OtherGround Forums Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood. *spoilers*

10 days ago
2/5/05
Posts: 47974
Eskimo -
clattymine -

I know literally nothing of the truths or stories surrounding the Manson murders. Maybe that would have changed my feelings on this movie. Not sure though, at least it would have helped my understand the premise a little more. I’m in the “not a fan” camp. 

If you don’t know the history of LA, the Manson stuff, Polanski, movies, etc then I’m sure this movie wasn’t very good. 

Finding out what really happened almost pisses me off more as far as what he did in the movie. 

10 days ago
11/10/18
Posts: 3498
clattymine -
Eskimo -
clattymine -

I know literally nothing of the truths or stories surrounding the Manson murders. Maybe that would have changed my feelings on this movie. Not sure though, at least it would have helped my understand the premise a little more. I’m in the “not a fan” camp. 

If you don’t know the history of LA, the Manson stuff, Polanski, movies, etc then I’m sure this movie wasn’t very good. 

Finding out what really happened almost pisses me off more as far as what he did in the movie. 

His movies aren’t for everyone. I thought it was a great spin and brought DiCaprio’s character full circle. In the beginning he dreamed he was a pool party away from being on top again. The “pool party” just happened to involve a flame thrower lol. I thought it was great. 

But again, I honestly can’t imagine watching it if you don’t know all the history I mentioned. You probably missed most of the important lines and foreshadowing because it wouldn’t make any sense to you. 

Just curious, how old are you? I’m really surprised how many people don’t know anything about the Manson murders. 

10 days ago
2/5/05
Posts: 47975
Eskimo -
clattymine -
Eskimo -
clattymine -

I know literally nothing of the truths or stories surrounding the Manson murders. Maybe that would have changed my feelings on this movie. Not sure though, at least it would have helped my understand the premise a little more. I’m in the “not a fan” camp. 

If you don’t know the history of LA, the Manson stuff, Polanski, movies, etc then I’m sure this movie wasn’t very good. 

Finding out what really happened almost pisses me off more as far as what he did in the movie. 

His movies aren’t for everyone. I thought it was a great spin and brought DiCaprio’s character full circle. In the beginning he dreamed he was a pool party away from being on top again. The “pool party” just happened to involve a flame thrower lol. I thought it was great. 

But again, I honestly can’t imagine watching it if you don’t know all the history I mentioned. You probably missed most of the important lines and foreshadowing because it wouldn’t make any sense to you. 

Just curious, how old are you? I’m really surprised how many people don’t know anything about the Manson murders. 

I’m 40. 

But I sort of intentionally avoid pop culture stuff. Never had any interest in reading up on manson and all he did. 

I had actually just read on here that the movie was good and had almost no idea what it was about. 

Edited: 9 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 34818

The movie takes place 50 years ago --this week-- in fact for a much of it.

I did/do wonder about the fact that we live in an age where SOOO many people don't know anything about anything that happened before they were born. There were teens & early 20's in the theater who I thought: they must have no idea what any of this stuff is.

 

.

9 days ago
2/20/09
Posts: 15401
shen -

The movie takes place 50 years ago --this week-- in fact for a much of it.

I did/do wonder about the fact that we live in an age where SOOO many people don't know anything about anything that happened before they were born. There were teens & early 20's in the theater who I thought: they must have no idea what any of this stuff is.

 

.

Yup.  Without the understanding of the Manson story, I could see the movie falling flat.

 

Heading out with my wife to see it again soon.  She’s 30.  Very smart.  No idea about Manson.  I made her read up on it so she gets the movie.

9 days ago
9/26/10
Posts: 20248
donkypunch55 -
shen -

The movie takes place 50 years ago --this week-- in fact for a much of it.

I did/do wonder about the fact that we live in an age where SOOO many people don't know anything about anything that happened before they were born. There were teens & early 20's in the theater who I thought: they must have no idea what any of this stuff is.

 

.

Yup.  Without the understanding of the Manson story, I could see the movie falling flat.

 

Heading out with my wife to see it again soon.  She’s 30.  Very smart.  No idea about Manson.  I made her read up on it so she gets the movie.

Enjoy! good idea to prep wife ahead of time. 

9 days ago
10/27/03
Posts: 24171
Eskimo -
clattymine -
Eskimo -
clattymine -

I know literally nothing of the truths or stories surrounding the Manson murders. Maybe that would have changed my feelings on this movie. Not sure though, at least it would have helped my understand the premise a little more. I’m in the “not a fan” camp. 

If you don’t know the history of LA, the Manson stuff, Polanski, movies, etc then I’m sure this movie wasn’t very good. 

Finding out what really happened almost pisses me off more as far as what he did in the movie. 

His movies aren’t for everyone. I thought it was a great spin and brought DiCaprio’s character full circle. In the beginning he dreamed he was a pool party away from being on top again. The “pool party” just happened to involve a flame thrower lol. I thought it was great. 

But again, I honestly can’t imagine watching it if you don’t know all the history I mentioned. You probably missed most of the important lines and foreshadowing because it wouldn’t make any sense to you. 

Just curious, how old are you? I’m really surprised how many people don’t know anything about the Manson murders. 

I would say most people know the name Charles Manson and when asked would say ‘cult leader’.

Some would probably get it slightly wrong and say ‘serial killer’ I’m guessing.

But then details would drop to zero for most people.

9 days ago
5/10/03
Posts: 38683

Enjoyable film if you know the history and where Tarantino took his liberties. Pitt and Leo crushed it!

9 days ago
6/29/15
Posts: 1507

Movies are supposed to stand alone. A person shouldn't have to know what happened in the summer of 69 to understand a film. What happens in between the 4 sides of a screen are what's important and if the content doesn't give the audience the context, the movie will suck. That's what happened here.

9 days ago
4/21/09
Posts: 20196
TheRealJoker -

Enjoyable film if you know the history and where Tarantino took his liberties. Pitt and Leo crushed it!

Literally the only reason I want to see this movie is Pitt and Leo together. How can that go wrong?

 

Headed to see it tonight.

9 days ago
5/22/05
Posts: 23259
Hey Bro -

Movies are supposed to stand alone. A person shouldn't have to know what happened in the summer of 69 to understand a film. What happens in between the 4 sides of a screen are what's important and if the content doesn't give the audience the context, the movie will suck. That's what happened here.

Bullshit. Lots of movies and novels depend at least partly for their effect on the historical context in which they are set. How dare Tarantino assume the audience has opened a book or read a newspaper in the last 30 years.

9 days ago
5/3/03
Posts: 10457

I liked it. It was way better than I thought  it would be, 

  Long ass movie but it didn’t seem like it

9 days ago
2/5/05
Posts: 47983
banco -
Hey Bro -

Movies are supposed to stand alone. A person shouldn't have to know what happened in the summer of 69 to understand a film. What happens in between the 4 sides of a screen are what's important and if the content doesn't give the audience the context, the movie will suck. That's what happened here.

Bullshit. Lots of movies and novels depend at least partly for their effect on the historical context in which they are set. How dare Tarantino assume the audience has opened a book or read a newspaper in the last 30 years.

Can you name some examples? 

Edited: 9 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 34825

He said he might do a "directors cut" of this.

I don't care how long it is, I am down!

Maybe he will do what he did with the Hateful 8 on Netflixk and break it up into 4 episodes of something.

 

9 days ago
5/22/05
Posts: 23264
clattymine -
banco -
Hey Bro -

Movies are supposed to stand alone. A person shouldn't have to know what happened in the summer of 69 to understand a film. What happens in between the 4 sides of a screen are what's important and if the content doesn't give the audience the context, the movie will suck. That's what happened here.

Bullshit. Lots of movies and novels depend at least partly for their effect on the historical context in which they are set. How dare Tarantino assume the audience has opened a book or read a newspaper in the last 30 years.

Can you name some examples? 

Top of my head would be movies about Watergate like all the President's men and dick (satire on Watergate). 

9 days ago
5/22/05
Posts: 23265

Good shepherd assumes knowledge of bay of pigs fiasco

9 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 3495
I saw it the other day and I still can't figure out ... what was the story? What was the conflict? was there a protagonist or an antagonist? Individual scenes were cool, like the Bruce Lee one and the scene where Pitt's character visits the cult, but overall what the hell did I pay to see?
9 days ago
2/20/09
Posts: 15402
ufc98newb -
donkypunch55 -
shen -

The movie takes place 50 years ago --this week-- in fact for a much of it.

I did/do wonder about the fact that we live in an age where SOOO many people don't know anything about anything that happened before they were born. There were teens & early 20's in the theater who I thought: they must have no idea what any of this stuff is.

 

.

Yup.  Without the understanding of the Manson story, I could see the movie falling flat.

 

Heading out with my wife to see it again soon.  She’s 30.  Very smart.  No idea about Manson.  I made her read up on it so she gets the movie.

Enjoy! good idea to prep wife ahead of time. 

Just got back.  She loved it.  She also thanked me for suggesting she read about the Manson killings.

Without knowing about them it kills a giant piece of the movie.

We decided to grab a friend who hasn’t seen it and go again on Tuesday.

 

It was even better the second time around.

More good lines than I remembered an interestingly enough, seemed way shorter.

9 days ago
2/20/09
Posts: 15403
wombat - I saw it the other day and I still can't figure out ... what was the story? What was the conflict? was there a protagonist or an antagonist? Individual scenes were cool, like the Bruce Lee one and the scene where Pitt's character visits the cult, but overall what the hell did I pay to see?

The short version is that history is the Antagonist and Tarantino’s fictional re-write is the Protagonist.

The arc of Leo’s character was interesting and very well done but not the focal point.  It was a subplot.  Everything else was to show us how sweet and human Tate was, how capable Cliff was and what degenerate shitbags the Manson family were.

Homerun on all counts.

9 days ago
11/10/18
Posts: 3500
clattymine -
banco -
Hey Bro -

Movies are supposed to stand alone. A person shouldn't have to know what happened in the summer of 69 to understand a film. What happens in between the 4 sides of a screen are what's important and if the content doesn't give the audience the context, the movie will suck. That's what happened here.

Bullshit. Lots of movies and novels depend at least partly for their effect on the historical context in which they are set. How dare Tarantino assume the audience has opened a book or read a newspaper in the last 30 years.

Can you name some examples? 

Every major film ever made about war. Most movies about major historical events assume you have knowledge of the event. You probably had most of that knowledge so it didn’t stick out to you. Maybe this movie overestimated the general public’s knowledge of that era in Hollywood and the Manson stuff.

9 days ago
8/28/17
Posts: 2354

I thought it was absolutely brilliant but pretty much every now and then movie watcher I’ve talked to whether at work or at the rink have all said something along the lines of “what a boring shitty movie.” Blows my mind how people need to see a Transformer blowing a building up to be entertained now

9 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 5636

I liked how the dog food was “Rat” and “raccoon” flavor

9 days ago
5/2/02
Posts: 27199
banco -
CobraKaiRep -
CuddleBug -
thedogofdogs -

Wont watch because of the Bruce Lee shit.

Obviously Bruce was holding back because his hands were registered as deadly weapons.

I kind of wonder if the ole gene and Segal incident was an inspiration for Bruce's portrayal

I'm surprised not a lot of people are upset at the portrayal. I think it might be closer to home than most want to admit. He's kind of become a legend you know what I mean and is usually portrayed in that sort of way

Lee's daughter is pissed.

Lots of Asian people pissed off. Not that many Asian cinematic heroes and to play one as a clown is rough. I guess it’d be like making a movie where MLK Jr. is portrayed is a calculating political asshole or Michael Jordan as a talentless player who was propped up by the NBA.  It’s a tough pill to swallow even if you know it’s only a movie.  

Edited: 9 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 34831
nottheface - 
banco -
CobraKaiRep -
CuddleBug -
thedogofdogs -

Wont watch because of the Bruce Lee shit.

Obviously Bruce was holding back because his hands were registered as deadly weapons.

I kind of wonder if the ole gene and Segal incident was an inspiration for Bruce's portrayal

I'm surprised not a lot of people are upset at the portrayal. I think it might be closer to home than most want to admit. He's kind of become a legend you know what I mean and is usually portrayed in that sort of way

Lee's daughter is pissed.

Lots of Asian people pissed off. Not that many Asian cinematic heroes and to play one as a clown is rough. I guess it’d be like making a movie where MLK Jr. is portrayed is a calculating political asshole or Michael Jordan as a talentless player who was propped up by the NBA.  It’s a tough pill to swallow even if you know it’s only a movie.  

 

Lee's wife and daughter licensed  his image to be a freaking claymation cartoon character for Lipton ice tea.

They have made a living licensing his likeness & image for all kinds of junk.

They don't really have much of a leg to stand on, IMO.

 

 

 

 

9 days ago
2/20/09
Posts: 15406
Bryan72 -

I liked how the dog food was “Rat” and “raccoon” flavor

Yeah and that dog was a beast.  Lol, “Brandi”