Once Upon a Time in ... Hollywood Review & Comments

I'm confused?

8/10 Unmissable yet another movie gets 9/10 Highly Recommended?

What's 10/10 above average? :laugh:
 
Nice review.

I thought one of the most telling lines in the review was -

'he's just about the only mainstream director, bar perhaps Scorsese, who can still get big budget R-rated movies greenlit without them involving superheroes'

Yes this is rather the problem we have found ourselves in within these modern times. It's not just R-rated, it seems like anyway possible to get superhero/monster/franchise to move into other genre the productions companies are trying.

From what I can tell this is one of the few films this year you can class as original idea which is one of the big takers at the box office.
 
I'm confused?

8/10 Unmissable yet another movie gets 9/10 Highly Recommended?

What's 10/10 above average? :laugh:

Then ignore the numbers and just read the words if it's that confusing.

Tarantino's OUATIH is flawed and far from perfect but, IMO, it's still unmissable. I thought I made that clear in the review itself.

Shazam, presuming you're talking about that in your example, as a 4K package, got a 9/10. The film itself, you might not have noticed, got an 8, and I didn't personally find it unmissable. I did however think that the overall package warranted a highly recommended.
 
he's just about the only mainstream director, bar perhaps Scorsese, who can still get big budget R-rated movies greenlit without them involving superheroes'
Yes, it's certainly a sorry state of affairs.
The thing is with Quentin, his best works by far (imo) function on limited budgets anyway. I'd have no problem if his final film came in at less than a tenth of OUATIH. I understand the 60s setting and A-listers need paying for, but a compelling low budget indie flick by Tarantino is just as bigger draw for me.
 
Really enjoyed this film, no real complaints.
The only thing that slightly brought me out of it was Tarantino's goddamn foot fetish, what is it with this guy?!
Half in the bag do a whole gag section on just that in their video review. Which I assume you've seen?
 
I absolutely love it. Slow burner that you just have to let wash over you.

I know Hollywood very well and the movie captures the essence of the place, although it’s a little bit more beaten up these days.

If you don’t know about the Manson murders and Sharon Tate, read about it *before* you see the movie (not a spoiler - the movie expects you to know).

Regards,
James.
 
Really enjoyed this film, no real complaints.
The only thing that slightly brought me out of it was Tarantino's goddamn foot fetish, what is it with this guy?!
I think he just does it for the lols now and it's become a bit of a calling card as everyone makes a thing of it... Like Russ Meyer with big boobs

I really enjoyed the film and if you can take the ending then surely you can take the Bruce Lee portrayal which was v funny

Brad and Leo on top form and Robbie was great as well


9/10 for me
 
Last edited:
The only thing that slightly brought me out of it was Tarantino's goddamn foot fetish, what is it with this guy?!

Like all fetishes it wont make sense to anyone who doesn't share it. I have a mild one myself but I have to say his goes waaaay beyond my own, and he rarely seems to do it in a flattering way.

Going beyond the fetishistic aspects of it though, I've noticed he does it often from a film making perspective with shots panning from feet (shoe'd or otherwise) upwards, revealing characters slowly. I think its a choice that lets you know a person is in the room without revealing their face too soon (and therefore keeping their intentions mysterious for as long as possible). But yeah, he definitely has it bad!
 
Watched it last night, overall quite enjoyed it and it didn’t feel as long as it should/could have. Feet thing didn’t bother me to much, although quite dirty and not all that pleasant to look at in some cases!

Found the Bruce lee scenes very funny personally, but overall great acting but as already mentioned Brad does steal the show somewhat and Margot, well somewhat wasted but can only imagine she did justice to the character she was portraying.
 
For the first two hours nothing happens in this film, it is two hours of character development and not much else. The 18 rated element of this film is very short. I like the Tarantino style but not enough to enjoy this film when it is has little else to offer.
 
For the first two hours nothing happens in this film, it is two hours of character development and not much else. The 18 rated element of this film is very short. I like the Tarantino style but not enough to enjoy this film when it is has little else to offer.
Have to agree with this. It's very tame for 18 as well, Denzel's Equaliser/John Wick had more brutality then this.

By far the weakest Tarantino film IMO, all character driven with a story that leads nowhere (if there is one). If you recap what the film is about, it's essentially the life of a stunt man and an actor over a period of time.

Leonardo DiCaprio of course does a magnificent job, as always. along with Brad Pitt, surprisingly they had a really good chemistry on screen together. The dog was great too but everyone else had minimal screen time that had no meaningful impact.

Let's just hope Tarantino goes out with a bang with his tenth and final film.
 
For the first two hours nothing happens in this film, it is two hours of character development and not much else. The 18 rated element of this film is very short. I like the Tarantino style but not enough to enjoy this film when it is has little else to offer.

Have to agree with this. It's very tame for 18 as well, Denzel's Equaliser/John Wick had more brutality then this.

By far the weakest Tarantino film IMO, all character driven with a story that leads nowhere (if there is one). If you recap what the film is about, it's essentially the life of a stunt man and an actor over a period of time.

Leonardo DiCaprio of course does a magnificent job, as always. along with Brad Pitt, surprisingly they had a really good chemistry on screen together. The dog was great too but everyone else had minimal screen time that had no meaningful impact.

Let's just hope Tarantino goes out with a bang with his tenth and final film.

I completely understand why the languid pacing might not be for everybody, but I'm not entirely sure why anybody would expect anything else from Tarantino.

He's hardly synonymous with wall-to-wall bloodletting. Right from the get-go, he was always known for bursts of (extreme) violence, and, aside from perhaps the Kill Bills, many of his features (Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, Inglourious Basterds etc.) follow this character- and dialogue-driven format. Hell, did anything even happen in Hateful Eight until the 11th hour?

I actually like that Tarantino is assured enough in his style that he can paint a picture and tell a story without resorting to more explosive tactics to keep your attention, but - as I've said - I agree that this style may not be for everybody.

I'd have been more than happy if this was his final film (it's my favourite of his for years, flawed as it may well be), but - conversely - I actually hope he doesn't stop for another 10 films, because I'd happily turn up for every one of them on Day 1. These are movies for adults (unlike Equalizer and John Wick, despite their body counts), done like nobody else in the industry (except, perhaps, Scorsese) still does.
 
Us-Movie-Stills.jpg


I have to say, the above image taken from Jordan Peele's US
reminded me a lot of way Quentin shot the Manson family appraoching DiCaprio's house in the last act. Or was it just me?
 
He's hardly synonymous with wall-to-wall bloodletting. Right from the get-go, he was always known for bursts of (extreme) violence, and, aside from perhaps the Kill Bills, many of his features (Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, Inglourious Basterds etc.) follow this character- and dialogue-driven format. Hell, did anything even happen in Hateful Eight until the 11th hour?
Hateful Eight was a classic Hitchcock type set up, a sort of whodunit, these kind of filmmaking keep you hooked from the get go till the final revelation. There has been hundreds of films all set within a car, room or even a death casket for over 90 minutes that keep you engaged. Hollywood had trouble doing so for a period of 2 Hours and 40 minutes.

As I said, I'm a huge QT fan and have been following him for years, a slow pace has never bothered me as QT manages to keep the audiences engaged with memorable dialogues (particularly Pulp Fiction, Django and Bastards). I was 12 when I saw Pulp Fiction, his my favourite director after Nolan and Hitchcock. The story in Hollywood was paper thin frankly and there were 2 really great dialogue heavy scenes (both were Leo with the young girl actress). Time will tell how people will rate this but to me this turned out a experimental film...
 
I watched this and in my opinion it was ok but not great .
I loved the line don’t cry in front of “”.

Brad Pitt is the star of this and his sequence with Bruce lee was funny .

In my opinion , Django was fantastic but his subsequent films are not reaching the same giddy heights .
 
I really enjoyed the film, managed to catch it on 35mm and I don’t know if it was film v digital (as I haven’t seen the digital presentation), but it looked old school gorgeous. Soft, warm, a little grain, a few scratches, felt so different from what I’ve seen (either in cinema or pristine UHD’s at home) over the years, really added to the period.
As for the film, while different pacing, I thought it was a great yarn and having known a little about Manson (Aquarius) helped a little. I see Mindhunter 2 has a Manson story too.
Brad was hilarious, a certain scene toward the end brought me right back to Brad in True Romance.
I found myself almost having to sink into my seat, I was laughing at many scenes, but a few I was the only one - especially the final
swimming scene, I think many may have been stunned at the preceding Brad/dog action, Leo’s smoking scene was almost welcome relief - maybe I’m just a sick mof* :)

Hollywood looked fantastic, even the shots from behind the cars steering wheel heading down the hills just brought me back to films of old. The jarring difference (in film) to European cinema was captured so well. Film historians are going to love this, if you have an appreciation of film over the decades, I think you’re going to get so much from this, but I can also see why some may think “it’s boring”, which is a real shame.
It’s Sunday folks, go out and watch it today!
 
Caught this on 35 mm showing yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. As others have said there are a few funny scenes with Brad Pitt providing some highlight scenes throughout the film especially the final section.
There were a few cameos I didn't know about, which appeared like
Damian Lewis as Steve McQueen.


I enjoyed the slow pace, even though I enjoy the MCU films, it's good to watch a film with a lot of character development, which Tarantino always excels as.

As a period piece it catches the late 60s well.

I see imdb has Tarantino as doing a star trek film next, will this be his 10th film as he is shown as producer, writer and director?
It also looks as if it will be an 18 film, the 1st star trek 18, wonder what he has planned for it.
 
Last edited:
Was that Leyla Dunham from girls fame in their to? On the ranch in white
 
Really enjoyed this film. I am a Tarantino fan who rates Pulp Fiction/Jackie Brown as his best, but with his recent output (Hateful eight/Django) not reaching those heady heights my expectations going in to this movie were not overly high.
It is a real return to form with the fantastic and often very funny dialogue, the occasional violent scenes, the superb performances he gains from his actors (Pitt is a standout), and the genuine love he has for the cinematic artform.
This is obviously an era of cinema that Tarantino holds dear, and It was a joy to watch this story unfold. I honestly did not notice the run time at all.
Highly recommended, and tustling with a very different movie in Endgame as my favourite of the year.
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom