July 29, 2019

"Tarantino’s love letter to a lost cinematic age is one that, seemingly without awareness, celebrates white-male stardom (and behind-the-scenes command) at the expense of everyone else."

"... Tarantino delivers a ridiculously white movie, complete with a nasty dose of white resentment.... 'Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood' is a tribute to the people behind the scenes and below the line, the ones who secretly infuse movies with their practical knowledge, life experience, and athletic feats..... Cliff’s unhappy marriage isn’t depicted as a site of conflict but as his endurance of the shrill and belittling rage of a shrew.... The movie’s most prominent female character, Sharon Tate (Robbie), is given even less substance; she is depicted as an ingenuous Barbie doll who ditzily admires herself onscreen.... There’s a peculiar sidebar, when Cliff picks up a teen-age hitchhiker who calls herself Pussycat (Margaret Qualley), who’s actually a member of the Manson Family, and...  when she offers Cliff a blow job—and Cliff distinguishes himself from Hollywood predators by asking her age, demanding to see proof of it on her driver’s license, and gallantly declaring that he doesn’t intend to go to prison for 'poontang.'"

From "Review: Quentin Tarantino’s Obscenely Regressive Vision of the Sixties in 'Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood" by Richard Brody (in The New Yorker).

I haven't seen the movie (yet), but I can't understand the assertion that the director's vision is regressive. Characters do all sorts of things in movies. How do you decide to attribute their failings to the moviemaker? Also, when does a regressive vision become obscene? I guess — as Justice Stewart said about pornography — Richard Brody knows it when he sees it.

Hey! "I know it when I see it" has its own Wikipedia article.
The phrase "I know it when I see it" is a colloquial expression by which a speaker attempts to categorize an observable fact or event, although the category is subjective or lacks clearly defined parameters. The phrase was used in 1964 by United States Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart to describe his threshold test for obscenity in Jacobellis v. Ohio. In explaining why the material at issue in the case was not obscene under the Roth test, and therefore was protected speech that could not be censored, Stewart wrote:
I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["hard-core pornography"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.
I like the "see also" list there. It includes "Duck test":
The duck test is a form of abductive reasoning. This is its usual expression:
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck...
Indiana poet James Whitcomb Riley (1849–1916) may have coined the phrase when he wrote:
When I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck.
A common variation of the wording of the phrase may have originated much later with Emil Mazey, secretary-treasurer of the United Auto Workers, at a labor meeting in 1946 accusing a person of being a communist:
I can't prove you are a Communist. But when I see a bird that quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, has feathers and webbed feet and associates with ducks—I'm certainly going to assume that he is a duck.
The term was later popularized in the United States by Richard Cunningham Patterson Jr., United States ambassador to Guatemala in 1950 during the Cold War, who used the phrase when he accused the Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán government of being Communist. Patterson explained his reasoning as follows:
Suppose you see a bird walking around in a farm yard. This bird has no label that says 'duck'. But the bird certainly looks like a duck. Also, he goes to the pond and you notice that he swims like a duck. Then he opens his beak and quacks like a duck. Well, by this time you have probably reached the conclusion that the bird is a duck, whether he's wearing a label or not....
Douglas Adams parodied this test in his book Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency:
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family Anatidae on our hands....
The Liskov Substitution Principle in computer science is sometimes expressed as a counter-example to the duck test:
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck but it needs batteries, you probably have the wrong abstraction....

118 comments:

Farmer said...

The woke film criticism trend is already tiresome.

Michael K said...

The best movie about old Hollywood was "The Bad and the Beautiful." I understand there was a real problem deciding on a title.

Aunty Trump said...

Great! I can’t wait to see it now. I may take some pharmaceutical grade no-doze, it being three hours long, but great!

Lucid-Ideas said...

Whether they pan a movie or promote a movie, neither side is to be believed. Writing things like this you must entertain the plausibility that it is designed from the outset to cater to conscious or unconscious biases you already have.

Have you considered that the New Yorker wants you - yes you white dude - to see the movie because they anticipate that action as a way for you to say "Haha New Yorker Lol get fucked!"?

Continue to do what you've already been doing. Stop. Seeing. Their. Movies.

They're dead. Their code is hacked (and hackneyed). Tarantino isn't anymore original than any of the other uncreative drivel they've come and gone with. Dude's old. They're old.

My sawbucks shall forever stay in my pocket.

MayBee said...

I love it that Tarantino is in trouble with this reviewer for having Brad Pitt refuse a teen-ager's blow job.

bleh said...

Oh, for fuck's sake.

Aunty Trump said...

"Tarantino isn't anymore original than any of the other uncreative drivel they've come and gone with”

Movies are the fine art of our age. The rest of it has long been destroyed.

"Have you considered that the New Yorker wants you - yes you white dude - to see the movie because they anticipate that action as a way for you to say 'Haha New Yorker Lol get fucked!’?"

Paranoid much? Sure, it could be all double and triple agents and false flags in some meta game, but as long as I am not outright lectured in a movie, I can still enjoy it, writing off the political opinions as coming from people paid to playact.

"My sawbucks shall forever stay in my pocket.”

That’s the real reason why the media don’t care about conservatives. I am not suggesting you change, just pointing it out.

Dave Begley said...

I saw the movie and it isn't that good.

This movie reviewer is deranged. Whiteness has nothing to do with the movie. A Bruce Lee character is in it, so's there's that.

Cliff (Brad Pitt) is not married. He lives in his trailer with his dog. He feeds his dog Wolf's Tooth dog food in two scenes which are way too long. Leonardo's character gets married during the movie.

Brad Pitt was just being prudent and smart asking for that girl's ID.

The only laugh in the movie was when Leo's character used one of those old fashioned ice cube trays with the lever.

I liked the music. No Dylan. A clip from Roger W. Morgan. He worked in Omaha with his Morganizing stunt.

And I know you people are probably getting tired of this, but my "Frankenstein in Love" is way better than QT's script. I was inspired to keep selling my script after seeing this movie.

I'm going to win the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay. You read it here first.

Aunty Trump said...

Refusing a blow job is really really difficult. But I can’t imagine being in a situation where a teenager would offer me one in the first place, but if I looked like Brad Pitt, my guess is that I would have worked out a protocol myself.

MayBee said...

I saw the movie. I loved it.
I almost feel like this person didn't actually see the movie. Sharon Tate doesn't "ditzily" watch her movie. She does what I think most of us imagine we would do if we were just starting out a movie career-- go see it and enjoy the audience's positive response. How is that ditzy?

Sure, the Manson Family was overwhelmingly white and female. That's truth. Does this reviewer wish Tarantino would have celebrated that? Diversified them?
Finally, if Cliff's "marriage" is onscreen more than 15 seconds, it wasn't much more. And it wasn't flattering about the wife, but it was even less flattering about Cliff.

This is ridiculous.

n.n said...

Regressive, progressive, it depends on how its qualified. However, both are monotonic. As for allegations of diversity or color judgment (e.g. racism, sexism), it is more often a projection than a viable accusation, spread through myths and popular culture, exploited for political, social, and economic leverage.

Lindsey said...

I really liked the movie and would see it again. But I also agree with the other comment: the reviewer is deranged.

Aggie said...

Yes, because everything past, present, and future must be seen by everybody through my tiny little astigmatic lens. You simply must get some therapy for my problem, until you understand the importance of my in-the-moment creativity.

Lloyd W. Robertson said...

I liked the movie. In a way it is largely about women. Sharon Tate is thoroughly enjoying the new-found freedom of the 60s. She somehow lives with both ex-boyfriend and husband, honestly tries to find the joy in things, and has great success in doing so. The hits of the day are constantly playing in the movie, often on AM car radios; Sharon dances along as much as possible, dances her way into a party, dances her way into a movie theater where she is going to watch herself. She is very beautiful; I think she captures the sweetness of the flower child, although the real Tate was older than the boomers. The Manson girls (boomers) are in some ways at the opposite extreme. They can play childlike and goofy, because they know men and others like that, but they have exercised their freedom to join Charlie Manson's sick cult, and they do not object to any sickening thing he proposes. This does all say something about the sixties, I believe.

tcrosse said...

The best movie about old Hollywood was "The Bad and the Beautiful."

Ditto.

Kevin said...

I haven't seen the movie (yet), but I can't understand the assertion that the director's vision is regressive.

I’m so old I remember when critics reviewed the moviemaking of the film that was produced, and not the intersectionality they were disappointed wasn’t included.

If you think the next remake of Apollo 13 isn’t going to have three black astronauts, aided by a talented team of recent immigrant engineers who largely solve their predicament by speaking Spanish, you fail to see what Hollywood has become all about.

readering said...

Hard to see the writer director of Jackie brown, Kill Bill 1 and 2 and Django as the creator of a ridiculously white man movie.

readering said...

Reservoir Dogs a white man movie but ....

Bay Area Guy said...

Great scenery and music of LA circa 1969! Special shout out to scenes of "Stan's Donuts" in Westwood (which is still there) and Hamburger Hamlet (which is not).

But the story was just stupid. All gimicky.

Thumbs down, for me.

hawkeyedjb said...

"Obscenely regressive." Huh. A movie about the 60s that's set in the 60s. With white people!

The Mouse that Roared said...

Hold on. Someone is criticizing (insert anything here) as regressive, sexist, racist, or homophobic in/on (insert magazine, newspaper, news channel, social media site here)?

This is so uncommon and the charge is so serious that I am rattled. We need to get to the bottom of this.

hawkeyedjb said...

What's next? A remake of "Midway" with black and hispanic Japanese sailors?

Amadeus 48 said...

Go read John Nolte's review at Breitbart if you are interested in seeing this movie.

Known Unknown said...

Like Tarantino gives a shit. Even if I don’t like all of his movies, I really like him because he loves the entire process of making a movie.


S

robother said...

So, Straight White Male Porn is hard to define, but The Woke know it when they see it? Do they have a raging hard-on against every straight white male they see as they walk out of the theatre?

rcocean said...

brody is an obnoxious jargon-filled writer who constantly sneers at anyone who's not in the "protected classes" and/or lives in NYC. He judges films by his extreme Lefty politics and weirdo cultural beliefs. The actual film is irrelevant. I find him unreadable. Put him back in the 1940s and he'd be writing for the "Daily Worker"

rehajm said...

The movie review is like a Chuck post. Ann you wrote about X but I want to talk about...Why wont you talk about...?

rehajm said...

I mean there's websites that compile what nudie parts are shown in films. Just like there's an audience for that, perhaps the reviewer compiles wokeness for the so inclined, like there's an audience for that.

Fernandistein said...

seemingly without awareness, celebrates white-male stardom

An appropriately aware person would denounce rather then celebrate.

John Borell said...

Tarantino already did a "black" movie - Django Unchained.

Xmas said...

The movie, as a movie, is good. If you remember 60's era television and movies either from either first or re-runs, and how character-actors got used in lots of shows, this movie plays off your nostalgia.

Light Spoilers to follow:


For almost the entire movie, there isn't much violence beyond clips from DiCaprio's character's movies and TV shows plus couple of small 'real' fist fights with Pitt (one funny and one more menacing).

But the last 10 minutes...oof.

The movie ties itself to the Sharon Tate murder and the Manson family-members involved. And, if you've seen 'Inglorious Basterds', you can imagine the sort of vengeance-porn Tarantino would apply to such an event.

Playing off a real-life event and real-life monsters/villains certainly caused me discomfort. Partially, it was from not knowing if or when Tarantino would veer from real-world events. And partially, it was from worry that this portrayal would be disrespectful to the real-life victims and their families. On the fortunate side, Manson only appears briefly (reflecting the real encounter between Tate and Manson months prior to the murders). And the Family is not portrayed in a glamorous manner.

Darrell said...

Tarantino doesn't suck from the cock of the Woke "goddess."

Hence the negative reviews by the shill media.

It's great movie recognizable by people that lived it or remember the time. See it. Enjoy it. You won't see Tate killed. Bernardine Dohrn already got off over that (three fingers stab, stab, stab.)



doctrev said...

John Noble at Breitbart -loved- this movie. I was actually impressed at how hard he was willing to go to the mattresses for the film. Personally, Tarantino's messed up relationship with Uma Thurman and his obeisance to Weinstein makes me want to give this a miss. Do the right thing, Quentin, and call that bastard out. I'll happily buy two tickets then.

bagoh20 said...

We really have gotten to the place in our culture where most opinion is entirely predictable, especially among those who do it for a living. You have a clientele ,and you tell them what they want to hear while trying your darnedest to sound smart so you get invited to stuff. This was written party out of fear and partly out of greed. Greedy and scared is a tough row to ho. (not a typo)

Darrell said...

Uma Thurman and Tarantino are friends again.

MayBee said...

Thurman's daughter is in the movie.

Ice Nine said...

>>"Tarantino delivers a ridiculously white movie"<<

Is there something wrong with "white" movies? Wasn't Hollywood of that era largely a White thing? Weren't all of the players in the Manson saga white? This writer seems to not like those facts.

He also seems to think that Tarantino should have made his movie about life in Hollywood of the 60's about life outside Hollywood of the 60's. Dude, make your own movie.

And he apparently doesn't like people in movies talking exactly like real people do. Quentin does like that. Dude, make your own movie.

Nonapod said...

I haven't yet seen it, but here's a different take on the Sharon Tate character:

In OUATIH, we watch her watch these two scenes (and also flash back to Bruce Lee giving her martial arts training for the role). While watching herself up on the big screen, she's sitting front and center on our big screen (maybe in 70mm, if you see it right), wearing a big grin on her face as she revels in the crowd's reactions.

It's a monumental moment because it re-humanizes Tate, who for so long has been nothing but a symbol of a grisly set of killings, maybe even a dark punchline. Think of Trent Reznor, who later regretted renting the Tate house to record "The Downward Spiral." After he met Tate's sister, he realized she wasn't "American folklore," but a victim of "serial-killer bullsh*t." But in Tarantino and Robbie's hands, she is warm and lovable.

PM said...

Brody is an identity bean-counter (not 'beaner'). The only surprise: his review didn't contain the usual NYer paragraph starters like "In the Age of Trump..." Anthony Lane is a finer, funnier, far more substantive film critic, which is why Brody never appears in the print version of Remnick's inceasingly shrill rag.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

A movie depicting Hollywood stars in the late 60's didn't depict enough trans people, I guess. Thumbs down.

Kalli Davis said...

All they see is race. I'm really sick of it.

Francisco D said...

If you think the next remake of Apollo 13 isn’t going to have three black astronauts, aided by a talented team of recent immigrant engineers who largely solve their predicament by speaking Spanish, you fail to see what Hollywood has become all about.

Do these people understand that they have made a parody of themselves?

Narr said...

Librarians are taught "Goose, not Waterfowl." I.e. be as precise and unambiguous as possible.

I cherish my Mulholland Drive highlights, but most showbiz and H-wood movies bore me.

Narr
Manson should have been offed in prison about ten minutes after he got there

Known Unknown said...

"Tarantino already did a "black" movie - Django Unchained."

Jackie Brown, too.

Yancey Ward said...

Obviously, Tarantino is a racist- just look at who got fucked in the ass in "Pulp Fiction"?

stlcdr said...

Kevin said...
...
If you think the next remake of Apollo 13 isn’t going to have three black astronauts, ...

7/29/19, 12:25 PM

Exactly was my thought!

Maybe they should also remake the moon landing, too. How about making a civil rights era movie where black and whites are switched. How about MLK was white and shot by a black man...wait, that isn't going to work. Maybe I don't get this 'woke' thing...

eric said...

I saw it and enjoyed it. Even though it didn't have the usual violence and action of a Tarantino film.

Fandor said...

I agree with Michael K and tcrosse that THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL is ONE of the best movies about old Hollywood. However, I would also recommend two others directed by Billy Wilder; SUNSET BLVD and FEDORA. Both star William Holden, who is essentially the same type of character dealing with a reclusive movie star, only one is young and the other old. SUNSET BLVD (1950) was made at the height of Wilder's career while FEDORA (1978) was filmed when his box office appeal was in decline.
All three films are interesting character studies of the people who are larger than life on the screen, their entourage and the hustlers who want to hitch their wagon to a star. The shabby side of Hollywood glitter is on full display with pros like Billy Wilder, Vincente Minnelli directing.
Another good one is IN A LONELY PLACE directed Nicholas Ray. It stars Humphery Bogart and Gloria Graham. Graham is also in The Bad And The Beautiful.

Kevin said...

Shorter review: Acclaimed Writer/Director/Producer of movies where Jews kill Hitler and blacks take revenge on slave owners gets no slack when movie about 1969 Hollywood does not end with the brutal slaughter of white studio executives by migrant film crew workers.

Jack Klompus said...

I wonder how many subscribers to the New Yorker aren't white or have a single non-white person in their phone contacts.

Fandor said...

A sort of sequel to THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL was another Vincente Minnelli/Kirk Douglas collaboration in 1962 entitled
TWO WEEKS IN ANOTHER TOWN. It wasn't well received at the time and I'd only recommend it for the curious. The narrative lacks the impact of The Bad And The Beautiful. It does have some nice locations, Cyd Charisse and Edward G. Robinson.

Music by David Raksin in both films. LOVE IS FOR THE VERY YOUNG from The Bad And Beautiful, the lovely main theme, became a jazz standard.

Temujin said...

Here's another version: Hollywood in Toto

The Left is filled with miserable people who won't be happy even if you follow their thinking. It won't be enough. It'll never be enough for The Miserable Left.

Sebastian said...

"How do you decide to attribute their failings to the moviemaker?"

Step 1: turn prog. Step 2: fight the culture war like a true prog, i.e., 24/7. Step 3: don't let no petty bourgeois white man get away with racist junk.

"Also, when does a regressive vision become obscene?"

Step 4: as soon your prog reviewer and xer fellow progs decide it needs to be vilified, for the greater good.

Anyway, I appreciate Althouse's annoyance, of course, but it is also getting a little stale. Progs don't review or argue or report or do anything else in good faith. So every single g--damn thing can get the same Althousian response.

Darrell said...

Pale, male, and stale.
Respect the narrative!

Roughcoat said...

Saw it over the weekend and liked it. My wife liked it too, especially the scene in which Brad Pitt takes his shirt off.

Roughcoat said...

Movie reviews are bullshit. They're all about the reviewer showing off. "See what a good writer I am? Most reviewers are full of shit. It's a parasitical profession.

Char Char Binks said...

Every movie is ridiculously white, even if no white person is directly involved in its making. Movies wouldn't exist if whites hadn't invented them. Last I checked, Edison and the Lumières were white. I have no patience for any turdhole who complains about that.

Phil said...

You never lived in the streets though you wish you had
Not enough talent to play a guitar
You failed as an artist 'cause you lacked in the confidence
Now you're a critic and you're at the top
(The top of what)
You don't believe what you write
You're and imposter you don't, don't, don't believe what you write

"Imposter", Oingo Boingo

Roughcoat said...

I like white person movies. Maybe, in part, because I'm white. Black person movies generally don't appeal to me. Neither do I like Indian (Bollywood) movies. The Bollywood movies are racist and lack diversity: almost everybody in almost all of them are Indians of the Hindoo persuasion. No white persons. That's racist.

rightguy said...

Brody thinks Tarantino should have adulterated his own movie by being more politically correct, inclusive, and intersectional ? Would he really like to see that movie ?

Bunging political/partisan ideology into a work of art invariably corrupts and devalues it. Social Realist art from the thirties has no value artistically or commercially today. Bob Dylan walked away from the protest movement in 1964 because he realized it was an artistic and intellectual dead end.

Maybe he thinks Tarantino should have done something more woke like Toxic Masculinity.

Marty said...

There seems to be endless unhappiness in Leftyland about everything. What's even more hilarious about this self-imposed emotional state is that the Lefties fervently believe that the government can fix this.

Someone make a movie about this.

narciso said...

I've never seen that one, so it's kind of a bookend with network, re the news business, they say the DiCaprio pitt association is based partially on Reynolds and needhan,

Bilwick said...

A "ridiculously white" movie? The shade of Bruce Lee would beg to differ.

Jeff Brokaw said...

Agree with Roughcoat 2:05 - critics are full of shit nearly 100% of the time, far too focused on providing opinions on this that or the other.

It’s a profession built on judging the creativity of others without creating anything even remotely comparable yourself. Oh, so you spent an hour or two of your life watching (or listening to) what other people have spent years of their lives creating? And then you spent 25 minutes writing about it?

Huh. That’s fascinating. STFU.

Roughcoat said...

The "good" characters are sympathetically portrayed. The Brad Pitt and Leonard DiCaprio characters are decent and likeable. Sharon Tate is sweetly portrayed. The bad guys are really bad and they get what they've got coming. Did I mention I like this movie?

narciso said...

I guess I kind of like parts of inglorious bastards for the same reason, now Christoph waltz, played exactly the kind of unctuous sociopath, that would have ended up in the gehlen org, the core of west german intelligence,

Marty said...

Speaking of Leftyland unhappiness and lunatic trust in government, nice headline in HotAir just now: "Marianne Williamson: We need a Department of Children."

Dave said...

Hi Ann,

I'm wondering if it would be better to bring this new "duck" tag in line with the posts tagged by "ducks". Get them in a row, so to speak.

--Dave

Aunty Trump said...

“The "good" characters are sympathetically portrayed. The Brad Pitt and Leonard DiCaprio characters are decent and likeable. Sharon Tate is sweetly portrayed. The bad guys are really bad and they get what they've got coming. “

So you are saying it’s a Tarantino movie. That’s like saying a Wes Anderson movie is going to be a little bit precious.

Aunty Trump said...

Once you know a critic, even if you disagree with them, they are useful. Like if Mr Great Awokening here praises a movie, I know I can skip it. Like that.

What would be more valuable than a football tout who was wrong 75% of the time? I mean once you figured it out.

whitney said...

I wonder when they'll figure out that all the millennials watching reruns of friends, Seinfeld and other pre-2005 shows are all white millennials who are enjoying seeing a world populated by only mostly white people. It must seem like a dream to them.

Bay Area Guy said...

"Once Upon a Time in the West" -- classic, outstanding, best music, Henry Fonda, Charles Bronson, Jason Robards.

"Once Upon a Time in America -- awesome mob movie, mostly overlooked; Robert De Niro, James Woods, Elizabeth McGovern.

"Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" -- meh.

Jeff Brokaw said...

Just watched the trailer and read Christian Toto’s review - looks good to me, I may have to go see this in the theatre.

libertariansafetyguy said...

Guess everyone forgets Jackie Brown and Django... maybe Tarantino has become unwoke.

chuck said...

The fundamental problem is that it is a movie.

narciso said...

yes, I saw that one, I think Sergio leone could have edited a good half hour forty five minutes out of it, and deniro's character has a certain conceit, was that bill Forsyth's debut film,

I'm Full of Soup said...

I figured this was coming since the movie has to be kinda 100% white....it's a form of MAGA....let's call it MACA ...Make Art Caucasian Again. Heh.

Michael K said...

< Hamburger Hamlet (which is not).

HH had the best onion soup in town. I never had a hamburger there.

Fandor, another good movie about old Hollywood is "Singing in the Rain." More comic but well done.

narciso said...

a more sober look at the period in question, in bastards,


https://bookpage.com/reviews/24108-leila-meacham-dragonfly-fiction#.XT9P8HdFzIU

Kay said...

I didn’t like tarantino’s last one, but this one looks like it would be a lot better. I’m also personally interested in the time period and subject matter.

I'm Full of Soup said...

I'm generally not a big fan of Tarantino films but this one sounds good. I'll go an see it even if the SJW's have already decided it is too white.

I Callahan said...

2 things: First, this article is a good enough reason for me to go and see it. Second, why on God’s green earth do you read that sanctimonious lefty rag? It is easily the most pretentious publication in the US.

Rick said...

I wonder how many subscribers to the New Yorker aren't white or have a single non-white person in their phone contacts.

Be serious, they all have Al Sharpton's number.

Ironclad said...

OMG - how disgraceful to portray an earlier era without woke consciousness! I mean when they remake Birth of A Nation I am certain that there will be a strong female lead of Color showing how a powerful acting statement if you just don't pay attention to the details.

HollyWood in that era was predominantly white actors and anyone that was on 50s TV shows (as was in the movie) would have been a white male. But hey - maybe they wanted another Disney Beauty in the Beast where who knew that 25% of rural 17th Century France were black?

I saw the movie and it's weird with a typical Tarintino ending (the man likes flame throwers), but it IS a fairy tale per the title.

narciso said...

imagine a film in 1969, that tries to capture the environment of 1919, Chinatown in 1975, probably came close relating events from the water wars of the 20s, telescoped a decade into the future,

Leland said...

Grace Randolph had a similar review on YouTube. See did a half-spoiler review, because she realized that many wouldn't understand her criticism of Tarantino without examples from the movie. Mostly she thought it was a good movie except for these issues. Myself, I wasn't interested because I can't see a DiCaprio movie without seeing DiCaprio as himself and not as a character; with the exception of "Catch me if you can", since faking being other people is what his character is doing anyway.

I think Althouse would appreciate Grace's comments about the Tarantino's poor portrayal of women of the era.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

"I wonder how many subscribers to the New Yorker aren't white or have a single non-white person in their phone contacts."

I hate the whole douchey "mic-drop" thing, but that's a mic-drop of a comment. Their little heads would explode in righteous indignation.

Howard said...

It was a very good flic. It was old home week for us Angelenos. Joe Bob says check it out

Michael K said...

I mean when they remake Birth of A Nation I am certain that there will be a strong female lead of Color showing how a powerful acting statement if you just don't pay attention to the details.

I liked the "Robin Hood" made by Ridley Scott, right up to the point that Cate Blanchett donned armor and pretended to be a female knight.

readering said...

Here's a link to the more favorable New Yorker review by Lane:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/08/05/quentin-tarantino-tweaks-history-in-once-upon-a-time-in-hollywood

narciso said...

alan richman, largely stole the show, in that one, but it's academy award, compared to the most recent one with taron Egerton,

Laslo Spatula said...

Howard said...
"It was a very good flic. It was old home week for us Angelenos. Joe Bob says check it out"

Howard: you simply cannot invoke Joe Bob without giving a breast count.

And the number of heads that explode.

I am Laslo.

MayBee said...

OMG - how disgraceful to portray an earlier era without woke consciousness! I mean when they remake Birth of A Nation I am certain that there will be a strong female lead of Color showing how a powerful acting statement if you just don't pay attention to the details.

They did remake Birth of A Nation. It was remade by a black man, and got critical acclaim, until a woman from his college days claimed he had sexually assaulted her and then he was destroyed by everyone. I have never really figured out why they went after him so hard.

libertariansafetyguy said...

I liked the movie. I got lost in the story and that’s always a good thing. The blue sky’s and tan hues are captured beautifully. The dialogue is well done but not as shocking as Pulp Fiction or The Hateful Eight.

DiCaprio’s is amazing in lacking self-confidence. Pitt is great a looking a bit past his prime but not really worried - almost stoic in his lack of ambition. Robbie, to me, was amazing. She captured the wide-eyed optimism that we could make the world a better place of the 60s hurdling toward the Mason Murders. She did more acting with her eyes than anyone else in the movie.

I told my wife afterwards that it seemed like the Manson Murders were a major shock to Tarantino’s youth and he used the best weapon he had against that tragedy, his childhood hero’s from television.

In some ways it reminded me of one of Tarantino’s best movies he wrote (but didn’t direct) in True Romance. Only this time, it was True Bromance.

Howard said...

Blogger Laslo Spatula said...
Howard: you simply cannot invoke Joe Bob without giving a breast count.

And the number of heads that explode.


Guilty

vanderleun said...

Althouse remarks in passing... "I haven't seen the movie (yet),"

Well, if you thirst to see young girls savaged by pit bulls and then blasted in the face with a flamethrower, run don't walk for you thrill.

Fernandistein said...

The blue sky’s and tan hues are captured beautifully.

That's "a thing" they do nowadays, e.g.

The reasons why “Orange and Teal” look is so popular in movies

narciso said...

consider it a preventive revenge fantasy, like 'inglorious bastards'

Howard said...

It's called simultaneous contrast. red-green blue-orange purple-yellow. Artists have been doing it for centuries.

3-digs.

1) K-rails on the Hollywood fwy

2) The cars on Hollywood Blvd were too clean

3) The air was too clear.

narciso said...

manson, and the rest of the family, were not held accountable for what they did (that inspired doehrn and ayers) and later on did the same for Jeffrey McDonald,

readering said...

Will try to see it this week. A friend from back east who visited recently commented after going, where's all the traffic?

Kirk Parker said...

stlcdr,

"Maybe they should also remake the moon landing, too."

They already did that.

Aunty Trump said...

There were something like 170 million people in the US in those days, we have double that now. It was nice when it was less crowded.

PM said...

Met Joe Bob Briggs when we shot some beer spots w/him in Texas. Funny, smart & xlnt company. He had to say '4 stars, Joe Bob says Check it out' over and over until the client shut up. He didn't care. $$ is $$.

rcocean said...

I hope Tarantino is less self-indulgent in this one. After "Jackie Brown" he became too big to edit. Even his best movies like "Inglorius Bestards" are too long and too quirky. At least he's given up acting.

rcocean said...

I just looked up the runtime: 2 hours and 41 minutes. Oy vey! You can be sure at least 30 minutes of that is pure waste. He never knows when its too much. Django had about 100 Killings of which 50 were unnecessary. And did we really need TWO "kill Bill" Movies?

Oh well.

readering said...

I read a criticism that Weinstein rode herd on Tarantino over budgets but his new overseers at Sony gave him carte Blanche.

glacial erratic said...

Honestly, I never understand these comments. America was a white majority country. Why wouldn't they expect whites to be in charge? How is that somehow evil?

veni vidi vici said...

When will people who write dross like this finally fuck off already?

They're already long past their sell-by date FFS.

Gk1 said...

I saw it on Saturday and could tell 10 minutes in that the butt hurt brigade would pan it. It's a Tarantino film for christ sake. Lighten up,Francis.

rhhardin said...

I need to know if it's going to be another morality play movie with stock characters, so much the fad recently, or something interesting to watch.

I hate spending $15 for a flick I bail out of in a few minutes.

rhhardin said...

Inspector Lewis, a Masterpiece Mystery TV series, was good until disc 4 of season 1, when the sidekick came out as ambiguously gay or something and had a psychological crisis and the evildoers were anti-gay. I think that portends that the rest of the series is going to be junk. The writers are out of ideas. Also the bad guys are easy to spot early after that starts.

Aunty Trump said...

“Inspector Lewis, a Masterpiece Mystery TV series, was good until disc 4 of season 1, when the sidekick came out as ambiguously gay or something and had a psychological crisis “

I feel the same way about BoJack Horseman. It was great until the story arc seemed to close naturally, adn the next episode, a character has a very public abortion in a very special episode. It’s almost like “You’re out of ideas? Well we have a whole file cabinet full of propaganda we want to push!"

Chuck said...

Richard Brody is a pretentious idiot. The movie was wonderful, nostalgic, amusing, beautiful to look at.

Aunty Trump said...

“I need to know if it's going to be another morality play movie with stock characters, so much the fad recently, or something interesting to watch.”

It’s almost like the old days in Montreal when some bishop or cardinal would approve the movies that could be shown in the city. When the left threw that off, it wasn’t that they hated the idea, it was that the weren’t in control.

PM said...

AAT:

That's power.
In LA, the Church put out a guide for Catholics titled The Legion of Decency.

Sam L. said...

Why should I believe what's writen in the NEW YORKER?

Narr said...

Lloyd Tilghman Binford was the Chief Censor of Memphis, Tennessee from the 1920s to the 1950s; he was Boss Crump's good buddy, of course, and like him the son of a north Mississippi confederate veteran, who moved to the big city and made a fortune in insurance and real estate. Unlike high church Crump though, Binford was a Baptist.

His board had the job of reviewing and censoring stage plays and movies, which they did with gusto, and to some acclaim or notoriety depending on the observer. Dozens of municipalities in at least seven states (not all in the South) adopted the Binford standard--if the Memphis board didn't approve, neither did they.

Some entertainers flatly refused to play Memphis, while some movies were made with sequences that could be left out (Lena Horne was a particular irritant to the guy) without damage to the plot. He was expert at enforcing "Segregationist Realism" -- even to the point of going after Our Gang for race-mixing.

Faulkner named the Memphis brothel-keeper in "The Reivers," Binford.

Narr
He summered in Europe and owned race horses too