Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019)

BrutulTM said:

So none of this has anything to do with the movie. Sounds like you just think Tarantino is a douche which isn't news.

Click to expand...

Arbitrary said:

I'm normally pretty good about keeping the artist and the work separate but he managed to do enough shit to impair my enjoyment of his catalog.

Click to expand...

So, anyway.

The depiction of Bruce Lee was tasteless and only done so The Coolest Man on the Planet could be made to look even cooler and several times we have the director's foot fetish on display. Those things are part of the movie. Destroying a priceless guitar borrowed from a museum is part of that movie.

BrutulTM said:

It has nothing to do with whether it was a good movie or not. And there are thousands and thousands of old Martin guitars out there. They're not "priceless', you can buy one very easily. I don't think the music is going to die because that one got broke.

Click to expand...

I'll alert the museum that there are thousands and thousands of 1800s era Martins out there and they can be very easily bought. They seemed pretty unhappy about the whole thing but this should smooth things over.

BrutulTM said:

Send them this link:

1840s C.F. Martin Guitar * Museum Piece | Reverb

From the Martin Historians - “This definitely looks like a mid-1840s -early 1850s Martin. The faux Spanish foot and nickel silver nut were features of some Martins at this time. This might be the earliest guitar I’ve seen with a 5-9-5 rosette that later would become standard on Style 28 guitars.”...

reverb.com

30 years older than the one they lost and apparently in good condition for $12,000. More than I would spend on a guitar but hardly "priceless" and barely a line item in a Tarantino movie budget.

Click to expand...

I gave them a call and they said it was more like this


but then you have to consider we're talking about an auction from 15 years ago. I agree though that he definitely should have bought his own rather than borrowing one from a museum to trash.

i just got around to watching this. holy shit this was a great movie. i dont care if it was an accurate portrayal of Bruce Lee. its not an accurate portrayal of history as the ending should have told everyone who watched it. i was dreading the ending. i said to myself. if Tarantino made a gore porn scene of Tate getting dissected with her baby i was going to flip the fuck out. seriously, if he did that i was done with his movies and him. i would have beat his ass if i ever met him in real life. but no. i was so happy with what the ending really was. it was so fucking badass and Robbie was so damned adorable as Tate through that entire flick. as the ending of the movie kept getting closer and closer i kept saying, "please don't show her getting murdered, please don't.". after Death Proof i was somewhat down on his movies because it was just mindless brutality on these chicks who didnt do anything wrong. i gotta say they painted Charlie's "family" in this as a bunch of really good looking people. RL photos of those dirty fucking skanks contradict the shit out of that.

all in all a very good film. maybe my third favorite of his next to Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown. best scene is either the fight with Bruce Lee or the hostage scene with the little girl. it made me curious how the father was going to get her back.

I had the opposite reaction.

I forgot why I never watched this movie when it came out, then saw this thread bumped back in April, which then made me decide to watch it. Going into it blind (outside of the last two pages about Lee), I found most of the movie to plod along like an average Tarantino movie, but it certainly wasn't special. I didn't even figure out it was about Manson's people until 2/3 of the movie was done, but then the retarded end happened and ruined it all; making it feel like some self insert Hollywood up it's own ass, auto fellatio mess.

I find Tarantino is at his worst when he does his stupid gore shtick verses his good/great dialog. So, if I were to rank this movie among all his movies, I would put it third from the bottom, better than Grindhouse and Death Proof (which I absolutely hate), but worse than Kill Bill.

All you need to know about this movie is the western show Leo is the bad guy in within the film is better than the movie itself

this movie is the definition of a film that insists upon itself.

Breakdown said:

All you need to know about this movie is the western show Leo is the bad guy in within the film is better than the movie itself

this movie is the definition of a film that insists upon itself.

Click to expand...

Fadaar said:

View attachment 536321

Click to expand...

I wasn’t sure anyone would get it. Bravo!

Burns said:

but then the retarded end happened and ruined it all

Click to expand...

This is bizarre, I can't imagine disliking the ending to this film - it was far and away the best part.

Drinsic said:

This is bizarre, I can't imagine disliking the ending to this film - it was far and away the best part.

Click to expand...

A lot of Tarantino's violence is too silly for me when he gets carried away. The only movie were he goes ham with it, and I actually still liked the movie enough to watch it more than once was Dusk till Dawn, probably because I saw it as a teen. If the rest of the movie is great, it makes up for it, but the rest of this movie is about 3.6 roentgen.

For example, my favorite movies from him are Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown. Pulp Fiction had one of the best story & dialogs ever put to film and Jackie Brown was almost all built on the same formula with even less violence needed.