Bump.

Just accidentally sat through Once Upon a Time in Hollywood last night, felt like Tarantino’s ‘Hail Caesar’.

Surprisingly enjoyable, I like Brad Pitt and DiCaprio and even the general pace of the movie felt OK (if you’ve got nowhere else to be). Final scene was a bit gratuitous for my taste but I’m a delicate little flower these days. File it under ‘revenge porn’ alongside Inglorious Basterds.

I think ‘Hollywood’ is probably my favourite QT film, and at the moment at least, possibly my favourite film.

I understand it’s not for everyone, I think spending 5 mins reading about Sharon Tate and the Manson family (if you don’t know the story) on Wiki will enhance the film for anyone. I allows a simmering tension to build as it goes along telling the story of a washed up TV cowboy and his friend. Otherwise it might just seem like a bit of an over-long slightly awkward Bromance film with amazing visuals. For example, I think if you don’t know the back story the scene at the Ranch could be a bit boring, 5 mins of Pit trying to speak to an old Friend who seems to be living with a lot of young women, if you do, there’s an expectation of something nasty happening any moment.

As for Pulp Fiction, it’s a great film, I didn’t like it first watch, like Reservoir Dogs it’s a very harsh film, back in the early 90s there weren’t many films with such graphic violence and shocking stories, I didn’t see the story, just the shocking parts, 2nd viewing when I was less sensitive to it, it’s a good story. I’ve watched a chronological-ish cut on YT, it doesn’t really work because it’s not the jumping time-line that confuses, it’s the multiple stories happening at once, it makes more sense in the order of the original.

I thought Jackie Brown was great, it’s not as remarkable as his others, it’s simpler, more toned down, but it’s a great film. Django is brilliant, so is Inglorious, The Hateful 8… it’s an hour too long but still okay. I wasn’t a fan of Kill Bill, again too gory in parts, but years after it was released I watched them again and really enjoyed them. Death Proof is rubbish, I gave up.

I think if you don’t know the back story the scene at the Ranch could be a bit boring, 5 mins of Pit trying to speak to an old Friend who seems to be living with a lot of young women, if you do, there’s an expectation of something nasty happening any moment.

I was being my usual dense self when watching it so didn’t know the back story or even particularly twig what was going on at the ranch but there were enough wee hints that it was a really effective scene, sort of outwardly innocent enough but you and Brad Pitt both know there’s something not right.

I do need to read up more on Sharon Tate, didn’t particularly understand the scene in the cinema.

Death Proof is rubbish, I gave up.

it’s pure indulgence (even more so than most QT films 😃) I love it, but I think you need to see in it context as Grindhouse (in a shorter, edited version – I’ve never actually seen the standalone version which is ½hr longer I think) with the other films & trailers really. (Although as I’ve always been a huge Danny Trejo fan, the best thing about Grindhouse was always the fake Machete trailer!!) The think I most like/respect about QT is he just makes the films he wants to make, and if anyone else likes them too, bonus.

He was probably doing a lot of coke at the time.

Thing I didn’t like about Once Upon a Time.. was the scenes of the film making, the cowboy film (gawd, I think it was, can’t even remember properly). Was just so long and dull, had no relevance to the plot of the actual film I was watching. Just a huge lump of out of context scenes from another film dumped in the middle. Rest of the actual film was brilliant. Loved it.

I do need to read up more on Sharon Tate, didn’t particularly understand the scene in the cinema.

There’s not much too it, if you hadn’t guessed the Women in the film falling over suit cases etc was the real Sharon Tate, so it’s Sharon watching herself on the screen, intermingled with flash backs of her being trained by Bruce Lee for the fight scene which is then shown being acted by the real Sharon Tate, so that’s kind of confusing but cool.

Really though, it builds her character, QT didn’t want her to have too much dialog and when she does speak it’s never really part of the plot, just chit-chat, Sharon in the film is supposed to be sweet and innocent and perfectly lovely, she’s not arrogant or a diva, she treats everyone well, picks up hitch hikers and and honestly wishes them well, this all adds to the peril you know how the film will end, and it makes it harder to watch. They took some slack because Margot Robbie had so few lines in the film, but it’s how the character is portrayed, you’re just supposed to marvel at her beauty and innocence, like how people used to see Movie Stars in the 60s.

Obviously, being QT there has to be a shot of her feet looking slightly grubby, the dirty old man.

I have deliberately avoided Tarantino’s movies since then, I think he’s massively overrated, he just isn’t as clever as he thinks he is

Bears repeating. Very mixed output I thought.

RD was good, witty dialogue. PF was flat out funny.

Then it appeared that he stopped being edited and disappeared up his own back end. JB was dullsville. Kill Bill was awful, and at least twice as long as it needed to be. The badly spelled Basturds film, I fell asleep in and haven’t bothered rewatching.

He’s clever, but, clever for clever’s sake doesn’t make good films. He’s good at dialogue. And picking soundtracks.

OK, I guess I read too much into the cinema scene 😁

Genuinely surprised at the dislike for Inglorious Basterds, yeah the ending gets silly, but otherwise I thought it was a fairly punchy, easy watch. In fact given the choice I’d probably watch I.B. again rather than P.F. although perhaps just because I’ve watched P.F. so much in the past.

Basterds is a funny one. I watched it for the first time recently and thought it a bit… meh. Not sure why to be honest, it’s original and has some cracking performances from the nazi baddie, and Pitt is always good. Maybe I just wasn’t digging the war setting in that context.

Hollywood though, wow, I absolutely love that film. Probably seen it five times already. It’s just spellbinding. Showing that golden age of the movie industry, plus the weird way it’s telling a story you already know but different. Makes you suspend belief. Just like a good movie should.

From dusk till dawn isn’t technically a Tarantino movie

The first half of it is, before he hands off to Rodriguez. Hell, he’s even in it for crissakes.

What about tarantinos other movie, ‘natural born killers’.

Surely a contender for “best usage of soundtrack in a film ever” for the moment Woody makes his escape and RATM kicks in. I saw that film at the cinema and the entire theatre basically went Team America “**** YEAH!”

Rest of the actual film was brilliant. Loved it.

Yeah I’d broadly agree with that.

And the scene with the voice-over recap is terrible. Snip that and it’s fabulous.

Love: 8, Basterds, OUATIH, Dogs, Pulp, JB, True Romance (yeah I know)

Not great: Django, KB, Death Proof

Django was so nearly great but goes on and on on a very clumsy fashion.

I’m with Kermode; he’s gotten too indulgent in his latter films at the expense of quality and tightness.

Still – Pulp Fiction utterly changed Western cinema.amd is pretty much timeless.

Don’t think I’ve watched “Once upon a time in Hollywood” yet so I’ll give it a try later.

Watched Once Hollywood tonight for the first time, the ranch scene with Pitt was like the start of Inglurious where the terror and menace ramps up. Was laughing my head off when Rick came out with the flame thrower (that I’d spotted earlier when Pitt fixes the aerial). Needs a bit of Google time and a few more watches to fill in the details.
Solid 8.5/10

Quentin Tarantino = The Emperor’s new clothes

I mean I’m not his number one fan, but pulp fiction is the defining film of the 1990s and was released 27 years ago

That’s hardly emperor’s New clothes territory.

His films have taken close to $2bn, is suspect that wouldn’t happen if he was ENC.
Admittedly nearly all his films are A Day at the Races with swearing.

I mean I’m not his number one fan, but pulp fiction is the defining film of the 1990s

I thought the defining film of the 90s was Trainspotting.

“I thought the defining film of the 90s was Trainspotting”

Defining in the UK maybe, though as a film it’s a bit of a re-tread of Goodfellas, (as was City of God).

EDIT:

Goodfellas has a good claim to being the defining film of the nineties, (released in 1990 iirc, kicking off the decade).

Tarrantino’s skill is in taking the kitsch and making it poetic. His films are about his own obsession with film, not just the good ones but the bad ones too. We don’t so much goes onto his world as much as he comes into ours, mining our our brains’ hard drive for all the trash we have absorbed on and through the screen over our lifetimes.

With the jump cuts and endless cultural reference hes reminds us just how much of our experience of reality is tied up with synthetic images and storylines.

His films were memes before memes became a thing.

Goodfellas might be the better film, but it’s more a refinement of Scorsese’s individual output than an era-defining piece of work. IMO.

Trainspotting might be just as accomplished and inventive as PF, but it’s huge success was still a fair bit smaller and more UK centric.

From my perspective, which is subjective obvs, PF was more formally innovative and the fact that it could be dismissed as superficial cleverness was kind of the point. It was pure entertainment.