Decode "once upon a time in Hollywood" for me ?
 

Saw that recently... I thought the first 2 hours were a bit slow (acting scenes mostly, you could say we were very pleasantly bored with no idea where this was going) but I enjoyed them anyway for a great look at 1969 Los Angeles and Hollywood, old cars and well recreated locations (at least to my eyes).. then the last 20 minutes switch to bat-$hit-crazy Tarantino stuff which I'll admit I enjoyed quite a bit. Heck of a build up to that, if you think back to how it all tied together, I must say...

SPOILER ALERT

Can someone explain to me, since this was before my time - is Tarentino essentially doing an alternate version of history where the Mason family ends up going to the wrong house and things go "better" - and presumably Sharon tate and her friends survive (and also presumably Polanski never gets in trouble with the law later)... I enjoyed the movie overall because it's well acted and the location stuff, but I think I kinda missed the point... Isn't it kinda disrespectful to the Tate family (and folger), or is is just the opposite somehow? Just wondering, I didn't exist then, I'm probably lacking some cultural references to understand what the goal was / where he's going with this, if that avoided murder was the goal of the movie or a side trip from diCaprio's role... How'd you see this ?

No expert on the subject, but yes, its a complete change of outcome from what really happened. Pretty good at recreation of 1969 LA, I saw a few errors like microwave transmitters and satellite dishes on the roof of a commercial building.

A cornucopia of Tarantino potpourri for the purpose of becoming a cult classic to watch stoned.

Ahhh...I’m not sure that I understand your question. :confused:

You’ve always seemed like a bright guy, you’re really wondering whether this was a fairy tale? “Once Upon a Time...” and the happy ending that defies extremely well known history and you are confused about what you saw?

Not sure how to answer, forgive me.

It's alright Denis... It's just that I knew practically nothing of these events (which predate my birth in another country - I know polanski but from the sex scandal), so I was wondering if I was missing on some cultural lore that might clarify this entire movie for me. The first 80% seemed pretty historically accurate, I was wondering why he changed who gets murdered at the end (hopefully Spoilers were established), if it is seen by viewers as some sort of homage or if it's a little messed up and disrespectful?
it seemed like an incredibly long build up about Dicaprio/Pitt story to go about pivoting at the end from the failed actor story to "saving Sharon Tate". And also since I wikipedia'd it, kinda disrespectful - as I understand she really was pregnant when gruesomely murdered - yet nobody seemed bothered by this alternate ending... It's just a really strange (though entertaining) movie so I was wondering if I was missing something cultural/historical, or if someone knew what Tarentino was aiming at exactly... No biggie... I'll go watch the art of racing in the rain next, that was a good book and i'm pretty sure I'll understand that ;-)

I apologize, did not know that you were that young, etc. The first part of the film was not “historically accurate”, it was a completely made up story about people who never existed, (w exception of Manson family and famous people but even they never did anything portrayed in the film). It’s all fiction, make-believe. :)

I just think of it as a twist that Tarantino pulled on us. I thought I knew all along what was going to happen at the end and was pleased with the unexpected ending. It was kind of like watching the story from a parallel universe. I liked it. I liked the Bruce Lee scene, too.

You wanna know about Charlie and his family read Vincent Buglosi book Helter Skelter.

Talk about truth being stranger than fiction..

Charlie wasn't after Tate and the others..he wanted Doris Days son Terry Melchor who was a record producer who turned him down as a recording artist. Manson also hung with Dennis Wison of the Beach Boys.

With both the Tate and La Biaca murders Charlie knew the neighborhood as he had been there before.

Great to see the old cars in the movie but sadly the Porsche 911 Sharon Tate was driving was a 1973-1973.5 based on the bumperettes, not a 1969. The Volvo 1600S and the Jaguar XKE Coupe packed on the street leading to the Tate home were a nice touch as too the many VW Beetles driving around so common back then.

No surprise from Tarantino given that he said, the ending was going to have a different twist from the Manson tribe. I wondered if that Pit Bull of Brad's was going to spring into action sooner or later and she was great. You know with Tarantino it was going to be bloody and brutal. I thought the story line in the movie was predictable, but he kept focusing on Sharon Tate, her sweet innocence and presenting a constant aire of mystery.

The Steve McQueen character was super! Once McQueen heard he was on the Manson hit list, he started carrying a pistol.

A recent two hour special had several of the Manson woman in an interview. "Squeaky" Fromm said that she got that nickname "squeaky" when old blind man Spahn who owned the Spahn Ranch where the Manson tribe resided touched her on the elbow when he met her and she responded with a "squeak" sound. He called her Squeaky after that and it stuck with her in the tribe.

That was Damian Lewis, from Band of Brothers, homeland, and Billions (which I've finally caught up to, damn it is good! Him and Giamati are phenomenal actors)

Denis, you are pretty harsh on someone that is unfamiliar with something that happened before they were born, straight to insulting.

Ironic when you hold strong opinions regarding current events then confess to be ignorant of key facts.

You’re such a sad old man with nothing but your internet trolling and stalking, Tobra. Give it a rest.

For me, the last 5 minutes made the first 2.5 hours of relatively uninteresting and benign storytelling, worth it, and then some. The twist was great, and classic Tarantino though should have lasted a little longer I think.

1969 LA was fantastic, loved it. I'm not sure when Howard's was started, sign says 60s to me, but have been there and to me it's a quintessential part of modern vintage California.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1565714194.jpg

So, it is Inglorious Bastards in 1969 Hollywood?

I think I'll pass

I would say it has nothing in common with Inglorious Bastards except Brad Pitt. I thought there was a lot more violence in Inglorious Bastards, too.

No. I hated inglorious bastards because it was so silly. This one is way more interesting, if a little slow initially and disjointed, but as shaun said above, the last part of the movie totally makes up for the slow start. And I enjoyed the period LA part (I'm sure I missed out on a lot of nostalgic commercials/signs/brands on display, could hear folks cracking up in the theater "oh I remember that")... In many ways where I live (Marin County) looks a lot like that, still (Eichler homes everywhere, lots of classic cars, little housing development so lots of 60s homes style wise). I'd want to watch it again, but this time I'd FFWD through all the cowboy acting stuff...

Nice guy eddie.

Decode................
 

blah blah blah........ tarantino...... blah blah blah.......hollywood, blah blah blah blah

PCAR CONTENT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1565803597.jpg

I enjoyed every moment of it. Every second of it. Had a great night out dinner in a great restaurant in the movie theater, then upstairs to the movie.

It's title "Once upon a time..." tells you immediately that it's fiction, a story. Not meant to be a factually correct account of the events.

Nice 911 and Karmann too.

I’m nice to the nice people. He ain’t one of them.

Exactly. Like every one of his films, it’s pure fiction. A fantasy. There never was a real Rick Dalton or Cliff Booth and all of their interactions w real people are made up. Like most people, I thought that he was going to deal w the Manson murders in a historically accurate manner, (or close), because they are so well known but in the end, it all made sense from a Tarantino POV. :)

Nice guy

It must be true, read it on the internet

I just saw it... Ummmm not sure what to say except that it was entertaining. :D

The Pit bull was something else. Imagine having a dog that well trained. That little gal stole the show.
To me it really was a car movie and the light yellow Cadillac was just beautiful.

Brad Pitts character was brilliant but all of the actors did really well. It's certainly different which is good.
Not the best Tarantino movie but better than Kill Bill. (IMO Jackie Brown is his best so far)

Brandy!

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1575380375.jpg

I'm glad I only paid $1.99 to watch

I too enjoyed every minute of it. I read a few reviews saying it was all about Tarantino’s love affair with his favourite period in time. Just watch it like that, see the detail, appreciate several cool actors enjoying themselves and don’t get too wound up. The history is close enough, and of course the ending is once upon a time.

Didn't like it, glad I didn't pay for it in a cinema
It showed Hollywood probably better then it looked in the actual day and age
then some alternate story that never happened but wasn't really all that special either.
If it weren't for Margo Robbie looking hot, most men watching would have fallen a sleep after 1 hour..

if you ask me Tarrantino lost his edge , he's to repetitive with his script and dialogs
and recent movies are just plenty of hit& misses

1992 Reservoir Dogs great
1994 Pulp Fiction great
1997 Jackie Brown great
2003 Kill Bill: Volume 1 great
2004 Kill Bill: Volume 2 ok
2007 Grindhouse: Death Proof meh
2009 Inglourious Basterds great thanks to Waltz else it would be an OK
2012 Django Unchained ok thanks to Waltz else it would have been a solid Meh
2015 The Hateful Eight BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING
2019 Once Upon a Time in H meh

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wU0Pp2n6ooE" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I paid $1.99 on Prime. On-line, it was $1.99. On the Roku, it was $5.99. So I rented it on-line, then watched it on Roku.

No way. ANYTHING would be better than watching the Golden-Globes.

Ricky Gervais was funny tho

I enjoyed it and fully expected the twist too. Watching Brad beat up the hippie was somehow quite satisfying. My Dad owned the same Cadillac (in a different color) so that was kind of cool.

I would be seriously ill if I had to watch the Golden Globes.

Youtube Ricky Gervais' opening speech from the golden globes, trust me, you'll enjoy it...
He will never be invited again ;-) He put those highly paid celebrities in their place!

Edit - here, I got it for you

https://youtu.be/LCNdTLHZAeo

I paid about $150.00 to see it. But that was for GF and I to have an amazing meal downstairs + drinks, Peter Jackson's movie buffs handing out t-shirts, coffee cups and posters, and showing behind the scenes things about the movie. AND bringing a drink into the movie theater. I loved every moment of the movie.

Thanks for that. Fabulous!

We saw it at the theater. Thought it was good.

Saw it again in the small screen and it just didn’t do it for this time. Brad Pitt pummeling the hippie chick was good though. That and the flamethrower 🔥.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AT7xJwHQJwk" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

He had the flamethrower from the movie he cooks the Nazi’s in....

I enjoyed it.

And he stored that flame thrower in his garden shed.
If you think about it, Were else would you store your flame thrower?
Certainly not in your house! ;)

I thought it was pretty good, I understand Sharon Tate's sister gave her approval of her sister's depiction in the film. Probably hits a little close to home for some Hollywood types who've watched their celebrity fade.

Having grown up in LA (my mom used to shop in one of LaBianca's grocery stores) it was kind of cool seeing old LA sights.

Watched on travel from FL to SoCal. Enjoyed the movie, loved the sights and cars.

Pitt’s character was great, especially how he handled the business at the end.

Bruce Lee scene should be a classic.