Quentin Tarantino's Manson murders movie

lol see it*

not even if it's a Star Trek

take 57 of the kill bill foot scene:

QT: i think we nearly got it that time

Going back to the Lee scene for a sec, I feel it serves dual purposes not yet discussed (or at least under-discussed).

A. It illustrates part of why Booth is seen as damaged goods and a troublemaker. While on the clock he literally gets into a fight with one of the stars of the show, which unto itself is/was a reason for getting fired and/or blacklisted. Booth pretty much only has a career afterwards because Dalton is still getting work and making it a package deal, but as we see, even that isn't a sure thing anymore.

B. It lets the audience in that Booth is the kind of guy who can and will go toe-to-toe with someone like Bruce Lee. Later on, in his encounters w/the tire slashing guy and ultimately the would-be killers, the audience's sense of suspense is slightly removed and replaced with anticipation of just how severely he's gonna fuck 'em up.

someone lmk when you all stop talking about feet

but also: great post, sic!!

Self-XP

I noticed on another forum someone alluding to a similar thing happening re: Dalton & the two flamethrower scenes early on, kind of a 'Chekov's Flamethrower' thing.

also, to your point about Cliff being the 'superhero' of the movie: the jump sound effects when he's fixing the TV antenna early on (which is also a callback to Kill Bill)

if we had a best original critical dialogue of the week feature, sic would have a strong contender with that post

agree with all, Pitt’s fictional character defeating fictionalized Bruce Lee isn’t an intentional slight on the real Lee, it’s a nod toward the audience that this is a character in a movie and that we’re to believe he’s going to do extraordinary things

Yeah, that scene was such a goof I don't see why anyone would take issue with it. Bruce Lee's reputation (like that of Muhammed Ali, for that matter) is downright legendary, so getting his ass kicked by a fictional stunt man? BFD.

Now, why anyone should care that Brad Pitt's character can do that and other things, I don't know, but he's pretty entertaining doing them.

Random thoughts:

- Loved the recreation of 1969 LA, as someone who spends a lot of time immersed in the era as a result of various interests and research projects. I'm not sure I would have enjoyed it as much had I not been able to geek out over the little details ("hey, there's that club I saw mentioned in the Free Press archives!")

- If you dug the bursts of KHJ, check out www.reelradio.com — hours of old airchecks from KHJ and other markets.

- I wouldn't have cared for the ending all that much either way, but the almost cartoon-like dispatching of the Family didn't sit that well after seeing Charlie Says. Obviously, they did a horrible crime, but considering the abuse the Manson women themselves suffered (both from Charlie and their backgrounds), it felt a bit gross, not much like the satisfaction of killing off a bunch of Nazis.

- I thought the use of a flamethrower was interesting, reminded me of a lot of Vietnam imagery. Considering Rick (and the film) represents the old generation that the counterculture displaces, perhaps no coincidence it's from one of his World World II movies — a clear "good guys vs bad guys" conflict, as opposed to the war those hippies types Rick hates are protesting.

Cliff doesn't even defeat Lee - Bruce takes one (1) fall in the sizing-up section of a constrained spar, before Lee is taking Cliff seriously.

(The moment felt unsatisfying to me because of the cheat of the off-screen throw, and cartoonish dent & foley, but the scene is showing there's much more to Cliff than his mien and ambition indicate. It's not saying that Lee was less than his demonstrated skill & incredible ability IRL.)

A little detail I liked about Cliff is all the scars you can see all over his body throughout the movie.

the thing people are complaining about is not so much that he beats bruce lee but that the film depicts bruce lee as an asshole

there's also the whole racial connotations which don't really need to be explained.

At least he didn't have Bruce Lee using the n word.

but that the film depicts bruce lee as an asshole

it does not do this in any way

Eh, sure it does. At least a little.

That's why Cliff picks a fight with him.

Cliff is the asshole in that exchange.

Sure. But it comes after Bruce Lee boasting about besting Cassius Clay, and his fists being lethal weapons and whatnot.

Sure. But it comes after Bruce Lee boasting about besting Cassius Clay, and his fists being lethal weapons and whatnot.

― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, July 30, 2019 4:18 PM (0 seconds ago)

bingo

Bruce is at work. He's writing "Bruce Lee."

Gonna need smelling salts to contemplate the unprecedented effrontery of some "bragging" taking place in a conversation about whether Cassius Clay might win a fight

Bruce single-handedly dispatching the entire Manson Family while the ghost of Ip-Man smiles from the heavens would have placated everyone.

enjoying sic's takes in this thread

same

what pct of the opening-weekend audience knows who Cassius Clay was?

btw I never heard of The Wrecking Crew til this thing came along

Same percentage that would buy Damian Lewis as Steve McQueen under that weird Sonny Corleone wig.

Yeah, wtf was going on there? I thought they mostly did a good job casting the celebrity roles, but that was just way off.

I saw it again tonight ( sung to the tune of the Mamas & the Papas lol)

I took sic’s take on the Cliff vs Bruce scene into consideration & it def plays better in that light.

ie that the purpose of the scene is showing more of what Cliff’s about than any kind of deliberate slight on Bruce. Cliff’s stuntman archetype in general always had something to prove even when there was nothing TO prove, like the only reason he even does it is the fact that a) there’s a crowd & b) they’re all awed by Bruce - oneupsmanship-as-performance is all those dudes knew how to do

Plus seriously, what kind of asshole ~other than Cliff~ would challenge Lee on the set of Lee’s own show? While working a job he’s barely holding onto to start with that he only got because Rick begged for Cliff to be hired. the ego required for that is staggering when you think about it.

I loled this time seeing that one of the cans of dog food was BIRD FLAVOR (i saw the rat and raccoon flavors before)

I thought this was a decent review, though some parts are a little off - https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/07/tarantino-once-upon-a-time-in-hollywood-revenge-fantasy-manson-family

And not to continually harp on the Manson aspect, but this was one of the few movies/depictions I've seen that comes close to getting the vibe of the Manson girls right. It's not just being free spirity hippy runaways. These are teen runaways who are eating acid for breakfast lunch and dinner and boning anyone who comes through the gate AND trying to survive AND impress Manson with who they can lure. That scene when Pussycat leans in through the window at Cliff and you can see right away that she's fried, flushed and twitchy, it's played so well because it's so squirmy and a little creepy and just kinda not quite right. That QT cast such young looking or irl young actresses really sets in the shock when you see them all standing together at the ranch. They're SO young. Manson was running those girls as a pimp to get over with people like Melcher, or the bikers, or whoever else he needed to get over with. And it doesn't need explaining -- you can see it plain as day as Cliff takes it all in.

catching up on some earlier thread:

I haven't seen either so have been debating which one to watch; I'll probably do the 4 parter.

yeah, do that: I haven't seen the standard version, but enjoyed the roadshow cut and liked the tweaks & format of the episodic edition. Most of the changes are just small indulgences due to the running time allowed by the episodes, or additional / overlapping dialogue that didn't reveal anything we weren't told about the characters elsewhere. But there's one substantial new scene which expands the audience's perspective on events and characters, and that scene benefits from its positioning relative to an episode break.

The best reason to watch it, though, is alleviation of longeurs, as noted. What was rich and immersive on 70mm, between velvet curtains, in a 700-seat 1935 art deco theatre, doesn't hold the focus as compellingly on a $20 tv off Craigslist. Watching 50 minutes a night worked well & left me keen to return at the start of each episode.

(Also, disregard Josh - the whole title sequence doesn't play each time. If you want to run straight through, Netflix gives you a basic end credit roll, enough to have a wee or put the kettle on, then picks up with the narrative again.)

Pitt's most amiable performance. Clemenza is otm about the ranch sequence: he can finally move in character.

Burn After Reading.

(although you might call that moving in caricature.)

He's better here.

I didn't think the credits of the extended Hateful 8 weren't skippable or something, my understanding was just that their combined runtime (rather than new or longer scenes) accounted for the biggest boost in the movie's total runtime. Or so I read multiple places, I haven't seen the extended cut myself.

I can't imagine anyone sticking around for The Hateful Eight credits without wanting to nuke the theater.

Didn't catch that Clu Gulager was the bookstore clerk when Robbie goes in and asks for Tess of the d'Urbervilles (People you thought were...)

Was Tess a reference to the Polanaki rape case?

Polanski directed the movie of Tess and supposedly he got the idea from Sharon Tate lending him the book

i believe the film is also dedicated to Sharon

hoping the Scorsese film will be a meal at Rao's after you've all gone to Chuck E Cheese with this one

The Scorsese will be terrible, get real

just see the movie morbs you’ll probably like it

it's possible; i wouldn't say likely

xp

no flappy, i vote by withholding my dollars

Held up well a second time--some ambivalence remains, a few things got better. I really don't care, but I was thinking afterwards I could see it winning the Best Picture AA. 1) It's making lots of money; 2) They can look after the lifetime-achievement thing for Tarantino; 3) (most important) It deifies Hollywood. Hollywood literally prevents the Manson murders and saves the day. And not the big-star, clueless-elite, right-wing caricature of Hollywood--an even more appealing rank-and-file Hollywood, a washed-up actor and his stunt-double. I know there's the violence, but excessively violet films have won Best Film, no? And the violence really amounts to 10 minutes or so.

"excessively violet films"--You know, Purple Rain, The Purple Rose of Cairo, those films.

Was this filmed in 70mm? The 35mm projection looked very nice.
If you put Steve McQueen and Bruce Lee in the first act, shouldn’t they do a buddy cop sequence by the last? No Oscar for that oversight!

"hoping the Scorsese film will be a meal at Rao's after you've all gone to Chuck E Cheese with this one"

is scorsese doing a tate film?

I'm hoping the second weekend box office dive will be at least 65% (unless the screen count is going up)

it was shot on 35

Having no interest in Tarantino is one thing, but holding out Scorsese--based on his body of work the past 20 years at least, especially the films that aren't documentaries--as something to aspire to, I don't get that.

Silence was great!