|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jul 28, 2019 22:28:28 GMT
I don't even remember a "Snake" in the movie. I'm assuming one of the Manson girls? They all blur together except for Pussy, Dakota Fanning, Lena Dunham, and the two killers.
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Jul 29, 2019 1:07:34 GMT
Another thing--IMDB lists Martin Kove, Clu Gallagher, and Brenda Vaccaro in the cast--are they? They have no characters listed so I assume its someone BS. I remember the first two being in the end credits, I just didn't remember seeing them. Or Rebecca Gayheart. Martin Kove was in one of the clips from "Bounty Law" or maybe some movie that DiCaprio's character was in. I didn't notice the other two but that is very common in Tarantino movies. Very small cameos by actors in heavy makeup and weird wardrobe are one of his trade marks.
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Jul 29, 2019 1:09:48 GMT
I don't even remember a "Snake" in the movie. I'm assuming one of the Manson girls? They all blur together except for Pussy, Dakota Fanning, Lena Dunham, and the two killers. I believe Snake was the hippie girl that Dakota Fanning's character sent to watch Clint through the door when Pussycat first brought him to the ranch.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jul 29, 2019 2:13:48 GMT
I don't even remember a "Snake" in the movie. I'm assuming one of the Manson girls? They all blur together except for Pussy, Dakota Fanning, Lena Dunham, and the two killers. I believe Snake was the hippie girl that Dakota Fanning's character sent to watch Clint through the door when Pussycat first brought him to the ranch. If that was her than hardly a scene stealing role.
|
|
|
Post by gljbradley on Jul 29, 2019 4:36:36 GMT
which parts felt cartoonish to you? I'd say the part where Pitt's dog starts chewing on Tex Watson's nutsack, Sadie Atkins taking a statue to the face, the dog then chewing her, the Italian wife's reactions to everything, Pitt's non-reactions to everything including being stabbed in the leg because he's tripping balls, Pitt bashing Red's head into 40 different orifices, Sadie running out a window and into a pool while firing a gun blindly and screaming like Yosemite Sam, and Leo pulling out a flamethrower on a whim and roasting her. So basically the entire climax. WTF?!
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jul 29, 2019 12:30:36 GMT
I'm not usually a Tarantino fan and I enjoyed the hell out of this movie. Oddly, it has the hallmarks of a Tarantino film I usually dislike: overlong and self-indulgent, filled with pointless scenes. And it is tedious at times, no question about it. But when it's good, it's great. The two leads are outstanding and QT did a great job of balancing the impact each character had on the film. Pitt definitely got the more 'fun' role while Leo got more of an 'actor's spotlight.' So many great scenes for both, though honestly some of that western stuff could've been cut way down or dropped altogether. There are several scenes that convey the same message about Rick's headspace, we only really needed one.
So many great creative choices by QT in this flick. The flashback to Cliff's wife's death was hilarious and cut out at the perfect moment. Let the audience decide what happened, otherwise Cliff becomes an unlikeable character. The minimal use of Manson was the way to go. You don't want to glorify or humanize him; particularly in a QT script where even the bad guys are enjoyable most of the time. That fantastic scene with Dakota Fanning and Bruce Dern. You think things are about to go sideways but it ends up being exactly what she said it was. Brilliant. Cliff is borderline superhuman in this flick so I'll excuse the draw he had with Bruce Lee. It's odd that we spend so much time with Sharon Tate when she ultimately is irrelevant to the story, but I guess that helped set up the twist. I had a hunch it would deviate from history and the climax was spectacular.
Full disclosure, Brad Pitt is one of my favorite actors so that surely plays a part in my enjoyment of this film. Maybe I don't get as much out of it with a different actor. All I can tell you is I had fun watching the film, despite the way it lagged here and there. I'm having a tough time rating it because I'm big on rewatchability and I don't know how many times I could sit down and watch this flick from start to finish. Still, the crafting and execution of the story, the performances and all the fun little details as well as that romping finale make it impossible for me to rate this below a 7/10.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Jul 30, 2019 17:59:07 GMT
Just got back from it and all I gotta say is wow what a letdown this was. It was such a pointless & self indulgent film imo. Leo & Brad had a few cool moments but overall wtf was this Tarantino?! And lol at some critics saying this was Tarantino's best film since Pulp Fiction haha get the fuck outta here. 5.5/10 it works as a film if you see it sort of throwing back to the hollywood of yesteryear a sentimentality and admiration of which the very people within the movie wouldn't have ever recieved otherwise in reality. rather then romanticizing Manson, the movie does smartly choose to make the portrait and built up legacy of the murders very grounded and sort of picks away at that built up image until it illustrates an ordinary set of people who really aren't that great at all. it never feels romanticized or sensationalized in an inappropriate or an irresponsible way.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Spencer on Jul 31, 2019 4:06:30 GMT
I saw it tonight and I have to say that I was somewhat disappointed. I felt there were times when Tarantino really went too self-indulgent with his direction, and as a result many scenes were too drawn out and seemed pointless. It really slowed the movie's pacing. Might have worked better if it was about 45 minutes shorter.
However, it is not without its good points. I thought it had one wild, helluva finale that I wasn't quite expecting. Some of the hippie characters were very amusing, especially that of Pussycat (extremely well played by Margaret Qualley). Brad Pitt was at his very best here displaying an oh-so-cool/tough guy persona. And finally, I enjoyed all the 1960s nostalgia and the soundtrack.
So overall I thought it was just OK. Perhaps my expectations were a bit too high.
|
|
|
Post by Cooper, the Golden Retriever on Jul 31, 2019 4:49:54 GMT
I enjoyed it, and yes, at around 2:45:00 it IS pretty long..but that's the good thing (hell, Stanley Kubrick's EYES WIDE SHUT 20 years ago this month was around that length and that did it justice, his last.)
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Jul 31, 2019 14:40:08 GMT
Didn't like it.
1. Waaaay too long for a movie with no plot. 2. Too many loooong scenes of Brad Pitt just driving around. 3. First half hour was deadly dull ... I actually entertained the thought of walking out (which I've never done). When I went to take a leak, I knew I could take my time because I wasn't going to miss anything important. 4. The funny scenes were not very funny, the suspenseful scenes were not very suspenseful, the outrageous scenes were not very outrageous, no interesting dialog or conversations, the over the top violence was limited to the last five minutes.
There's probably a reasonably good 90 minute movie in there ... somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jul 31, 2019 18:00:25 GMT
Did it look period enough? Like Zodiac? That movies was the best at capturing 1969 in visual look.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Aug 1, 2019 2:20:00 GMT
Did it look period enough? Like Zodiac? That movies was the best at capturing 1969 in visual look. I think it did, but not in the spectacular way zodiac did. This one was clearly more intentionally sexed up.
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Aug 1, 2019 4:27:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by James on Aug 3, 2019 23:43:33 GMT
Just got back from it and enjoyed it vastly, although I will agree the third act was a bit out of place compared to the rest of the movie. It felt even more off the rails than the final act in Inglourious Basterds.
But the movie is still top notch, with Pitt and DiCaprio giving some of their best performances. I’d say this is in the lower-mid-tier of QT’s movies but even then I still think all of them are good.
|
|
|
Post by vegalyra on Aug 5, 2019 21:10:17 GMT
Saw it Thursday night, I really enjoyed it although the first act is very slow burn. I really dig the era, the music, the scene, and the cars. I rate it above Hateful 8 but below Jackie Brown, probably in my top 5 of his films. I bought the soundtrack as soon as I got home.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Aug 5, 2019 23:04:04 GMT
I thought it was great. It didn't feel like 2 hours and 45 minutes at all. If you're an admitted obsessed film lover I'm not sure how you could dislike this movie. It's the most NON QT film QT has made which means all the white kids eager to fap to hearing the N word dropped repeatedly will be disappointed. Also the idiot generation that can't go 10 minutes without worshiping their GOD aka their "smart" phone will be confused and anxious. Fuck both those groups of people anyway.
I thought the "twist" was great. Even knowing QT took liberties with history in Inglorious Basterds and suspecting he would do so here I was dreading seeing sweet likable pregnant Sharon Tate in jeopardy or worse. A missed opportunity for a scene of Polanski being anally raped but oh well. A few things that were wrong or that I didn't like may be due to QT's revisionist history. Some were just mistakes. For example.
Smoking acid would not do anything at all. LSD is broken down by heat so torching it destroys it. I guess the story needed the acid cig to be there months later but did we need Cliff to be tripping balls for any particular reason? If you got a chuckle because you knew Cliff was seeing trails waving his arms around then you also knew smoking acid has no effect.
Zoe Bell is a painfully wretched "actress" STOP USING HER QT!!!!!!! I did like watching her die in The Hateful Eight but unless she is brutally killed right away I wish she would NEVER EVER speak or attempt to act in a movie again.
Mike Moh did a spot on Bruce Lee impression especially his voice but why make Lee look like such a douchebag? Anyone else surprised that self proclaimed Asiaphile and Kung Fu rip off artist extraordinaire QT kind of shit on Bruce Lee? Perhaps the Bruce Lee in this version of history was a jerk but still seemed odd to me.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Aug 6, 2019 13:49:37 GMT
I thought it was great. It didn't feel like 2 hours and 45 minutes at all. If you're an admitted obsessed film lover I'm not sure how you could dislike this movie. It's the most NON QT film QT has made which means all the white kids eager to fap to hearing the N word dropped repeatedly will be disappointed. Also the idiot generation that can't go 10 minutes without worshiping their GOD aka their "smart" phone will be confused and anxious. Fuck both those groups of people anyway. I thought the "twist" was great. Even knowing QT took liberties with history in Inglorious Basterds and suspecting he would do so here I was dreading seeing sweet likable pregnant Sharon Tate in jeopardy or worse. A missed opportunity for a scene of Polanski being anally raped but oh well. A few things that were wrong or that I didn't like may be due to QT's revisionist history. Some were just mistakes. For example. Smoking acid would not do anything at all. LSD is broken down by heat so torching it destroys it. I guess the story needed the acid cig to be there months later but did we need Cliff to be tripping balls for any particular reason? If you got a chuckle because you knew Cliff was seeing trails waving his arms around then you also knew smoking acid has no effect. Zoe Bell is a painfully wretched "actress" STOP USING HER QT!!!!!!! I did like watching her die in The Hateful Eight but unless she is brutally killed right away I wish she would NEVER EVER speak or attempt to act in a movie again. Mike Moh did a spot on Bruce Lee impression especially his voice but why make Lee look like such a douchebag? Anyone else surprised that self proclaimed Asiaphile and Kung Fu rip off artist extraordinaire QT kind of shit on Bruce Lee? Perhaps the Bruce Lee in this version of history was a jerk but still seemed odd to me. Yeah I don't know what he was thinking with the Bruce Lee stuff. I guess he wanted to set up Cliff being a total badass so you'd buy him beating people to death while tripping, hence the draw with Lee. Having Lee not destroy him is a huge stretch but forgivable in my book, but I'm not sure why he needed to be such a tool. QT could've set up a scene where they naturally face off for a stunt action sequence, there's no way the real Bruce would be picking fights with stunt men and talking about kicking Ali's ass.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Aug 8, 2019 20:37:49 GMT
B+
+ - Leo & Brad never looked happier about their roles, lines, & settings. I liked that they didn't have some crazed hidden Tarantino side to them towards the end. Has QT ever had such decent down to earth (for the most part) lead characters before? Leo's porch reading scene with Julia Butters might've been my fav of his ever. Complete dive right into that character, looking like the time of his life. I wonder if this movie will seem the demarcation point for both actors from their final touches of youth. Brad ridin' around in Hawaiian shirt for one last fling of a role. - '69 Hollywood on full parade... QT's excellent touch of soaking the sunshine in full era audio via radio, tv, & film. A very nice angle considering how tough it could be to mask 21st century physical L.A., & not using full A-list notable songs either makes it more accessible & liveable.
- - I was probably expecting greater crash with reality, & yet QT delivered satisfying payoffs for all without stepping on history - nor completely rewriting it like Basterds. My takeaway was the sombre final shot implied the Manson spree would still occur, yet not on the calendar it did in real life. - Kurt Russell didn't have it here for me. His aged appearance doesn't reflect the type of alpha character he was in Death Proof, years ago now. - A high floor, alas not a real high ceiling either to the film's macro arc. Entertaining, well acted vignettes all... except as a whole, the film proper felt more a romp into '69 rather than rich storytellings.
I'd maybe have it my 4th fav QT behind Dogs, Pulp, & Bill 2.
|
|
arekay
New Member
@arekay
Posts: 19
Likes: 7
|
Post by arekay on Aug 8, 2019 22:08:37 GMT
7/10
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 11, 2019 2:06:11 GMT
B++- Leo & Brad never looked happier about their roles, lines, & settings. I liked that they didn't have some crazed hidden Tarantino side to them towards the end. Has QT ever had such decent down to earth (for the most part) lead characters before? Leo's porch reading scene with Julia Butters might've been my fav of his ever. Complete dive right into that character, looking like the time of his life. I wonder if this movie will seem the demarcation point for both actors from their final touches of youth. Brad ridin' around in Hawaiian shirt for one last fling of a role. - '69 Hollywood on full parade... QT's excellent touch of soaking the sunshine in full era audio via radio, tv, & film. A very nice angle considering how tough it could be to mask 21st century physical L.A., & not using full A-list notable songs either makes it more accessible & liveable. -- I was probably expecting greater crash with reality, & yet QT delivered satisfying payoffs for all without stepping on history - nor completely rewriting it like Basterds. My takeaway was the sombre final shot implied the Manson spree would still occur, yet not on the calendar it did in real life. - Kurt Russell didn't have it here for me. His aged appearance doesn't reflect the type of alpha character he was in Death Proof, years ago now. - A high floor, alas not a real high ceiling either to the film's macro arc. Entertaining, well acted vignettes all... except as a whole, the film proper felt more a romp into '69 rather than rich storytellings. I'd maybe have it my 4th fav QT behind Dogs, Pulp, & Bill 2. I love Dicaprio in comedy, would love to perhaps see a hitman comedy starring him as well.
|
|