MovieChat Forums > Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood (2019) Discussion > Overrated

Overrated

posted 9 months ago by redban (6318)
22 replies | jump to latest

I heard so much praise about this movie. I finally got around to watching it over 4 years later, in 2024

The movie is gorgeous, with all the 1960 imagery. Pitt and DiCaprio are charismatic as always … but the movie’s plot was weak, there are too many scenes that make me wonder “what was the point” (eg Margot Robbie at the movies), I don’t really know what the hell the purpose of Margot Robbie’s character was, and the ending with the home invasion felt sudden and out of place with the rest of the film

C-

[–] Befus (494) 8 months ago

Yeah I just watched this as well, and the whole time I was thinking "is this going anywhere?". And the home invasion scene at the end was so absurd that I was just sat there chuckling in bewilderment and saying "what the bloody hell am I watching?" It's a movie that takes a freaking long time to say absolutely nothing at all.

[–] spurtle467 (1549) 8 months ago

The film was pretty plotless and boring apart from the scene at the ranch and the ending. Arguably Tarantino's weakest for me. If the next film is his last it might be good timing.

[–] [deleted] 8 months ago

That seems to be a common complaint. My mother didn't like this movie because and I quote "there is no story".

[–] skipper (316) 8 months ago

Are you aware of Sharon Tate’s history? I believe that if a viewer doesn’t know that, then they can’t truly appreciate the movie.

[–] Sparky (2620) 7 months ago

I guess I wonder if they'd think the same thing after reading "Helter Skelter" by Bugliosi. Perhaps they bring up a good point though: what did Sharon have to do with the reality of it all? haha No seriously you hit the nail on the head- knowing what really happened would make all things clear regarding the film. I don't think it takes a high IQ or anything, just knowledge.

[–] Information-Police (4890) 8 months ago

Sharon Tate is Checkov's gun on the wall that never goes off. If you know the history of Manson and the Tate/LaBianca murders, when you see the pregnant Tate, you start fearing that Tarantino is going to show her brutal murder by the end credits. But the events of the film are quite different.

[–] Lucia2016 (617) 8 months ago

It's an idealized Romantic snap shot of Hollywood and the world when it was arguably at it's peak late 60's before it all fell to shit

It's not really about plot but if you really want one then it's Daltons redemption. The film shows how Hollywood disgard of their unwanted Actors and when we meet Dalton he is going through the process. Rather than simply boot out the people they don't want they put them through a degrading drawn out affair where they use the star power to bring on a new studio up and comer similar to WWE

So Dalton has this realisation and after encountering the young girl decides to go down fighting. Leading to him having to really act rather than stand around pretty dressed as a cowboy like he was used to. All of this is fantastically played by Di Caprio in his best ever role IMO.

Then you have Brad Pitt, for as good looking as he is and famous i find his films and his acting rather boring. QT knows exactly how to use him, get your shirt off get those shades on and just look super cools stop pretending your an Actor.

It took me 3 times to like this myself first two went over my head before it clicked. Agree the Margot Robbie scenes are shite but Di Caprio,Pitt, the chemisrty, dialog, sountrack, reacreation of that era and underlying bittersweet message really hit home for me.

You aren't getting films like this again, Movie stars are going extinct proper cinema is going extinct this film feels like a goodbye

[–] stickman38 (3358) 8 months ago

That's a great analysis of the film, Lucia. I agree with everything, except for the Sharon Tate/Margot Robbie scenes. I thought it was a really sweet moment when they showed her doing things that Sharon would have probably done if still alive. It was a great snap shot of Hollywood from a bygone era. The nostalgic feeling of this film is amazing, maybe one of the best I've seen in a movie. I really liked this film a lot.

The Tate scenes almost brought tears to my eyes. lol.. I know, it sounds corny but some movies will have this effect on people. Pitt and Di Caprio are really good in this too. And yep, Pitt is a movie star and not exactly an actor. He's pretty good at 'tough guy' roles though. He was good in that WWII film, Fury. He plays a tank commander and a rather convincing one at that. Have you seen it? It's not exactly a great film in my opinion but it's got some pretty intense battle scenes.

[–] Lucia2016 (617) 8 months ago

The part that always gets me is when the sun is going down and Out of time plays, or it might be California Dream maybe both need to watch it again. It's in one part totally totally Romantic in the shots of the City the style and laid back attitude of Pitt but at same time like the sun is literally going down from that way of life.

The Hippy carefree attitude soon to be replaced by a depressed angry one

No i haven't seen fury War films are my least favourite genre a lot of it is history rewriting propaganda and they are slow and miserable but i did hear it was good. He is great in certain films but when tries to to serious philosophical super deep stuff like Babel and tree of life i think he's wasted

He should be like a Steve Mcqueen

[–] BillySlater (4241) 7 months ago

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought Robbie's character and scenes were completely pointless.

[–] e3e34ifj (1912) 3 months ago

I agreed with you the first time I saw it. but after a few watches I've come around to it more because I think the point was to implant the audience into 1969 Hollywood. not really a flowing narrative or story, just time travel back to better days. in that regard, it's one of the best period pieces ever made.

[–] jriley555 (8204) 3 months ago

Its not over-rated at all. This movie is epic. It's a masterpiece. QT is weaving cultural history/characters/character-types & tropes/the look & feel of a bygone era, a fantasical re-telling of a tragedy in a loving embrace, quite at odds with the ultimate facts.

Nothing about it is pointless, not a single scene. I have the advantage, though, of having lived through it (as a very young person, at the time). Something in our country died in August 1969. it was a rude awakening from a drug-induced, surreal war-induced surreal dream of boundless youth, a free & easy & optimistic country. It marked the beginning of the great reaction.

[–] letess (1563) 3 months ago

I can understand Tarantino creating what-if scenarios to alter outcomes in periods in history like Basterds. It’s kind of invigorating and there’s a thrill in the revolt. But this movie - and I like all the acting - all the characters - but where’s the actual real ending? It’s like showing Taxi Driver and then omitting the ending. It’s a fairy tale with the once upon a time stuff but this should not be a fairy tale. In that category of alluding to similar names, like Once Upon a Time in the West or Once Upon a Time in America - now these two movies are masterpieces. “Something in our country died in August 1969.” Why not show something. I will see this movie again and see if I can like it better - but my first time seeing it - I felt a real letdown. And said - is that all there is. The omission diminishes the movie for me. And yes, I think it’s overrated too.

Actually Fincher’s Mindhunter is more satisfying. Manson was played by Damon Herriman. The same actor Tarantino selected. That simple TV episode with Manson and then Tex Watson was so much more rewarding than Once Upon a Time in Hollywood in telling the story.

[–] jriley555 (8204) 3 months ago

There is no question that this is a pure fantasy, wish fulfillment. Its basically drinking in the fragrance of that era, without the bad after taste, imagining a better outcome, a less lethal world, where the old can gently fold into the new. It is what it is, it doesn't pretend to be anything more than it is. Very similar, in essence, to Django - imagining a happier ending. But its wonderfully entertaining.

QT does, indeed, trade on revenge fantasies, they're his bread and butter. But who doesn't love a good revenge fantasy ?

As far as its being over-rated, that's a term which lends itself to disputation. As an artistic work, I think it is superlative - the main characters were beyond compelling, ironic, pathetic, silly, magnetic. It loves its heroes & hates its villains. That's old school, to the core.

My favorite line : Don't cry in front of the Mexicans.

[–] letess (1563) 3 months ago

I will watch it again. I think knowing that the Cielo Drive murders are not included, I will try not to direct the movie in my mind.

[–] jriley555 (8204) 3 months ago

Will be interested in your take, on second look. :)