This movie was very unsatisfying if outright disappointing.
It constantly builds to climaxes that don't eventuate.
There's Bruce Lee, right? So you think to yourself wow there is going to be some amazing fight. But no. There's a 30 second cat fight and then as the real fight is going to begin it gets stopped cold in is tracks by the stunt woman from Death Proof.
It's a QT film about the Tate Murders, so yeah you're thinking Rick and Cliff are going to go on a roaring rampage of revenge against all of Manson's family, right? Nope. They don't even do their murders and they just die in 30 seconds.
The set up with Bruce Lee and Cliff's wife to imply that Cliff is a badass doesn't go anywhere since he is high on acid at the climax and just whistles for his dog to kill everyone. All he does is slam a teenage girl's head into the wall, something anyone could do.
Charles Manson approaches the house? Goes nowhere. Brad at the ranch wanting to see his old friend? Surprise, he's there and in perfect health.
Everything is set up and nothing is delivered on. Expectations subverted. Quentin has finally gone to film school: the Rian Johnson school of filmmaking.
And the worst thing is why the film is set "six months earlier" when it could easily be written to all occur within a few days before the massacre attempt. And literally the only reason is because Quentin wants to show us non-pregnant Sharon Tate. Because apparently pregnant women are ugly. We don't even see her at the end just hear her voice because fuck pregnant bitches am I right?
Which explains the most egregious scene which goes nowhere - Sharon Tate going to the cineplex by herself. Because the entire movie is just an excuse for Quentin to have a couple of feet scenes and and some violence at the end. The rest is filler.
The best things in the film were Julia Butters and Maya Hawke.
>the movie was better in my head brainlet criticism
Julian Moore
OP is not wrong though.
Zachary Cruz
Brainlet is thinking a retard like tarantino has anything to say. He's about as deep as a puddle. Some films that are slow, boring and seemingly pointless are thought provoking. This one isn't.
Zachary Phillips
Oh my God this movie sucked, I only understand marvel flicks.
Tarantino has always done the ecpectation subversion thing, thats all what Pulp Fiction is about. The only difference is that he didnt do it to an innocent childrens franchise.
So to sum up you thought it was disappointing because there wasn't le epic violence at the end?
Camden Murphy
im not jewish enough to like it
Jack Robinson
>There's Bruce Lee, right? So you think to yourself wow there is going to be some amazing fight. But no. There's a 30 second cat fight and then as the real fight is going to begin it gets stopped cold in is tracks by the stunt woman from Death Proof. No. >It's a QT film about the Tate Murders, so yeah you're thinking Rick and Cliff are going to go on a roaring rampage of revenge against all of Manson's family, right? Nope. They don't even do their murders and they just die in 30 seconds. It's about changing Hollywood with the Manson family as a backdrop. >The set up with Bruce Lee and Cliff's wife to imply that Cliff is a badass doesn't go anywhere since he is high on acid at the climax and just whistles for his dog to kill everyone. All he does is slam a teenage girl's head into the wall, something anyone could do. And kills Tex. > Charles Manson approaches the house? Goes nowhere. Agreed, that was pointless. >Brad at the ranch wanting to see his old friend? Surprise, he's there and in perfect health. Spahn is a real life person, that's what it was like in real life. He was taken care of by those hippies. >And the worst thing is why the film is set "six months earlier" when it could easily be written to all occur within a few days before the massacre attempt. So would they shoot all those films in Italy in 3 days or what the fuck? The film is about Leo and his character has a certain arc. >And literally the only reason is because Quentin wants to show us non-pregnant Sharon Tate. Because apparently pregnant women are ugly. We don't even see her at the end just hear her voice because fuck pregnant bitches am I right? She is supposed to be shown as the light that was taken from Hollywood at the time. She represents innocence. He also shows her pregnant and the approach to her character was very respectful. She was shown as a sweet and gentle human being whose life was taken by a bunch of retards.
Aaron Lee
Every scene without Brad Pitt was trash.
Gavin Hernandez
u dont have to write all this shit faggot where do you think you are? the flick was an ode to the 60s by Tarantino thats it. It wasnt a good movie, there wasnt any build up to the climax, the ending was good and the acting was fun. thats all. dont post another imdb review here u retard
Brandon Anderson
>Which explains the most egregious scene which goes nowhere - Sharon Tate going to the cineplex by herself. It was a sweet way of paying her tribute. Seeing that she could make other people laugh etc. >Because the entire movie is just an excuse for Quentin to have a couple of feet scenes and and some violence at the end. The rest is filler. The film is about changing times in Hollywood. If you don't even get basic themes of Tarantino's films whose films usually have none then i don't know what to tell you. You obviously wanted some exploitation schlock that Tarantino is known for. It's not filler. Leo's characters has a arc, so does Pitt and so does Sharon although she is more of a symbol than a character. It's a nice, sweet and ultimately positive hangout film. Probably the most mature film he has ever done, along with Jackie Brown.
David Wilson
fact
Christopher Rivera
You wrote an awful lot for a guy who's entire criticism can be boiled down to "not enough action scenes for me".
Bentley Martinez
the final scene was amazing and i liked the bruce lee, it was a great subversion and a quick and easy way to set up Cliff as a badass
Landon Smith
Charles Manson approaching the house IS the setup for the murders. Quentin just assumed all the viewers knew about. He should have taken zoomers into account and set it up for them
Jonathan Sanders
you are under the age of 18
Dylan Barnes
I'm a zoomer and that scene didn't need to be in the film. You just know that Sharon Tate dies irl, it was kind of a pointless set up.
Logan Hernandez
tell that to OP
Nicholas Walker
>I'm a zoomer time to kys
Liam Roberts
What age range are zoomers?
Benjamin Bell
>Scene from the trailer isn't in the film Am i the only one furious about this?
I wish they played up the stunt double angle a bit. All the cutaways made my think I was watching family guy.
Hunter Collins
Yeah I was kinda surprised too. And it’s not the only one that was cut apparently
Logan Ward
QT literally made this whole movie so he could record margot robbies feet
of course its trash. all his movies are
Cameron King
Not OP but yah. That end scene sucked what little life there was right out of the movie. Beginning to end was the same formula as a found footage movie. >nothing happens for as long as possible >suddenly something happens >movie ends Bravo Tarankino.
Grayson Russell
overrated. idgaf about "muh 60's nostalgia" story was weak af and ending was something a 12 year old can write
