. I loved the cameos--even though no one identified her at the Playboy Mansion party dance, you knew you were watching Cass Elliott not simply because of the weight of the actress playing her but because she danced exactly like Elliot.

Are the murders shown on screen? What’s the ending?

Never mind read the Vox review

R3 SPOILERS!!!!

****** *******' ********

The Tate murders don't happen. DiCaprio's character lives next door and on the night of the murders, he chases away Tex and the Manson Gals who back down the hill and then decide to go back and kill DiCaprio. Things don't go so well for them because Brad Pitt's character is a stuntman and a badass and he basically beats the shit out of Tex and one of the gals (with the help of his pit bull). The other gal goes to the backyard where Leo is and he takes care of her. Everyone lives happily ever after except for the three Manson kids who get brutally killed. The movie ends with Leo going up to the Tate house to have drinks with the Sharon and the other 3 who aren't slaughtered that night.

The end.

It sounds dumb.

R2 I think when Leo starts bitching to them about their car, one can surmise that Parent probably drove away. But he clearly got Linda Kasabian wrong. She didn’t just drive away, she was the lookout.

R5 that’s not how it played out. Wtf.

R8 it was pretty close. All he got wrong was Atkins falling in the pool after being mauled by the dog and Leo taking a flamethrower to her ass.

Boring. Too long. Waste of money. See literally ANYTHING else.

I didn’t like the ending because it felt like the Inglourious Basterds trick of giving history a more satisfying ending only works once.

Now it just feels like shtick, and I’m dreading the inevitable Tarantino movie where Brad and Leo foil 9/11 before it happens, chatting about schlock movies with Mohammed Atta before they brutally kill him on September 10.

Did someone ask if pit bulls existed in 1969?! Really??

My complaint about the movie is that Margo Robbie was NOT Sharon Tate...she didn't embody the late actress at all.

I feel Margot was better.

I thought the very ending was overly sentimental. I would have had the camera higher up when Sharon etc. walks out to greet Rick, with just faint murmuring heard. Then draw back, revealing the night lights of Hollywood and L.A. The End.

I wonder if QT was trying to say that the cute young hippy girl who Brad picks up was a sort of guardian angel. If not for her giving him that acid cigarette, he would have been too freaked out when the thugs broke in- and wouldn't have had the super-human strength and confidence to fight them.

The best thing about the movie for me is the exhaustive attention to 1960s period detail. Obviously much of it was CGI, but incredible anyway. Just kick back and take a trip down memory lane.

I wasn't expecting to enjoy it as much as a did. I'm no big Leo fan, but this was his best work in ages. I'm so over the criticisms of misogyny about the ending. These are Manson girls. They're pieces of shit. They murdered people. People SHOULD cheer their demise in the same way they applaud when the heroine decapitates Jason or Michael Myers or Freddy Krueger at the end of a slasher movie. Have we gotten to a point in society where we feel like even psychokillers shouldn't be punished? I'm pretty far to the left politically, but there's something really cathartic and satisfying about seeing those evil assholes get what they deserve.

Agree, R16! Thought it was surprisingly great and really enjoyed the ending...

I wonder how many uneducated people under 30 will watch this movie and think that is how it all really happened and that Sharon and the others survived that night. I suppose the Labiancas don't even exist in this timeline. August 9th is a Friday. They should have waited and released it on the 50th anniversary. think they had originally planned to but then changed it if I remember correctly.

There is zero chance I might see something so boring. And I hate the colours yellow, beige, tacky golden, roasted by the sun, etc.

the movie is a cartoon.

R6, it sounds dumb, but it isn't. By the ending, you've 2h40m with the Leo and Brad characters. You are thoroughly invested in them because they are entertaining and sympathetic. It feels great to see them defeat the Manson gang.

I don't especially like Tarantino, but I loved the movie.

^ ... you've SPENT 2h40m ...

The movie is almost 3 hours? Ugh

He should have made it into a Netflix mini-series

My first time in LA was in 73 so it was great to see the LA Tarantino created, it was so vivid in the time period. Amazing. What a great time to be in LA for a white male, even a gay one!

I loved the ending. But there was an earlier giveaway, in that Tate’s house looking nothing like the real house. As has been pointed out, so much is historically accurate in the film that it seemed like a red flag to me that something was off.

there was one shot of the tate house in the movie of the rear and obviously it was a different location shot as it resembled the actual cielo drive tate house (that was torn down). It looked like a barn and had reddish paint and white trim. THe interior shots werent too realistic but overall it captured the right mood of the house. The front of the house and the garage in the tarintino movie were really way off. They did film on the actual dead end cielo drive culdesac street where it intersects with the main part of cielo drive..........it was a mixture of actual location footage of the street and substututes........All in all the locations shots of what was suppose to be the location of the tate house was just short of cheesy........

Never bothered to watch. And yet somehow, I still feel whole.

“Suppose to be”, R26?

Do we know exactly who killed Sharon? Is there an account of what these people did when they broke in?

I've only read "Helter Skelter," r29. It was enough. But google "Sharon Tate murders book," and you'll find a number of books you can dig into.

Thanks R30

I loved the ending. Those vicious straight cunts got what they so richly deserved.

It is, after all, a fairy tale. “Once Upon A Time.......”

I was watching “the mother in laws” every night, but since this movie came out have switched to Manson Family documentaries on U-Tube, much to my husbands relief.

[quote] And I hate the colours yellow, beige, tacky golden, roasted by the sun, etc.

Noted!

Just saw OUATIH and am now fantasizing about a Tarantino sequence involving Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, a dog, a flamethrower, Trump, McConnell and Nunes.

In the film the invasion is Aug 8 but in reality the invasion was Aug 9.

I don’t think Angel was the one who sold the cigarette to Pitt’s character, it was someone else who looked similar.

Sharon yelled out “Mama!” to Mama Cass when she greeted her at the party.

I guess it was intended as a happy valentine to the pop culture of the 60s that Tarantino loves, but there was no magic for me: it really strained for sweet or funny effects that fell flat, and the revisionist ending was a slightly shorter copy of the one in Inglourious Basterds.

[QUOTE]In the film the invasion is Aug 8 but in reality the invasion was Aug 9.

No, the killers entered the estate at 10050 Cielo Drive before midnight Friday night, August 8, 1969. Steve Parent was killed before midnight. The other four were most probably murdered between midnight to 12:30 which was by then very early Saturday, August 9th.

[quote] I don’t think Angel was the one who sold the cigarette to Pitt’s character, it was someone else who looked similar.

Exactly right. Different girl. (Ann Reinking was Angel. )

I saw no Ann Reinking in the movie.

Loved the movie. I thought Pitt, Leo, and Margot did great jobs. It was a beautiful film. Awards for everybody!

[quote] I saw no Ann Reinking in the movie.

Andi McDowell's daughter Margaret Qualley played Ann Reinking in Fosse/Verdon.

The fairytale element was made clear by having Robbie watch the real Sharon Tate (who looks absolutely nothing like her) on the screen: Robbie is portraying someone who is not Sharon Tate, but a tribute to Sharon Tate. I thought this made the movie very dream-like.

That thought is too sophisticated and abstract for most of the posters on this thread r43

R43 makes a interesting point. I wondered why they CGI'ed Rick Dalton into FBI and those other shows, but didn't do the same thing for Sharon.

How many of you recognized Doug Simpson (Nick Hammond) who played Marcia's lust factor on an episode of THE BRADY BUNCH, circa 1973 ? In the movie Hammond was the director of the tv show that the Leonardo DiCaprio character was guest starring on. Hammond was also one of the Von Trapp children in THE SOUND OF MUSIC (1965).

Charles tex watson actually delivered the fatal blows to all the victims on both nights. The girls rolls were somewaht embellished. They were there and participated but Watson was the one that butchered everybody. The DA in the case has a long standing theory that you get the most truth at what actually happens after a murder immediately after it happens and then the details get murky. Initially one of the girls told her fellow inmate (when she was in jail for a different crime) that she participated in the tate murders and the reason they picked sharons house was because it was isolated. SImple as that. When Watson was first arrested he made a series of tapes for his first defense atty confessing to the details of the murders. Those tapes are finally in police custody after the lawyer died 40 years later. It got leaked that Watson confessed he killed all the victims and the girls were only minor participants. The police is keeping the tapes off limits because that info could enable the women still in prison for the murders a better chance at parole as their participation was less than they were charged with. Sharon Tates sister is aware of this info and she wants all the murderers to remain in prison until they die, and I dont blame her. SO the answer is Tex Watson basically killed 7 people on 2 different nights as well as maybe another couple vicitms at a later date before he was arrested. In the book Watson wrote about the murders he admitted he had a good time murdering his victims. How would you like to live next door to that guy if he ever gets out?

R47

And the actor in the film who portrayed Watson did not look as formidable as the real one.

And I was positive that was Taylor Kitsch, R48. Looked just like him. Appears I was wrong. It was Austin Butler. No idea who that is.

R2, Krenwinkle stabbed Pitt in the hip so she did indeed inflict violence. And they all had guns and knives.

One of my favorite parts was seeing the Susan Atkins hit right in the face by the can of dog food. The real Atkins was a very vicious cunt so it was nice to see her comeuppance.

Hammond was great as Sam Wanamaker. He was very cleverly shot mostly from the side of his face.

But wasn’t the whole point that Tarantino situated the film around the Manson murders so he he could indulge in an ultraviolet, misogynist fantasy of killing and mayhem? And nobody would care? That was certainly a part of it. The revisitation of these events felt very exploitative to me. And yet, still, I was relieved that he took this detour because the last thing I wanted to see was a recreation of the Tate murders.

It was very manipulative. Clever but manipulative. “See? I’m not doing the thing you thought I was going to do so instead In can do THIS! Nobody cares about these people!” But it was still highly opportunistic violence.

Anyone else notice how many feet and shoes we saw? Dirty, bare feet. Boots (cowboy). Boots (soft leather). High heels. Sandals. More boots. And on and on. Guess Quentin still has that foot fetish thing going on.

Never saw Brad’s bare feets so was disappointed.

saving for when I finish it