Once Upon a Time in Hollywood |OT| Fictional Glorious Basterds Unchained (Open Spoilers)

uncelestial

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,795
San Francisco, CA, USA
Whew you came in here preaching!

Fully agreed with the Margot bit, that was such a beautifully lived-in portrayal and hearing her voice over the speaker at the end was a punch to the gut. I knew it wasn’t real, I knew that part signaled the send off for a wonderful woman who was so much more than what the media painted her as.

The more I think about the film as a whole the more I love it. I hope there’s an extended cut.
I feel you on the punch to the gut. Tate's disembodied voice as gates open and the protagonist ascends through them. ;_;
 
May 9, 2019
90
Australia
Criticism of the Tate scenes shouldn't be shushed away. I think removing them would remove a key component of the film and would be making a different movie, but if we get to the heart of what Hopkins is saying, it's probably that those scenes weren't effective for him and didn't contribute enough to the rest of the film for them, or it was unclear what QT was trying to do. Or even that we know what he was trying to do and they weren't very effective.

This is a sentiment repeated by multiple posters and critics, as well.

I'm more mixed on those scenes. I see what QT was trying to do, and there is something sweet and human about it, but it is also (intentionally) a shallow look at Tate. He just wants to show her as a happy person, taking pleasure in her first success, living her life, etc. We're not really getting to know Tate any better or understanding her as a human, but we are getting these little glimpses that humanize her.

I think they are sweet and effective in that way, but then again, I think QT's indulgences make it not work as much for me. Tate + foot fetish is weird (in a movie all about humanizing this person, QT has to add a scene that plays to his own extratextual love of feet, which he also knows his audience knows, so its this strange double/triple audience wink), and TBH, the entire "well, it's a good thing this type of masculine manly man was here to stop the murderers" is a very, uh, complex type of wish fulfillment/fairy tale.

...this is a bit much.
After seeing the ending I understood better what Tarantino was going for but when I was initially watching the film I was getting annoyed by how surface level a character she felt when compared to Rick and Cliff.
 

she_esh

Member
Sep 12, 2018
9,218
Ireland
If there's two types of people I really don't understand, it's Trump supporters and people who fall asleep in movie theaters.
I was fighting off sleep through much of Apollo 11. Not so much the movie's fault as I had a migraine that day, had just taken 2 paracetamol and also saw the 147 minute Midsommar before it lol.
 

Schlomo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
560
Even though I enjoyed the film overall, I thought it was incoherent and meandering compared to Tarantino's best. The Tate scenes only seem to serve a purpose during your first viewing when you don't know the ending.

People in this thread keep bringing up it's supposed to subvert the way Tate is remembered and Manson is glorified, but personally I never experienced any glorifying portrayals of him, and Tate was always the girl from Dance of the Vampires for me first of all. So perhaps it is a regional/cultural thing that makes the film work for some but not for others.
 

Chikor

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,288
So I saw it and have to say I was definitely not a fan. I saw nothing beforehand and only saw it due to my friends going. It honestly felt so drawn out and scenes that meant nothing just kept going on and on. That whole scene with Tate going to the bookstore and going to see her film never meant anything in the end.
We got to see that panty shot of her from the The Wrecking Crew. It's important people remember that she had a panty shot in the last movie of her released in her lifetime. But it's okay, because it was written in the movie that she was happy and the crowd was happy so really, why are people upset about panty shots?

I donon, maybe I don't get it, if someone has a better explanation to the function of that scene I'm gonna listen, but I thought it was kinda gross.

p.s.
I couldn't tell if they refilmed that scene or just special effects it, like, did Tarantino made Margot Robbie go through that shit too?
 

Psychoward

Member
Nov 7, 2017
24,155
Just watched this finally. I love Tarantino movies, Ingloruous Basterds, Django Unchained, Kill Bill vol 2 and Hateful 8 in particular.

Some of my favorites of all time.

This movie sucked.

- the bruce lee shit seemed really awkward and racist
- yeah i get tarantino has a foot fetish and i was expecting it but jesus christ it was extra long and blatant. The male gaze in general in this film was insufferable
- the way that the movie portrayed class struggles/hippies/wealth disparity just comes across as Tarantino venting personally
- the entire movie felt like it was building up to the tate murder and it felt like he was coasting off that instead of creating a brand new story like Basterds or Django.
- I liked the ending overall but it really just felt like Basterds but worse and more expected (doesnt help when its the same director). The final scene was pretty touching though
- the main reason I like Tarantino is his off-kilter, witty dialog and it seemed like it was almost entirely absent in this one
- DiCaprio was great but the acting within the acting made it so I wasnt really tense in his Western scenes like I was in the dining room scene of Django for example
- the movie seemed less like a period piece and more of a movie that goes "HEY LOOK AT THIS FAMOUS PERSON THAT WAS ALIVE AND FAMOUS AT THIS TIME or here's a random radio broadcast from the era". Like I know these guys aren't politicians but they don't even react to the president getting his head blown off? Felt really cheap.

There's a looot more but yeah the average Tarantino flick is like a 9.5 for me and this wasn't even clooooooooose

And yeah it did feel pretty meandering and this man directed a fucking 40 minute long conversation as a climax and a final "fight". I don't know what happened.

The final trailer for this was fucking bomb though and probably contributed to my disappointment.

Edit: soundtrack was dope though
 
Last edited:

Psychoward

Member
Nov 7, 2017
24,155
Also I was really really disappointed that when Cliff lit up they never showed the effects of acid using the actual film, it was just Pitt's (admittedly great) portrayal of it. Compared to midsommar's and fear and loathing and las vegas' hallucinogen scenes it was a let down
 

chaobreaker

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,231
I'm not 100% into the idea that this movie being a love letter to Sharon Tate.

For one thing, there was this looming sense of dread that pervaded all of her scenes that made it hard to see her as anything but a murder victim. I can't speak for other people but I watched the movie not expecting that ending at all. I honestly thought I was witnessing the last few days of an innocent woman before she got murdered.

There's also way too many shots of Margot Robbie doing mundane things that felt voyeuristic in nature, for example the few of shots of her walking on the street that was a filmed from across the street. You almost felt like you we're watching some of her scenes in the perspective of a stalker staking out your victim.

The only time I think the movie subverted this was those scenes at the theater. Tarantino's love for movies bled through those scenes so hard hat it ended up diluting the dread that enveloped all of Margot Robbie's scenes for a brief moment. Pretty fitting analogy of how the theater experience always felt like a brief respite from the reality of the outside world.

I can see there was an honest attempt but I don't know it didn't work for me.
 

Cass_Se

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,180
The looming sense of dread is because you expect her to be murdered. When I watched it the second time knowing the ending it's really, really not there, just Sharon Tate carelessly spendin a day off doing stuff, it's really delightful and relaxing (generally I'd say that until the third act the film is really chill on a second viewing).

The times I agree that there is a palpable sense of dread in the film is Manson's brief appearance, the scene at Spahn ranch and majority of the third act (briliant buildup there, even on the second viewing). Regular scenes with Tate are really light-hearted though, especially the entire sequence at Wrecking Crew showing.
 

jett

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,493
This was great, the ending was everything I hoped. I'm not sure I grasped entirely what QT was going for (and I'm not sure if he was sure, either), but this was really enjoyable all around. The three hours whizzed by.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,444
This was great, the ending was everything I hoped. I'm not sure I grasped entirely what QT was going for (and I'm not sure if he was sure, either), but this was really enjoyable all around. The three hours whizzed by.
I had a lot of fun with it too, and was kinda glad it didn't go full dark at the end.

My best guess was, as per the title, it was a Hollywood fairytale. It was what a young Tarantino daydreamed went on behind the scenes of his favourite TV shows and films, and perhaps true to that, it had to have the fictional happy ending we can all enjoy, knowing that in real life, things didn't go that way.
 

Fevaweva

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,422
I thought this film was fucking crap. Incredibly well acted and the directing is perhaps Tarantino's best....but the actual plot was exceptionally flat.

Margot Robbie was nothing more than a bait and switch. All the great character actor's Tarantino was able to get did absolutely nothing and the whole thing felt just felt pointless. I also found the violence at the end needlessly grotesque and jarring.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,707
The ending was great tbf. Never thought I’d see a cinema laugh at such visceral violence, crazy to think about.

I cringed at the wall slamming bit but that flamethrower scene, oh man
 

excelsiorlef

Member
Oct 25, 2017
43,296
So I had a thought and I don't know if it would have worked, but how interesting would it have been if the narrator rather than Kurt Russell was Margot Robbie as an older Tate. You'd never see her or anything but man the idea of it being Tate telling us this story....



The ending was great tbf. Never thought I’d see a cinema laugh at such visceral violence, crazy to think about.

I cringed at the wall slamming bit but that flamethrower scene, oh man
Yeah my Mom hates violence and I was so unsure about if she'd even see the movie once I told her the climax is ultraviolent. I convinced her to go by saying I'd warn (which eventually just was don't worry I'll look away), not only did she not looked away she was laughing. It was awesome. I brought my parents to see it because i needed to talk to them about it and couldn't really do so if they didn't see it. Both of them absolutely loved it. A family outing to a 70mm print of a QT joint! What a gift QT gave me.
 

Wackamole

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,144
Yeah my Mom hates violence and I was so unsure about if she'd even see the movie once I told her the climax is ultraviolent. I convinced her to go by saying I'd warn (which eventually just was don't worry I'll look away), not only did she not looked away she was laughing. It was awesome. I brought my parents to see it because i needed to talk to them about it and couldn't really do so if they didn't see it. Both of them absolutely loved it. A family outing to a 70mm print of a QT joint! What a gift QT gave me.
What was weird to me was that people in the audience didn't only laugh at the ultra violence (i did as well) but also laughed at the dead burned body/ face. That was a bit strange to me.
 
Aug 16, 2019
844
UK
I was surprised by the negative comments, but by reading them it seems more an issue with expectancy rather than thinking that was a bad movie per se.

What really baffles me are the accusations of racism (tarantino???) or the lack of moral social commentary ( again, tarantino???)

The movie is a huge What If, judge it accordingly.

And the Bruce Lee thing has to be a generational thing, but still I don't get it. What is wrong with him being knocked down once ( the fight does not even have a clear winner)? Do people actually believe him to be capable of beating everybody? or is it a cult of the person due to his early and unfortunate passing away?

I would never be surprised by an athlete being knocked by somebody else, let alone a movie star. I get the fact that he was legit, but so are Steven Seagal, Chuck Norris, Wesley Snipes, Tony Jaa etc

They are not unbeatable, and again I don't want to this to get through in the wrong way but I really think this outrage is a generational thing.
 

Orioto

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,241
Paris
My main problem with the movie is the writing really.. Without knowing the end, you're like.. Wait,so ok there is that cool character that is Caprio, except.. He's portrayed i mean but there is not really a story neither.. It's just like.. Him being who he is, it goes nowhere. If it was the 15 first minutes then you would build.. a story after that, but no, nothing. Then in parallel you have Pitt that is not a character at all. It's just some sort of cool guy for the sake of it, without any personality. And then you have the whole tate thing that drags soooo much cause it's like the whole movie is teasing what we know is coming. So i was like "this is a bunch of nothing, he's making us wait for the ending basically" and then well yeah.. the joke ending happens.

I wouldn't be so harsh on the movie if not for the hardcore violence in it. But this is Tarantino and he's a violent person who loves violence.
But i thought the movie could be different. If it was about how someone would prefer to avoid the sadness of the true events and live in some sort of nostalgic Hollywood dream. Why not, i could like that, but then, make the killer joke scene . soft. Make it like in one of those old cheap tv show, and then there is something i can like here. But Tarantino is like "let's imagine an happy ending to that story, that ends in the exact same extreme violence" lol.
 

excelsiorlef

Member
Oct 25, 2017
43,296
What was weird to me was that people in the audience didn't only laugh at the ultra violence (i did as well) but also laughed at the dead burned body/ face. That was a bit strange to me.
Nah. I get it.

It's because it's the Manson Assholes, there's something primally satisfying about seeing them get theirs and being so pathetic
 

Moonkid

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,059
As much as I love a bit of on-screen subjectivity, I liked how we didn't get like a POV shot or some other visual representation of his state of mind while high. It made me buy the scene more for some reason. That said, they could have gone for more on-the-nose commentary by having Cliff experience the fight as a cartoon which IIRC were vilified around then Psychoward
And the Bruce Lee thing has to be a generational thing, but still I don't get it. What is wrong with him being knocked down once ( the fight does not even have a clear winner)? Do people actually believe him to be capable of beating everybody? or is it a cult of the person due to his early and unfortunate passing away?

I would never be surprised by an athlete being knocked by somebody else, let alone a movie star. I get the fact that he was legit, but so are Steven Seagal, Chuck Norris, Wesley Snipes, Tony Jaa etc

They are not unbeatable, and again I don't want to this to get through in the wrong way but I really think this outrage is a generational thing.
I know there's been a lot of hubbub over the outcome of the fight but personally for me what let the scene down the most was Cliff mocking Bruce Lee's hi-yahs. Tarantino should know how a contemporary white audience is going to react. It was pretty uncomfortable when most of my theatre laughed at his vocals and there was no need for Cliff to echo the audience here. Not to mention the mischaracterisation of Bruce regarding Muhammad Ali whom he calls Cassius Clay in the scene, pretty out of pocket.
 
Aug 16, 2019
844
UK
As much as I love a bit of on-screen subjectivity, I liked how we didn't get like a POV shot or some other visual representation of his state of mind while high. It made me buy the scene more for some reason. That said, they could have gone for more on-the-nose commentary by having Cliff experience the fight as a cartoon which IIRC were vilified around then Psychoward I know there's been a lot of hubbub over the outcome of the fight but personally for me what let the scene down the most was Cliff mocking Bruce Lee's hi-yahs. Tarantino should know how a contemporary white audience is going to react. It was pretty uncomfortable when most of my theatre laughed at his vocals and there was no need for Cliff to echo the audience here. Not to mention the mischaracterisation of Bruce regarding Muhammad Ali whom he calls Cassius Clay in the scene, pretty out of pocket.
well the Lee scream is iconic today, but at the time everybody mocked it and many do still today, I am sure somebody does it in bad faith, but I wouldn't consider it something racist, when even asian Martial Artist mock it.

I didn't notice the Cassius Clay part, I know that Lee saying he could beat Ali is semi-true, but you might be right about the fact of using his old name.

But I see where you are coming from, Tarantino could have wrote the character better in face of times we live in, but let's not forget that despite his success, he still writes movies mostly for himself, with pros and cons of the case.

This might be his most intimate movie ever, followed by Jackie Brown
 

Xiofire

Member
Oct 27, 2017
978
This movie is an odd one for me, and I think it'll be a make or break when I watch it again when it hits streaming services later this year.

I loved some of the details that I reflected on after seeing the movie though, my favourites being:

Brad Pitt/Cliff Booth is Easy Breezy. All of his solo scenes are shot exactly like that of a western. The slow walk to Georges shack with bystanders watching in tension/suspense. Putting on his utility belt like a gun holster and flipping his beer can in like a 6 shooter. Random jumping stunts to get on the roof shot like old western action scenes. Driving round town in his car like he's roaming on his horse. Crossing paths with the "enemy" multiple times before the final "showdown".
Rick says that Easy Breezy was the best until he hurt his hip, and Cliff at the end is stabbed in the hip. Interesting juxtaposition of Rick desperately trying to be the on-screen cowboy that Cliff is on a daily basis.

I also enjoyed the portrayal of Hollywood and it's subsections of class, as well as it's tiny size. Having characters drive in real time between the different "classes" in Hollywood to show how small the divide is between these massively different classes of people. A very interesting statement on wealth and status in the hills.

Other nuggets:

Rick: "I'm one pool party away from being in a Polanski movie"
Technically true, just this pool party involves a flamethrower :')

The top billing gag at the beginning of the movie where Brad and Leo are credited in the opposite order to how they are seated in the car.

I'm sure there was a passing comment about spaghetti westerns having Italian actors speak Italian and American actors speaking English in the same scene, and then Tarantino did the same thing with Ricks wife talking to the cop.

I'm sure I'll think of more as I muse over this. Still think it's a personal 7/10 though. Didn't enjoy it as much as Tarantinos other flicks, but that'll probably bump with subsequent viewings.
 

Moonkid

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,059
For whatever reason I noticed that detail at the start too re: names reversed in the opening credits.

Also the rear-view mirror was 100% a Hitler moustache right lol.
His reaction to the knife in his hip cracked me up. Just confusion instead of pain or shock lmao.
The whole fight hit every beat just right, I only wish they somehow dragged out the dialogue beforehand more. It had probably the funniest line of the film though so it's still class.
well the Lee scream is iconic today, but at the time everybody mocked it and many do still today, I am sure somebody does it in bad faith, but I wouldn't consider it something racist, when even asian Martial Artist mock it.

I didn't notice the Cassius Clay part, I know that Lee saying he could beat Ali is semi-true, but you might be right about the fact of using his old name.

But I see where you are coming from, Tarantino could have wrote the character better in face of times we live in, but let's not forget that despite his success, he still writes movies mostly for himself, with pros and cons of the case.

This might be his most intimate movie ever, followed by Jackie Brown
Ah well agree to disagree because just about every East Asian lad growing up, whether or not you're Chinese!, is likely to have been mocked at some point with that scream. Whether or not it's intended as innocent play, shit's eye-rolling to witness as an adult.

He for sure referred to him as Cassius Clay in the scene and as far as him claiming he could take him in a fight, Bruce Lee has said that Ali would murder him.

Absolutely it's a movie made for himself, and despite this scene I still enjoyed his vision for the most part. Could have had less feet shots though. Like, none.
 

WhovianGamer

Member
Oct 28, 2017
843
So I went to see this film with my wife. Before hand I knew nothing of the film other than the trailer. Didn't really know much about the Manson family. Didn't know who Sharon Tate was.

Spent 99% of the movie wondering what the fuck was going on, and frankly, pretty bored. The ending was lost on me until it was explained to me.
 
Aug 16, 2019
844
UK
For whatever reason I noticed that detail at the start too re: names reversed in the opening credits.

Also the rear-view mirror was 100% a Hitler moustache right lol.The whole fight hit every beat just right, I only wish they somehow dragged out the dialogue beforehand more. It had probably the funniest line of the film though so it's still class.
Ah well agree to disagree because just about every East Asian lad growing up, whether or not you're Chinese!, is likely to have been mocked at some point with that scream. Whether or not it's intended as innocent play, shit's eye-rolling to witness as an adult.

He for sure referred to him as Cassius Clay in the scene and as far as him claiming he could take him in a fight, Bruce Lee has said that Ali would murder him.

Absolutely it's a movie made for himself, and despite this scene I still enjoyed his vision for the most part. Could have had less feet shots though. Like, none.
I get you now.

In my generation it's rare to mock an asian person with the Lee scream, we have a new and updated racism against them (sigh)

But yeah, I have not seen much eyes squinting or Lee screams to mock, maybe that is why it did bother me at all
 

Fevaweva

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,422
You know, from all the "YO DON'T SPOIL THE ENDING" from the advertising and "YO THIS ENDING IS CRAAAAAAZZZY" from people I have heard, I was expecting a pregnant Sharon Tate taking part in killing Manson Family members.
 

Moonkid

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,059
I get you now.

In my generation it's rare to mock an asian person with the Lee scream, we have a new and updated racism against them (sigh)

But yeah, I have not seen much eyes squinting or Lee screams to mock, maybe that is why it did bother me at all
That's fair, you can only judge from what you know or have witnessed and for what it's worth I appreciate you hearing me out.
 

Psychoward

Member
Nov 7, 2017
24,155
I know there's been a lot of hubbub over the outcome of the fight but personally for me what let the scene down the most was Cliff mocking Bruce Lee's hi-yahs. Tarantino should know how a contemporary white audience is going to react. It was pretty uncomfortable when most of my theatre laughed at his vocals and there was no need for Cliff to echo the audience here. Not to mention the mischaracterisation of Bruce regarding Muhammad Ali whom he calls Cassius Clay in the scene, pretty out of pocket.
Yup
 

Dice

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,925
Canada
As much as I love a bit of on-screen subjectivity, I liked how we didn't get like a POV shot or some other visual representation of his state of mind while high. It made me buy the scene more for some reason. That said, they could have gone for more on-the-nose commentary by having Cliff experience the fight as a cartoon which IIRC were vilified around then Psychoward I know there's been a lot of hubbub over the outcome of the fight but personally for me what let the scene down the most was Cliff mocking Bruce Lee's hi-yahs. Tarantino should know how a contemporary white audience is going to react. It was pretty uncomfortable when most of my theatre laughed at his vocals and there was no need for Cliff to echo the audience here. Not to mention the mischaracterisation of Bruce regarding Muhammad Ali whom he calls Cassius Clay in the scene, pretty out of pocket.
I found Bruce Lee in the film was as much a semi-goofy homage to his persona as Feng Long is to him in Street Fighter (even down to imitating the yells and 'yah's). Cliff barely whispered it back, he sounded more confused than really trying to mock. Tarantino likes a bit of comedy in his flicks, for him to use one of Bruce Lee's known martial arts ...verbal tics[?] (kiai?) just seems like a thing more than a few comedies would do.



It IS
a little shitty that initially QT wanted his [fake] character to win instead of Lee, but he didn't, and I think the scene is a little better for it (where, once upon a time, a Hollywod Stuntsman, who allegedly killed his wife --- and got away with it, also got kicked off a movie for sparring with one of Martial Art's biggest names). It's a tall tale in a fake reality; and a few minutes of airtime is definitely going to gloss over a character, and moreso if it's happening in what can hardly be seen as a serious film.

The fact we dive into exploring character dynamics is fantastic (especially as we become more conscious of problematic media that exposes racial and power biases -- and especially how media can support it), but...I dunno, I can swing with this because I like the way it works very specifically in this context to tell a dumb phony story (I still get more hung up on how many TV shows and movies still have predominantly white leads -- this one included). But Cliff totally losing to Bruce would shatter some of the narrative that he's supposed to be this "scary-when-angry" guy who is very strong when the occasion calls (whether in a duel; or retaliating against the guy who sticks a knife in your car tire; or versus home invaders) (Rick, on the other hand, has scenes that expose his "hidden rage" issues but that's a another thing of its own).
 
Last edited:

Anton Sugar

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,232
What really baffles me are the accusations of racism (tarantino???) or the lack of moral social commentary ( again, tarantino???)
Is this really so unbelievable? QT gets a lot of criticism from people of color. From blatant use of n*gger to using minorities to prop of white characters--his movies have a lot of issues that he gets a pass for, for whatever reason.
As much as I love a bit of on-screen subjectivity, I liked how we didn't get like a POV shot or some other visual representation of his state of mind while high. It made me buy the scene more for some reason. That said, they could have gone for more on-the-nose commentary by having Cliff experience the fight as a cartoon which IIRC were vilified around then Psychoward I know there's been a lot of hubbub over the outcome of the fight but personally for me what let the scene down the most was Cliff mocking Bruce Lee's hi-yahs. Tarantino should know how a contemporary white audience is going to react. It was pretty uncomfortable when most of my theatre laughed at his vocals and there was no need for Cliff to echo the audience here. Not to mention the mischaracterisation of Bruce regarding Muhammad Ali whom he calls Cassius Clay in the scene, pretty out of pocket.
The scene really shows how tone-deaf & sloppy he can be. Even his defense of the scene ("Lee's wife wrote about it") was Lee's wife talking about people SAYING he could beat Ali.
 
Aug 16, 2019
844
UK
Is this really so unbelievable? QT gets a lot of criticism from people of color. From blatant use of n*gger to using minorities to prop of white characters--his movies have a lot of issues that he gets a pass for, for whatever reason.
The guy who made Jackie Brown and Django is racist because his characters use the N word.

Not sure if Spike Lee or the usual triggered white boy. If you think in this sense almost every writer and director of any ethnicity is racist and sexist
 

Anton Sugar

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,232
The guy who made Jackie Brown and Django is racist because his characters use the N word.

Not sure if Spike Lee or the usual triggered white boy. If you think in this sense almost every writer and director of any ethnicity is racist and sexist
Are you *actually* implying QT can't be a racist because he made movies starring black actors/characters? This is some fucking funny movie director version of "I have black friends" right here.

In case it wasn't clear, I was pointing to a range of reasons that QT has been criticized, by "triggered white boys", women, and people of color alike, for his use of minorities and marginalized groups in his movies. Quit building strawmen.
 
Aug 16, 2019
844
UK
Are you *actually* implying QT can't be a racist because he made movies starring black actors/characters? This is some fucking funny movie director version of "I have black friends" right here.

In case it wasn't clear, I was pointing to a range of reasons that QT has been criticized, by "triggered white boys", women, and people of color alike, for his use of minorities and marginalized groups in his movies. Quit building strawmen.
I didn’t say he can’t be racist , I said accusing somebody of something because he wrote a line of speech is dumb. You can read in to everything whatever you like that way.

If you notice I didn’t say he can’t be racist because he works with Jackson or shit like that, he can still be the most racist person in the world, certainly not because some of his characters use a certain word in context.

By that rule you can accuse anybody of wild shit. This world it’s already racist enough and tough for me to start suspecting random people for their vision in art.

Leave that to that mad genius of Spike Lee
 

Fjordson

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,355
I can't say for sure whether or not deep down Tarantino is racist, but I do find that hard to believe. Some of his best characters have been minorities and the guy made a straight up slave revenge fantasy with Django Unchained. No, that doesn't automatically make him not racist, but I do think a mainstream director that is willing to tell that sort of story (and constantly talk about America's ugly past in pre-release PR) probably doesn't hate minorities.

I think Tarantino's problem is more this weird fetish for black culture and black people, which is certainly problematic in its own way.

Two examples that always stick out to me are:

1) the way he adopts a stereotypical black accent in certain interviews when talking to black reporters

2) Giving his character the n-word pass in Pulp Fiction. Like his character was so was just down with black people (or at least Jules) that he could say the n-word and no one would bat an eye. I've always felt like this was a weird fantasy fulfillment thing for Tarantino. Like he wishes he could say it in real life, knows he can't, so he decided to sneak it into a movie.

He's talked about how his mom dated black men when he was super young so black culture made a big impression on him as a kid and I've always wondered if ever since then he's been desperate to be a part of black culture and be accepted by it.
 

she_esh

Member
Sep 12, 2018
9,218
Ireland
There are certainly problematic elements in his movies (I'm not so much a fan of all the unchecked racism in Reservoir Dogs that goes absolutely nowhere thematically and is just more jarring than anything) but worth bringing up that Tarantino stood with Black Lives Matter in 2016 to protest police brutality against black people.

 

n.thou

Member
Mar 22, 2019
270
Worst movie I've seen for a really long time. It's rare I will actively keep looking at my watch and seriously thought about leaving early.

First 2hours were boring, sure the final act was ok but by that point I was honestly don't. Tarantino needs to go back to his smaller niche film style like Resovoir Dogs.

My wife fell asleep watching it and she is a HUGE Leo fan...kinda sums it up for me.
 
Oct 25, 2017
447
Not as bad as Django but still a bit disappointed. I can see what Tarantino was trying to achieve but he definitely fails at the execution. Despite that, there are some very good scenes and the performances of the main trio are stellar. The ending was also very nice.
 

dragonbane

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,873
Germany
Brad Pitt/Cliff Booth is Easy Breezy. All of his solo scenes are shot exactly like that of a western. The slow walk to Georges shack with bystanders watching in tension/suspense. Putting on his utility belt like a gun holster and flipping his beer can in like a 6 shooter. Random jumping stunts to get on the roof shot like old western action scenes. Driving round town in his car like he's roaming on his horse. Crossing paths with the "enemy" multiple times before the final "showdown".
Rick says that Easy Breezy was the best until he hurt his hip, and Cliff at the end is stabbed in the hip. Interesting juxtaposition of Rick desperately trying to be the on-screen cowboy that Cliff is on a daily basis.
This is neat and definitely fits
 

JJAwiiu

Member
Oct 27, 2017
326
I think my favorite scene was Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) at the Spahn Ranch trying to figure out what happened to his buddy. It was so tense and felt like a straight up horror movie done right. And then the cultists who I was sure were feeding him lies were actually telling the truth. It was awesome. I'd love to see a QT horror flick.

I also really liked the Bruce Lee scene. It's been discussed to death here so I'll submit that Lee's portrayal is probably historically inaccurate. But if you're gonna have your protagonist fight a martial artist + movie star in 1969, you HAVE make it Bruce Friggin' Lee! And everyone feels cocky once in a while, right? Maybe Lee was having one of those days and ya got to make them clash somehow. Seems like the type of detail QT wouldn't be completely oblivious to, he seems confident that Lee had arrogant moments. Maybe/probably he got the part about Ali wrong, I'm not gonna read the Lee bio by his wife to find out for sure. I felt it was a fun scene.

And did Cliff really murder his wife? He's such a cool character that I wanna believe he didn't, but there's this creepy undertone as a result. With the information we're given, I'm guessing he did. But I enjoy the sense of wonder about it. I know it's based on a real life event too, which shares a similar controversy.

At first I felt the Sharon Tate scenes were a bit of a waste in that she wasn't part of the climax and therefore felt irrelevant to the story. But upon reflection and reading the discussion here, that's the whole point. You see Sharon Tate as a wonderful person and toward the end of the film, I knew just enough about the situation to squirm at what was coming next. What was supposed to happen didn't happen, and that made me emotionally elated.

I really liked this one, guys. After a second viewing, I'd put it above Death Proof, Hateful Eight and Reservoir Dogs for sure. Maybe even above Inglorious Basterds -- I didn't love that one as much and I know the praise that gets. Then again I really liked Django more than most of the popular opinion too.