I dont get it

You don't know anything.

An inherit characteristic of any story is a plot. Trying to argue otherwise is like an edgy 14 year old artist trying to argue smearing fecal matter on his bedroom wall is art.

The movie has a point/purpose - but it's easily - EASILY - Tarantino's most complicated

blame yourself, you fell for the marketing completely.

Yeah there were definitely shots in the trailers not in the movie. Hopefully more Charlie in the extended mini-series version

Well the plot is 100% perfect and has no easy (if any) plotholes for you to whine about.

Why wasn't the rapist pedophile Polanski punished in this alternate history?

Punished for a future crime? While he is out of the country?

It's hard to have plot holes if there is not plot. ;^)

Sure why not, to prevent the rapes. He prevented the nazis and cultists from future crimes.

here comes marching in all the contrarians who like it because other people dislike it and think that makes them superior. The movie had no fuckin plot, 2 and half hours jerking off over how good the 60s and hollywood were isnt nearly as good as tarantinos earlier movies. the same faggots in this thread claiming muh plot dont matter are the same cunts who get mad when a tv show (like stranger things) is based in the eighties and is a complete circle jerk of popculture references, the only reason you fags enjoyed it this time because it was much more obscure.
It was a good movie but doesnt come close to reservoir dogs or jackie brown because it has no compelling story.

The nazis were actively committing crimes for years at that point and the cultists trying to commit a crime. Did you want the narrator to say, "By the way, Polanski died in a car crash while in Europe"?

>films need to tell a story
No. The film also has a plot but you are conditioned to watching films heavy on plot. Don't worry, once you watch more films you will get it.

Stranger Things is nigger lover propaganda, cry more

Im male
I dont watch capeshit and some of my favourite movies have intricate plots, this however had none

No I want Tarantino brutality.
>he was in europe
It's alternate history he can do whatever he wants.

>why was brad pitt unconditionally loving leo when he was being slowly screwed over?
Like when Rick got Cliff that job, and Cliff repaid him by throwing Bruce Lee into the car of the director's wife?

True he fucked up, but their friendship is never tested even once, just alluded to as Pitt lives in poverty and Dicaprio lives lavishly and still complains. I dont get why people thought this "bromance" was so great, it was never strengthened through conflict.

>muh epic art pieces
Imagine unrioncially claiming this for some Hollywood produced western trash.

>True he fucked up, but their friendship is never tested even once
Why would it have to be tested? Rick was employing Cliff, and Cliff was emotionally mature enough to accept that he was being terminated.

I thought the fact they never had conflict meant so much more than shoehorning in generic conflict drama for no real reason. You forget Cliff liked to help him.

you are an idiot, go back to Rick and Morty

hey at least it was better than death proof

Does every movie about friends have to have the relationship get tested?

>I dont get why people thought this "bromance" was so great, it was never strengthened through conflict.
yikes
this is not a teen drama or some garbage sitcom where every episode there's a conflict between supposed """friend"""

no, it's just a very """progressive""" way of thinking, this is why you see it everywhere now.

I think there are two views on the issue here
1. Cliff and Rick got no conflicts
2. Cliff and Rick got conflicts in wealth gap

If you've never had conflict with your friends, then they're not friends, they're acquaintances.

Maybe that's what Rick and Cliff are.

if you have conflict all the time with your friends, they are not your friend.
Also banter is very different from conflict.

And the older you get, the less conflict you want to be in, especially if you only have one true friend to begin with

But that never happened, retard.

cliff was rick's dog, like the pitbull was cliff's dog.

the symbolism wasn't hard.

Of course it didn't, because it's a fictional movie.

It didn't happen in the movie either. It's daydream sequence.

Why was the film so unrelentingly dull is a better question. There are two types of QT films. One's where the dialogue is filled with tension and builds beautifully to a pay off and the others where people sit around talking boring shit with no tension, point or payoff.

>where was the conflict?
Leo coping with his failing career and finding a way to save it

>why was brad pitt unconditionally loving leo when he was being slowly screwed over?
It's called friendship.
Pitt's character is extremely comfortable with the way his life is and I don't think he really cares about money.

>why did sharon tate just go and watch her own movies?
It's called character work and themeing.
It's one of the most important scenes in the movie btw, I still haven't seen other niggas pointing out how they cheer when Sharon's character defeats a kung-fu master (much like the way Cliff defeats Bruce Lee).
it's very meta and surprisingly subtle

You have no proof at all supporting your claim. Quentin Tarantino disagrees with you, and he is the one who wrote the scene.

So, which of us is the retard again?

I think there are two views on the issue here
1. Cliff and Rick got no conflicts. They are just boss and employee. So the wealth gap means nothing to them.
This view partly agrees with the "their friendship is never tested " criticism but basically it sees that there is never a friendship to begin with.
2. Cliff and Rick got conflicts in wealth gap. With this view you can argue that their friendship is being tested by the wealth gap. The wealth gap is the tension.

Either way, Quentin wins.

I hated stranger things because it was a bunch of teen faggot shit. I still want to shoot that coconut-head kid in the knees

>Quentin Tarantino disagrees with you
Source.

you're such a fucking faggot

Yeah like Reservoir (sewer) Dogs

ah yeah, the classic "find problems in good things in your life"

>“Could Cliff beat up Bruce Lee? Brad would not be able to beat up Bruce Lee, but Cliff maybe could,” Tarantino said. “If you ask me the question, ‘Who would win in a fight: Bruce Lee or Dracula?’ It’s the same question. It’s a fictional character. If I say Cliff can beat Bruce Lee up, he’s a fictional character so he could beat Bruce Lee up."

the main conflict is that Leo wants to see Margot Robbie's feet, so he tries to sneak into the cinema but shows up too late when they have to make new popcorn

is dicaprio really shit and boring in this movie or something?? literally have only heard people talk about brad pitt character

DiCaprio plays an overly anxious diva, but he's really funny on the role.

Cliff plays Hollywood Cowboy badass who kills niggas without a second thought. He's Johnny Cool or whatever the fuck 60s character, of course people remember him more

>why was brad pitt unconditionally loving leo when he was being slowly screwed over?
You need a buddy mate?

I'm a bit saddened to see that people complain about the lack of plot. I thought that the scenes of Pitt and Dicaprio watching TV together, or Dicaprio rehearsing scenes, or the crane shots were the heart of the movie and most of what makes its fairly stretched run worthwhile. The Manson Family plot was done a bit on automatic mode in that regard (ambient music/dutch angles every time creepy hippies appear, etc) or just as a way for Tarantino to show that he can do funny horrific violence anytime he wants if he picks a historically politically correct and obvious target without having much interest in them because of the magic of movies/genre/whatever. I'm not very fond of him.

>doesn't pay admission
>blocks others' view with bare feet propped up on seat
>engage narcissism/self-voyeurism
>avoid later helter skelter slaughter
OH THE SUBVERSION

The Aussie actor who played Charles Manson in this movie (and weirdly also in Mindhunter S2) said a lot was cut.

Can't wait for the 6 hours cut with the italian subsection put in.

No he's brilliant, the best part he's done since Wolf of wall street.
I don't get how people thought it was boring either, it's very well crafted and despite being 3 hours felt half as long.
Zoomers gonna zoom I guess.

If you require your movie to have a plot to be enjoyable, then you're basically limiting yourself to kino.
This movie was more about watching 2 characters lives, and enjoying dialogue than an intense plot.

It was meant to be laidback and a chill sort of film. But apparently there are retards on this board who can't appreciate comfy movies like this.
>muhhh plot
>muuuuuhhh plot
Ironically there is a loose plot. It's about Leo's character excepting that he's no longer in the prime of his career, and trying to revive his career.
then you have the manson subplot.

So literally if you're complaining its probably because you're only used to one style of movie and cant appreciate different things. Sounds like a symptom of autism to me.

Attached: 1487367945548.jpg (1280x720, 297K)

Where is My Capeshit?: The Post

found Mr 300iq

>where was the conflict?
Not all stories need conflict. Once Upon a Time focused more on characters and worldbuilding and it was enough to keep (at least) me interested, although I admit it felt draggy in some parts. Plot in movies is basically just a pretext to present engaging audi-visual experiences that entertain or emotionally affect the audience. Plot is needed because it's hard to keep audiences engaged for 2 hours (more for this movie), but some movies manage just fine with the bare minimum and it was the case with this one. I feel like a more complex narrative would have taken away from the experience.

>Why was brad pitt unconditionally loving leo when he was being slowly screwed over?
He knew it wasn't Rick's fault and he was a decent man who valued their friendship above all else. Him getting screwed over was in part his own doing.

>Where was charles manson?
The whole Sharon Tate / Manson family subplot was just to create suspense as everyone knows Sharon got iced by the Manson family. It creates an iminent danger for Cliff and Rick since Rick's house is right next to Sharon's. Ngl, at the end when Cliff got high I actually thought him and Rick would get killed too. It worked pretty well.

>Why did sharon tate just go and watch her own movies?
She had a grand vision of herself as an actress. That scene is a nice little tribute to her.

I will bite but only because I enjoy thinking (tips), unlike OP
>where was the conflict?
Central struggle was "popular actor slowly being forgotten and learning to live with it". It wasn't that much in the focus though but you can say it's the central thing
>why was brad pitt unconditionally loving leo when he was being slowly screwed over?
Because Pitt was a mature carefree vet who was probably still high from killing his nagging wife. He was shown to care about an old acquaintance even in threatening circumstances and to dig through insults to make sure he is safe; to control his urges and making sure when he lets them loose it's worth it; to stand his ground: not being overtly mean to people but to stand his ground where it was right.
And of course Leo wasn't screwing him over: they both knew their place and were comfortable there. They didn't have a commie mindset and treated each other as equals despite having very different strengths and weaknesses.
> where was charles manson?
Doesn't matter, dong his stuff, it wasn't his story
>why did sharon tate just go and watch her own movies?
Because she was simple not entirely secure ray of sunshine who wanted some validation. It's what women did before instagram and in this particular case it was valid because it was a small instance and she actually did some work to get to being validated.

Regarding the "no plot" concerns, I do agree in a sense that imho it's not as memorable as a movie or experience. But Tarantino focused on delivering a particular atmosphere and he fully delivered on that. He may have been misguided but he is definitely a great director.

The relationship between Cliff and Rick Dalton is Tarantino's commentary about how the film industry uses the work of stuntmen. Cliff was piss poor and didn't know how to do anything else, but also he was enchanted with the star power of Rick. He loved doing movies, being near movie stars and such things.
Charles Manson appeared in one scene of the movie, where he gets out of an old looking van and walk across the Polanski house (Sharon barely sees him). If you remember correctly, he didn't actually take part in the murders, he was just the "brain".
Sharon in this movie is meant to represent inocence and potential. As Tarantino rewrote story, he dedicated part of his film to legitimately grief over the loss of a talented girl who was full of life. Watching her appreciate the audience reaction to her own scenes is that much hurtful once you know what happened to her.
The actual driving conflict of the movie is Rick Dalton's fading star, but if you wanna get technical about it, the whole film is about a Tarantino's version of Hollywood, not populated by young, talented directors (Polanski is just kind of there for the whole film), but by television cowboys, martial artists and stuntmen working on cheesy action flicks.
Also, fuck hippies.

Tarantino doesn't care about things like a structured screenplay anymore. He could film 2 hours of a piece of shit and still manage to make it wildly entertaining for the audience. Now he's just making films that he himself would love to watch - and if we the audience also want to watch it, it is just a side effect.

But that's the point, I don't think Tarantino is trying to outmatch himself anymore. He's not trying to tell a very compelling story, he's just doing things for the heck of it. But even the way he films this "lack" of story is so well executed 2h30 of movie comes and goes like it is nothing. He has completely mastered his form and now he wants to talk about whatever he wants to talk about. And apparently, that is a stuntman beating the shit out of Bruce Lee.

they basically cop to the whole Polanski thing by having Steve McQueen say Jay knew Roman would "fuck things up one way or another", and that he was hanging around to swoop back in once he did
so Polanski will fuck up, Jay will get back with Sharon, and they'll all live happily ever after

>Pitt's character is extremely comfortable with the way his life is and I don't think he really cares about money.
think this is pretty fucking important and people ignore it
Cliff is just happy he's not IN JAIL

>why did sharon tate just go and watch her own movies?

It as a plot device to pay tribute to her work. He said in an interview he wanted to give the audience a chance to spend some time with her. He didn't want to dwell on her death end and history tends to. He wanted to celebrate her life.

and good point about the Sharon vs. Nancy Kwan thing, I hadn't thought about that

you just got tarantinoed

Attached: cliff.jpg (1200x1818, 273K)

Imagine unironically not getting the plot of this film.

My take on Cliff is that he's lived through war, through good times & bad, a shrew wife & her death, dodging the tank over it..... and now he's pretty relaxed about his life. Taking in some of the new vibes in LA; He's not the one that gets all het up over the hippies, that's Rick.
So Cliff just accepts Rick for what he is, the job for what it is, and life as it comes.

Acting wise he was the best and his character good but more memorable things happened to Brad Pitt's character basically

Also, I haven't seen all of QT's films.
I am old enough to have gone to see R Dogs & PF at the cinema when they came out.
But at least he's making films where it's not all about money, which is nearly everything put out in modern cinema these days.
For that alone, may he make many more films.

It’s a metaphore that represent the american wagies relation with their boss

anyone else thought this didnt really feel like this film was made by tarantino?

I thought the dialogue was more laid back than usual.

Go easy on him, he's just a kid.

All these replies just calling OP a brainlet instead of using words to explain makes me question you faggots.

I agree it was odd there was no plot but I guess that's the point of the movie, it's a series of vignettes more or less.

You're too big of a pleb to get it. It is style over substance.

Correct but with men it only happens once. If the friendship survives the major conflict then it becomes unbreakable.

He’s great. Brad Pitt is just the meme self insert Mary Sue character.

So I’m guessing Cliff got shot in the arm at the end? I thought he was a goner at first

how the fuck are people saying there is no plot lmao what kind of movies do you faggots watch?

Yes, the music seemed more in the background, usually a music is its own character in a tarantino flick, also the dialogue was more “normal”.

Just because the last 30 minutes had a plot and that we met some of those characters earlier doesn't mean the movie had an overarching plot

Based as fuck

Underaged pleb, filtered

You are fucking retarded if you think that, seriously.

>their friendship is never tested even once

Some friendships never are, and besides they're grown ass men, this isn't fucking Naruto

Rick trying his best to overcome being a has-been while Cliff is dealing with the consequences of his friend no longer being able to support him.
Sharon trying to maintain the high of being a famous actress by constantly listening to music, dancing, going to parties, going to her own movies etc.

all the scenes have relevance to the other scenes, it's just not a linear plot. i actually don't understand how you could watch this movie and say there is no plot. not all movies need to shove the plot in your face like Snatch does for example.

He got stabbed in the top of the leg near the hip, probably died.

This is why you have shit taste, user. You still think there are rules that need to be followed.

>drops Rick off at Lancer set and asks if he'll be getting any stuntwork
>Rick says the guy in charge is the same guy from Green Hornet so theres no point in even asking to use Cliff
>these words are audibly narrated for retards like you with ADHD again immediately before cutting to the memory of the Green Hornet shoot explaining why Cliff was shitcanned

There's literally nothing suggesting it was some daydream you fucking idiot. How much of a beta manlet chink do you have to be to use these mental gymnastics to block out the trauma of seeing your hero taken down a peg? Seriously pathetic.

It was a character study disguised as a Manson murders biopic

Is this the quintessential movie Yea Forums doesn't understand? Are Yea Forumsposters incapable of understanding any facet of this movie?

Attached: a33.png (558x614, 45K)

Men dont actually do that. faggot

Look at this tryhard

tarantual actually BTFO the brainlets with this flick, holy shit

for the better in my opinion

What are they leaning on?

No one said it was and it doesn't matter anyway

>”I try”

Attached: 164B97BD-1B5D-426A-AA85-A98370024BE9.jpg (1001x823, 154K)

favorite scenes?

for me, it's when Rick nails the scene in the saloon

Dialog was definitely more tame overall, but Pumpkinpuss' little spiel about an actors (not actresses because nonsensical *tips hat* ) job was classic overexplained cornball Tarantino stuff.

>sticking around abusive relationships
Women understand this

Yes but none of this matters and the sharon tate scene is not clever because its only referencing itself

3 lazy scenes made the 2 and a half run time worthwhile. Are you serious? Up your standards bro

We don't know where he got shot but the way he dropped made me think he was dead too.

I could swear we saw him during the credits, but maybe not.

Which was more based, Cliff stomping on heads or Rick pulling out the flamethrower?

Attached: 6A3B96E5-F15A-4104-AD72-952D67271316.jpg (1592x790, 154K)

Basically just confirms what we already knew: "Non-linear storytelling" has always been a cope for Tarantino not actually being able to make a movie, and brainless eat it up because they like seeing blood splatter everywhere

Yeah but nobody cares that much about sharon tate

>Sharon trying to maintain the high of being a famous actress by constantly listening to music, dancing, going to parties, going to her own movies etc.

I never thought of that, good point

I did not like the movie at all, but those elements were swell and I think show a certain maturity in the way Tarantino directs that wasn't present before. However the usage of music was absolutely horrendous, in comparison.

>i watch movies for the plot

Attached: typical tv poster.jpg (645x729, 64K)

The point is only a woman or a beta faggot would interpret their relationship as Cliff being screwed over, faggot

The conflict was between Rick and whiskey sours.

AHHH PREASE BRAD PITTU STOP IM DISGRACING MY FAMIRY

The frame of the image.

>abusive relationship
Woman and/or retard detected.

But did you enjoy it, OP?

Honestly can't tell if you're actually this dumb or not, these threads bring some absolute retards out of the woodwork.

>excuse
Don't use this word unless you are in an actual position of authority.

Shut the fuck up goober.

Tough to choose, though I guess the flamethrower was less telegraphed, so I'll go with that.

>why was brad pitt unconditionally loving leo when he was being slowly screwed over?
Because he wouldn't have a job

Why would you even watch it? Tarantino hasn't made a good movie since Jackie Brown. Inglorious Bastards was decent, at least.

because it’s an entertaining flick with big stars that isn’t capeshit possibly?

Is it? I've heard nothing but bad things from people who've seen it. I'll never know because I don't watch trash made by trash.

Because it's an epic with an all American masculine hero. But you stick with your Woke pap.

You're so above that trash and totally not insecure that you make trash posts to let everyone know on one of the most trash boards on one of the most trash websites, but you're totally not trash yourself right?

No, I'm pretty much perfect.

It's probably his best movie since Jackie Brown although I'm a bit partial to Hateful Eight's ending and Kill Bill's choreography (bless Yuen Woo-Ping). Also shows a bit of development of his directorial abilities.

I thought the Sharon Tate seeing her own movie scene made her seem extremely self-centered and less likeable.

What a trashy delusion to have.

I'm old, I forget things all the time and I can't even remember what I had for lunch two days ago.

Attached: stannis.png (472x752, 498K)

He didn't get shot or die you dumb fucks. The girl shot straight up into the air, Cliff just passes the fuck out because he was high on LSD and just got stabbed in the leg and is experiencing blood loss.

2 hours of feet would say otherwise.

>why was brad pitt unconditionally loving leo when he was being slowly screwed over?
You're talking about two people in one sentence here, try to be a bit more descriptive, your teacher in september will thank me

That and when Rick loses his shit from the car at the end when theyre getting drunk at his house.
>IT'S A BUNCH OF GODDAMN FUCKING HIPPIES
as he then tells this group of wannabe murderers to gtfo as he chugs from his margarita pitcher. Shit had me howling with laughter.

Is it my mind just wandering off, or is Rick Dalton vaguely based on the career of Jack Nicholson? Latter did get the lead in Chinatown in 1974, which Polanski is director of. During 60's Nicholson mostly played roles of a shady villain in westerns, similar to ones DiCaprio was portaying. I've done zero research on this, this is just an aimless guess.

So did Cliff actually murder his wife and get away with it? They only showed that one boat scene and a couple characters brought it up but it is never mentioned again nor answered. I was waiting for a scene where someone asks Cliff
>so did you actually murder your wife?
>It's funny you mention that, you see...
and then we go off into another scene of how she accidentally died and he got off, but people still think he did it.

My mom thought it was about Clint Eastwood with the whole spaghetti westerns thing

He's not supposed to be Jack. I think this was honestly QT trying to imply Leo could have been a golden age movie star and just as good in Chinatown as Nicholson was. Which is also why I think he photo shopped him into The Great Escape.

That doesn't excuse the fact that you imagine a superficial fleshwound in the hip would be lethal. He was totally fine giving testimony to police and telling Rick to come visit the next day.

You're a fucking retard, he was shot. It's literally impossible to lose enough blood to pass out from the knife wound he had, and LSD doesn't make you pass out. Also if you were to pass out from blood loss, you wouldn't just suddenly wake up and be lucid without receiving a emergency transfusion which Cliff didn't get.
t. EMT but more importantly someone with basic fucking common sense.

>That doesn't excuse the fact that you imagine a superficial fleshwound in the hip would be lethal.
I think you're confusing me with that other user, I never thought he died.

Its a riff on natalie wood. However you feel about that will reflect your feelings on Cliff.

Based and cuckpilled

90% of men in his shoes would have, and the scene was a clear reference to Natalie Wood which is why it was left ambiguous, but I think it's pretty clear he harpooned the cunt "accidentally".

Then why did you respond to my post in the first place grampa?

he never got shot
hope to god I never end up in an ambulance with you taking care of me

>ywn be stuntdouble bro to some rich actor

Attached: 1560357697260.png (657x527, 31K)

That whole scene was cringe. What happened to Reservoir Dogs and Jackie Brown? Why did Tarantino turn into a parody of himself?

Yes he did, stop being an idiot.

>abusive

Attached: 1566345380964.jpg (1920x1040, 584K)

YOU stop being an idiot, people are going to fucking die because of it

>NO U
Hopefully YOU die because of your blatant stupidity. Sure man he never got shot, he just randomly passed out immediately after the gun fired, it was coincidence. I mean his knife wound was superficial and not bleeding much at all, and even though you can lose 15% of your blood with no side effects at all, he clearly just passed out while on a hallucinogenic stimulant known to keep people awake. Genius deduction.

yep, glad an arrogant, poorly educated emotional wreck is in charge of the health and safety of random strangers, and potentially whether I live or die. very reassuring. how is it MY fault that YOU'RE incompetent?

stop responding to bait from literal retards it makes you look double gullible

I've seen it thrice already but i'm waiting for when i see it in 4k blu-ray in my basement theatré to form an opinion.

>throwing all subtlety out the window
Thanks for having no restraint I guess. I thought you were genuinely retarded.

Threads about this movie have hosted some of the dumbest people on Yea Forums, I couldn't be sure if he was baiting or brain damaged until his last shitpost. Guess I got hooked.

thanks for having no concern for the lives of others, and basically being a murderer thanks to your negligence and ineptitude

He probably believed what he was saying until he realized how retarded he sounded and switched to the trolling angle, kids do it all the time to escape shame.

Keep seething until you find a coping mechanism that works. Also dilate and have sex, maybe both at once to save time.

you don't understand what's going on here

Nah I'm not gonna do it, MMmm but if the camera was off I'd be whoopin' your ass up and down the street.

>people responding to shitposts with shitposts
Yeah it takes a higher than average I.Q. to understand shit flinging on Yea Forums.

Women get fooled by toxic relationships every time.

Their relationship was the opposite of toxic, OP is an idiot/woman.