And once again, the one that gets disproportionately praised. Just like The Departed (which was still good, and WAY better than Hollywood,) a master director is only recognized by the academy for their weakest efforts. Really stupid.
shareYou never actually give any arguments on why you think something. It makes you look like an idiot, perhaps you are one.
shareActually yes I do, apparently you never read my posts. I usually give very detailed explanations on what specifically I liked or disliked about a movie/show. I didn’t in this particular case because I didn’t feel it was necessary, it just wasn’t that good. I’ve heard countless people echo the same sentiment, how disappointing it was.
However, if you want details: It was extremely slow. The performances, production values and direction were great, sure. I expect more from a director like Tarantino who only drops a movie every 5 years and is usually a perfectionist. This was an extremely average and uneventful movie. None of the brilliance of any of his other films; no insanely quirky characterizations or clever abstract dialogue, no mind blowing twists or groundbreaking narrative structure. None of the trademark treats Tarantino fans expect after waiting years for his highly anticipated films.
Sharon Tate survived, that was a twist.
It was just a couple of days in their life, that's why it's called once upon a time...it's a hangout movie, not much is meant to be happening.
It has to do with mood and style, having the feeling of that time.
Yeah I guess. Boogie Nights captured the vibe of an era, I just didn’t get that with Hollywood. Yeah the costumes and set design were good, but I didn’t feel like I was in 1969 Hollywood.
shareQT is on record saying the sights and sounds that bring the world of Once Upon a Time in Hollywood together are memories he has as a young boy. His mom’s boyfriend would take him riding around town in a convertible like the one Cliff drives. If you notice when he is driving it’s shot from the vantage of the passenger seat at a lower level. The music are songs he remembers, not necessarily the hits of the day.
shareYeah, that’s nice. But it still doesn’t change the quality of the movie.
shareWhat I’m trying to say is that there are tons of little things going on in the film, and most QT films for that matter, like I mentioned above. Nothing happens without a reason. He wasn’t just capturing a snap shot of 1969 hanging out with a couple of guys. It’s all the small things like nods to other films that make it so cool, to me anyway.
shareIn the op you didn’t
shareI liked it, but I agree that it was slow in places. Some of the driving scenes could have been removed or at least shortened.
share"I usually give very detailed explanations on what specifically I liked or disliked about a movie/show. I didn’t in this particular case because I didn’t feel it was necessary"
And yet you thought it was necessary to repeat your dislike for this movie?
I didn't like the Irishman at all. Would you like several threads about me saying that for no good reason?
The difference is, The Irishman didn’t get all kinds of underserved praise
shareI thought most of its 10 Oscar nominations were undeserved. To me it was a tedious, self indulgent, overlong snore fest with terribly off putting CGI and phoned in performances. I thought it paled in comparison to the freshness and vitality of all of Tarantino's films, including ..Hollywood.
shareHow was it self indulgent??
share
I completely disagree. I LOVED it, especially when those damn dirty hippy terrorists got theirs at the end!
😎
right now, it's my favourite tarantino.
i'll let it sit and marinate for a few years and a few re-watches before firmly settling that opinion.
but i absolutely loved it. & i'm a person who rarely has patience with endless running times and self-indulgence.
i loved its hazy sentimentality for a time that's passed, and its cozy buddy-comedy elements, and the way it built sympathy to its main characters and their uncertainty in middle age.
and in its ending, it provided the one time in his career that tarantino actually managed to move me emotionally.
so yeah, i think it's great.
I don't think it's QT's worst.
And I don't think The Departed is Scorsese's weakest either.
He also called brad granny panties
shareDeparted is certainly not Scorsese’s weakest, I said it’s good. But that the academy chose to recognize him for that over his countless other masterpieces is ridiculous.
I can forgive his earlier work being overlooked, he had some stiff competition in the 70’s, but Goodfellas, Casino, and The Aviator are all far superior films.
I'm guessing that you're having another bad day.
shareDo you have anything good to say about anything?
If you do then how about you start sharing that.
I have plenty good to say about a lot of things. Have you not seen my countless threads of music/movies I like??
shareSorry... but I mostly see you complaining or putting something down.
Maybe you'd be happier if you looked for more of those topics for what you feel good about.
These are tough times and people need to look more for the silver lining in everything.
Yeah maybe because life is mostly shit and people are fucking awful? Anyone who doesn’t see this is either oblivious or stupid. How anyone walks around smiling like an idiot is beyond me.
shareBut most times when you say something positive regarding one thing, a negative assessment of something else, by comparison, is implied by your choice of words. And that's not an accident.
shareI know you’ve read all the reasons that many people feel the film is actually quite great. It’s been discussed over and over on the Once Upon a Time in Hollywood board. I personally have seen it 4 times in the theater and there’s a lot going on you may be overlooking. Again, it’s been detailed in that forum.
share