Quentin Tarantino's Manson murders movie

Moodles otm

Jeez, Cliff not the only psycho I guess,

xp

I def think it's there to both make him *less* likable and explain why he's basically an industry bottom feeder, w/a pathological devotion to his only patron

the only guy who takes care of him is the guy who's ok with him having harpooned his wife, the extreme manifestation of their implicit "bros before hoes" bromance.

so much so that he doesn't even believe it

The whole thing of him killing his wife is obv part of why stuntmaster Kurt Russell doesnt want to hire him (and stuntmaster’s wife hates him for that reason too) but between that & the war veteran part gives extra backstory/color as to why this affable handsome stunt guy is Rick’s manservant instead of working regularly

the reason we only see the lead up is no one other than cliff knows the truth. It’s not ambiguous as to whether or not he was responsible, we just don’t know if he decided to pull the trigger there.

or what shakey said

(xpost)

And yeah it makes him this more dangerous-seeming character than just an ordinary stuntman, he’s clearly working through some bleak shit whatever the truth about his past may be.

like in Cliff’s mind he kicked Bruce Lee’s ass and maybe his wife was a goddamn nag and it is all with good reason, taking ppl down a peg or two to his level

but -outside his own head- in the actual world of movie production he is arrogant unpredictable sonofabitch who has basically made himself unhireable

^^^

(although he may be genuinely humble at this point / believing he's living in penance for past transgressions)

I didn't take the flashback as Cliff's memory as much as Tarantino showing us what happened

Definitely his memory, he reacts to it when we cut back to present-day taps aff Cliff on the roof

just because it's his memory doesn't mean he's an unreliable narrator also

No, his reliability is unknown, not least of all because he is not a real person, but a character in a film, and the boat scene isn't an actual memory, but a filmed sequence edited together with other film sequences, in order to create possible linkages in the viewer's mind.

lol ok cool

lock thread i guess?

Lock borad

just because it's his memory doesn't mean he's an unreliable narrator also

yes

moodles otm

an actual apocalypse and ye still at it

I mean, I know it sounds ridiculous to lots of folks on here, but we're pondering the reliability of a scene that is purposefully left ambiguous in the middle of a film about the fictionalization of historical events.

such a mind you have, it’s really wasted on all of us

Lol, I'm not saying it's an original thought in any way

neither am I :D

Oh I know, thanks

Cue "Ramblin' Gamblin'Man".

peace out in my karmann ghia

Anyone seen the long cut yet?

There is no long cut yet.

Oh?! I thought it had been shown already. My bad. IMDB has this to say;

In October 2019, an extended cut of the film was released in selected theaters with an additional 10 minutes, made up of 4 new scenes which include an extended version of the opening scene, two fake commercials and a new after-credits scene.

He showed lots of bonus material like that, and Bounty Law stuff, before screenings at the New Beverly for months too, but the theoretical four-hour version or Netflix miniseries is still in the future

i really do want that in my life

finally saw this today. liked how they don't make rick dalton a joke. he's self aware enough and also seems p committed to actually doing a good job and he is good at his job imo. dog attack + flamethrower the perfect ending too.

https://deadline.com/2020/11/quentin-tarantino-two-book-deal-harpercollins-novel-once-upon-a-time-in-hollywood-cinema-speculation-70s-movie-deep-dive-1234616927

Would totally read a Tarantino deep dive into '70s film, absolutely. And, hell, I'll probably read the novelization too.

Yeah as much as I hate his post-Jackie Brown work I'd be pretty interested in a book of nonfiction film essays tbh, would be cool if he transitioned into doing that more

This is basically one long slow build to one big gratuitous climax, just not THAT big gratuitous climax. QT is soooooo clever! Brilliant direction though. Shame it means nothing.

Well, I mean, one could argue that every single piece of culture, pop or otherwise, means "nothing". What a weird argument to make.

I do see the criticism about the long slow build for this one, but honestly I think I would have enjoyed it just as much (if not more!) if that climax never came and it was just a day in the life of these characters with the Manson stuff limited to the hitchhiker and Cliff's visit to the ranch. The most interesting parts of the movie were not the climax.

ofc it doesnt mean nothing, i just thought the climax ruined all the other little observations along the way. he just stuck it there for his brodude fans

that Deadline article got me high

stock 2020 response but i cannot beLIEVE this movie only came out last summer. picturing going to the theater and seeing it and posting to ILX afterwards, it all seems much more distant than even other movies of that same year.

i saw that this was streaming on one of the services we get (probably our friend's premium extensions to Hulu?) and was sorta tempted to watch it, i remember really enjoying almost all of it except the ending, but the length and the sense of "this would not be the same enveloping Movie Experience on my TV" have put me off. but maybe i should really revisit it.

God I can't wait to read both of these books

xp I've had the opposite experience this year, I feel like zero time has passed since March. OUATIH feels as long ago now as it did in March, when I revisited Reservoir Dogs and Grindhouse for the first time in a while. No idea why

I would have preferred this movie not just without the ending but just without the Sharon Tate parts. A part of the movie that has any impact - or just any meaning whatsoever - based on context from outside the movie, from outside fiction. hate that as a trick in films to summon pathos, tension etc.

No way, some of the Sharon Tate stuff was great! The joy she had in watching herself onscreen was fantastic.

I know what you mean but I think both of those scenes work perfectly w/o context, then again I love scenes in movies where characters go to the movies and just watch a movie. They may be meeting someone, exchanging money, cruising, or just watching a movie, whatever. That kind of scene is so beautiful and meditative and even if you just know that this woman Robbie is playing is going to go see herself in a movie, that's enough, it works. And the ending is just euphoric, a glorious climax of anti-climax and some of the best fight choreography and individual gore shots I've ever seen. The ending of OUATIH goes beyond anything Argento or Fulci did, and it's so wonderful.

xp

I'm curious about what the experience of watching this is like if you have little or no prior knowledge of the Manson murders.

I was shocked at how many people I knew who saw OUATIH and knew nothing about the murders. Some liked it, some loved it, some loathed it.

Did they get that the ending wasn't how things went down?

sharon tate’s the whole point of the movie

ie what if instead of being america’s most famous murder victim & forever tied to some of the bloodiest murders of that era, what if she could be a person who lived ... this may sound v overwrought but imo the ending is a gift to the memory of her & the movie in no way works without her