Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood *spoilers from post 356*

Options
1101113151618

Comments

  • Posts: 2,799 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    ****, that was a boring pile


  • Posts: 2,799 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    El Duda wrote: »
    I think this may be looked back on as his masterpiece.

    No. I've seen six of his, this was the least


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,957 ✭✭✭Dots1982


    El Duda wrote: »
    I think this may be looked back on as his masterpiece.

    I doubt that will come to pass. The opposite in fact.

    Every QT movie up to this had a classic scene, even deathproof, this came up empty on that and many other things.


  • Registered Users Posts: 20,929 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    Dots1982 wrote: »
    I doubt that will come to pass. The opposite in fact.

    Every QT movie up to this had a classic scene, even deathproof, this came up empty on that and many other things.

    So he has to do it every movie?


  • Subscribers Posts: 41,075 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Dots1982 wrote: »
    I doubt that will come to pass. The opposite in fact.

    Every QT movie up to this had a classic scene, even deathproof, this came up empty on that and many other things.

    The whole movie is a classic scene. It's his most seemless movie since Jackie Browne, and doesn't rely on being a collection of vignettes


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,957 ✭✭✭Dots1982


    So he has to do it every movie?

    It would have helped. The ranch scene is the closest it gets to it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,957 ✭✭✭Dots1982


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    The whole movie is a classic scene. It's his most seemless movie since Jackie Browne, and doesn't rely on being a collection of vignettes

    What what you call the collection of scenes where Leo’s character is acting in a play within a play?


  • Subscribers Posts: 41,075 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Character building obviously


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,957 ✭✭✭Dots1982


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Character building obviously

    The way of building a character is to do it while moving the plot along with scenes that are relevant.

    Considering he had the offers of spaghetti westerns in one of the first scenes and that’s what he ended up doing anyway then I’m not sure the character building or redemption of an actor storyline really went anywhere.


  • Subscribers Posts: 41,075 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Nah, if every scene has to be plot building, then stick to the mission impossible movies


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,957 ✭✭✭Dots1982


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Nah, if every scene has to be plot building, then stick to the mission impossible movies

    Every scene in The Godfather is moving the plot somewhere so stop talking nonsense.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    The whole movie is a classic scene. It's his most seemless movie since Jackie Browne, and doesn't rely on being a collection of vignettes


    Interesting. I got the exact opposite impression of what you said. I felt it was a disjointed set of loosely connected vignettes.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    if the ranch, leo acting-within-the-movie and sharon watching herself arent classic scenes then the bar for classic scenes would want to be very high indeed


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    if the ranch, leo acting-within-the-movie and sharon watching herself arent classic scenes then the bar for classic scenes would want to be very high indeed


    Two out of three of those scenes left me scratching my head wondering what the point of them were.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,087 ✭✭✭eviltimeban


    Dots1982 wrote: »
    It would have helped. The ranch scene is the closest it gets to it.

    As per the comment above, I'm seeing the cinema scene being the most talked about in reviews and articles that I've read.

    Not a bad achievement, for a scene with no dialogue, and the use of real movie footage which could've been jarring or take you out of the movie. But it worked.

    It also highlights the point that perhaps this wasn't the "real" Sharon Tate in the cinema - this was the fantasy version who survived. Two different people, two different actors.

    Agree with the similarities to Jackie Brown, which at the time was criticised for being slow and different from Pulp Fiction.

    Where QT goes from here is anyone's guess. He has one movie left. What does he do with it?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭Stallingrad


    What does he do with it?

    Same thing he always does?


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,714 ✭✭✭✭Earthhorse


    I have a funny feeling he's going to keep making movies after his "last" movie.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,578 ✭✭✭Mehaffey1


    Just back from the cinema and I thought this was brilliant.

    I do agree some of the scenes were a bit unnecessary but the movie as a whole went by very fast for 2 hrs and 40 mins or so.

    The Ranch Scene with Pitt was exceptional as was the ending, I was laughing out love and didn't want it to end


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,747 ✭✭✭fisgon


    Thought this was wonderful - Tarantino's best film since Pulp Fiction.

    One of the things that made if for me was the lack of senseless, blood-spattering violence - violence is fine in a movie, if it is merited, but QT has a tendency to just revel in it and go too far. Here, he restrained himself, and allowed everything good about his film-making to come out.

    A joy to watch, funny, clever, subtle, controlled.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    fisgon wrote: »
    Thought this was wonderful - Tarantino's best film since Pulp Fiction.

    One of the things that made if for me was the lack of senseless, blood-spattering violence - violence is fine in a movie, if it is merited, but QT has a tendency to just revel in it and go too far. Here, he restrained himself, and allowed everything good about his film-making to come out.

    A joy to watch, funny, clever, subtle, controlled.

    The final act?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 945 ✭✭✭Always Tired


    Definitely getting this on DVD when it gets released in december to watch again at Christmas, agree that it's his best film since Pulp Fiction. Didnt feel long to me and i loved the way they recreated late 60s California so believably. One of my favorite films all time is Boogie Nights and this ticks a lot of the same boxes.

    And when I first hears what it was about I was like, I don't want to see that tragedy depicted on screen but obviously like Tate's family I had no idea what QT was going to do and I love what he did. Haven't had such a buzz off a film in a long time!


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,563 ✭✭✭✭peteeeed


    New version hitting US screens this weekend, 10 extra minutes

    https://www.empireonline.com/movies/news/quentin-tarantino-once-upon-hollywood-new-scenes/


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭Relikk


    peteeeed wrote: »
    New version hitting US screens this weekend, 10 extra minutes

    https://www.empireonline.com/movies/news/quentin-tarantino-once-upon-hollywood-new-scenes/

    It needed 20 fewer minutes, at least, to begin with.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 945 ✭✭✭Always Tired


    Relikk wrote: »
    It needed 20 fewer minutes, at least, to begin with.

    Not for me, I'm hoping the longer version is on the dvd.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    'Additional Footage' screenings of this start tonight and apparently that 'footage' bookends the film.

    Here's it detailed:
    The most important thing to note about the new footage is that none of it is actually in the film itself. The extended cut opens with two commercials that have been made to look like they might have aired on TV in 1969; each of the ads comes before the Sony logo that kicks off the film, and each of the ads is isolated by its own ultra-modern copyright slide (Tarantino must have shot this stuff, but you get the distinct impression that he didn’t personally supervise this amiable cash-grab). The first is for Red Apple cigarettes, a cute nod to the fictional brand that pops up throughout Tarantino’s body of work. Two square-looking actors stare into the camera, one after the other, as a narrator asks them if they “want to take a bite of a red apple.” The third person up is a young black woman with an afro, and she responds to the question by whipping out a cigarette and lighting it up with a smile.

    Then comes a moment that some people have been waiting for since they didn’t get to see it in theaters this summer: James Marsden appears as a young Burt Reynolds during his TV cowboy days (it’s easier to appreciate than it is to believe), and lights up a Red Apple on the set of one thing or another. It’s a nice tip of the cap to the late actor, as Reynolds starred in Sergio Corbucci’s “Navajo Joe,” which paved the way for Rick Dalton to make a career comeback with the spaghetti western “Nebraska Jim.” Who knows, maybe Rick is one “Deliverance” away from getting to hate Paul Thomas Anderson one day?

    The next ad is for Old Chattanooga beer, and it’s just spectacularly uneventful. Still, even that second TV spot helps set the tone for the film to come, as it attunes you to appreciate how “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” is wallpapered in commercials from start to finish. Not only does Tarantino weave a rich tapestry of period-appropriate radio ads into the film’s soundscape, but Sharon catches a few trailers before her screening, the Manson girls are constantly framed against bus stop ads that contrast them against the mainstream, and the neon signs that light up half of Hollywood are given their own romantic montage as things shift into gear for the grand finale. It’s the full evolution of an idea that Tarantino has been kicking around since at least “Reservoir Dogs.” He’s always used ads as the texture of American time, but here they’re also tinged with nostalgia and endowed with the bittersweet promise of a better life — they represent the faded beauty of Rick’s world, and the unfulfilled promise of his dreams. L.A. is a town built on aspiration, even (or especially) when it makes you feel like everyone else has already gotten what they wanted.

    The other batch of new footage comes after the credits, Marvel-style. The first and most exciting bit is an extended look at the pilot of “Lancer,” another TV western in which Rick memorably played the villain. In this long and very silly little bonus, we see the Lancer brothers (Timothy Olyphant and the late, great Luke Perry) arrive in town on a stagecoach, the latter dressed in an incredible light blue suit and top hat. There’s a lot of cheesy banter between them, as it seems they’ve just learned that they’re related. Little Mirabella Lancer (Julia Butters as Trudi Fraser) is, of course, the smartest one in the family, and she has some fun laughing at her new siblings before leading them off for a meeting with dad. It ends with flamboyant director Sam Wanamaker (Nicholas Hammond) calling cut as he rides a crane into the shot and praises Trudi for a perfect take, effectively returning the compliment she pays to Rick in the film. It feels like Tarantino messing around with an entire shooting day worth of Sony’s money, and leaves this “extended cut” gamble feeling like the studio’s way of trying to get it back.

    Finally, the presentation ends with some footage that patrons of Tarantino’s New Beverly theater got to see over the summer. We’re treated to a longer version of the “Bounty Law” clip from the beginning of the film, as Michael Madsen’s Sheriff Hackett exchanges some flinty dialogue with our hero Jake Cahill. When that’s over, Jake rides his horse across town as we learn that this week’s episode of “Bounty Law” was brought to us by Red Apple and Twinkies.

    Is that enough to justify another trip to the multiplex? On its own, probably not — if that’s all you’re in for, you might as well wait for home video or whatever Tarantino decides to cook up on Netflix. But the bevy of commercials that now bookend “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” help blur the line between reality and dreams even more than before, cementing the golden age of Hollywood (and Tarantino’s take on it) as a place that ultimately belongs to both and neither all at once.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    'Additional Footage' screenings of this start tonight are apparently that 'footage' bookends the film.

    Here's it detailed:

    Thanks. Didn't read it though; I could easily have watched another hour, never mind 20 minutes extra- it was just such a pleasure to watch. I'll wait for the re-release in the cinema with extra footage.:)


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,158 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    I should be surprised by the love for this here but given the blindness of Tarantino's fans to his faults, I'm not.

    Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is bloated to the extent that you'd wonder if he was just trying to live up to the run-time of Sergio Leone's similarly titled, and far better, film. It's not without it's positives: DiCaprio's performance is wonderful and, as always with Tarantino, the soundtrack is fantastic and it looks great but it really drags. I'm sure there's a better movie in there if an editor were to trim 40 minutes or so out of it (the awful Bruce Lee scene would be a good start and a lot of the driving scenes are far too long).


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I loved the Bruce Lee scene


  • Registered Users Posts: 20,929 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    Sleepy wrote: »
    I should be surprised by the love for this here but given the blindness of Tarantino's fans to his faults, I'm not.

    Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is bloated to the extent that you'd wonder if he was just trying to live up to the run-time of Sergio Leone's similarly titled, and far better, film. It's not without it's positives: DiCaprio's performance is wonderful and, as always with Tarantino, the soundtrack is fantastic and it looks great but it really drags. I'm sure there's a better movie in there if an editor were to trim 40 minutes or so out of it (the awful Bruce Lee scene would be a good start and a lot of the driving scenes are far too long).

    in your opinion


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,087 ✭✭✭eviltimeban


    There was a lot of driving in fairness.


Advertisement