Search
Search results
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jul 27, 2019 (Updated Jul 27, 2019)
Overhyped and disappointed
Contains spoilers, click to show
This review will contain spoilers.... and this is my opinon.
Once upon a time in hollywood is Quentin Tarantino’s ninth film and has a large ensemble cast.
This to me didnt seem like a quentin tarantino film, i mean it had some elements that he does but overall it didnt seem like a tarantino film, it was missing all of elements pervious used in his other films. There are only three storylines in this film. Rick's storyline, Cliff's storyline and Sharon's storyline and thats it. When in reservoir dogs, pulp fiction, jackie brown and four roons their were more than three storylines. Its also missing all the blood and gore like in his other films. Yes that sence at the end, and one of Rick's movies he has a flamflower but thats it. When as the other films that tarantino did had alot of blood and gore and violence and swearing. This movie seemed like it had none of that.
I was very disappointed because iam a huge quentin tarantino fan, i think he is one of the best directors of all time and like his other movies. So i was very excited for this movie and turns out i was very disappointed.
It didnt seem like it was a 2h and 40min movie.
Also lets talk about charles manson and his family throwed into this movie. I thought the movie was going to be about Rick and Cliff invisagating the murder of sharon taron and invisagating the manson family. Their are only three sences that have to do with the manson family.
1. The scene were charles introduces himself to polanski home.
2. When cliff goes to Spahn ranch run by the manson family and thier meanching charlies and cliff should meet him. This sence right here is the best part of the movie. Its myserious, dramatic, you dont know if the family is going to murder cliff or not. So your questioning if thats going to happen. But unfourtaly this sence is only like 5-15 mins long and at no point charles comes. You think something is going to happen than boom sence ends.
3. The end, were some of the manson family are about to kill tate and her friends and then thier try to kill rick and cliff because cliff was mad at them for being hillbillys and being on privite property. Which was like a unexpected turn but why??? Cliff fights them off and kills two of them and then rick kills one with a flameflower.
Thats it, three sences with the manson family and one with charles what a let down.
This whole movie was a let down,
Dakota Fanning, Bruce Dern, Luke Perry , Damian Lewis, Timothy Olyphant and micheal madsen all had one sence and these are big movie stars. To waste all of this talent is sad. Basically most of the supporting cast was wasted and only had one sence.
Also the ending, after rick and cliff fight off some of the manson family, cliff is being taking off to the hostipal and rick finally meets sharon tate then the movie's title comes on and then boom movie off. I thought that cant be it, that wasnt 2h and 40mins. It didnt feel like it, but it was. I thought why are the credits showing. Their should be more, but no the credits are showing.
Once upon a time in hollywood, is alternate timeline movie about the late 1960's in hollywood. But why have the manson family in it when your not going to use them that much. Why develop this alternate storyline, when their is a real life story and your using the real life people in the movie. Stupid it.
I can go on and on how this movie was very disappointed but i think i did this movie its justice.
Overall, once upon a time in hollywood is a very dissappointed movie.
:(
Once upon a time in hollywood is Quentin Tarantino’s ninth film and has a large ensemble cast.
This to me didnt seem like a quentin tarantino film, i mean it had some elements that he does but overall it didnt seem like a tarantino film, it was missing all of elements pervious used in his other films. There are only three storylines in this film. Rick's storyline, Cliff's storyline and Sharon's storyline and thats it. When in reservoir dogs, pulp fiction, jackie brown and four roons their were more than three storylines. Its also missing all the blood and gore like in his other films. Yes that sence at the end, and one of Rick's movies he has a flamflower but thats it. When as the other films that tarantino did had alot of blood and gore and violence and swearing. This movie seemed like it had none of that.
I was very disappointed because iam a huge quentin tarantino fan, i think he is one of the best directors of all time and like his other movies. So i was very excited for this movie and turns out i was very disappointed.
It didnt seem like it was a 2h and 40min movie.
Also lets talk about charles manson and his family throwed into this movie. I thought the movie was going to be about Rick and Cliff invisagating the murder of sharon taron and invisagating the manson family. Their are only three sences that have to do with the manson family.
1. The scene were charles introduces himself to polanski home.
2. When cliff goes to Spahn ranch run by the manson family and thier meanching charlies and cliff should meet him. This sence right here is the best part of the movie. Its myserious, dramatic, you dont know if the family is going to murder cliff or not. So your questioning if thats going to happen. But unfourtaly this sence is only like 5-15 mins long and at no point charles comes. You think something is going to happen than boom sence ends.
3. The end, were some of the manson family are about to kill tate and her friends and then thier try to kill rick and cliff because cliff was mad at them for being hillbillys and being on privite property. Which was like a unexpected turn but why??? Cliff fights them off and kills two of them and then rick kills one with a flameflower.
Thats it, three sences with the manson family and one with charles what a let down.
This whole movie was a let down,
Dakota Fanning, Bruce Dern, Luke Perry , Damian Lewis, Timothy Olyphant and micheal madsen all had one sence and these are big movie stars. To waste all of this talent is sad. Basically most of the supporting cast was wasted and only had one sence.
Also the ending, after rick and cliff fight off some of the manson family, cliff is being taking off to the hostipal and rick finally meets sharon tate then the movie's title comes on and then boom movie off. I thought that cant be it, that wasnt 2h and 40mins. It didnt feel like it, but it was. I thought why are the credits showing. Their should be more, but no the credits are showing.
Once upon a time in hollywood, is alternate timeline movie about the late 1960's in hollywood. But why have the manson family in it when your not going to use them that much. Why develop this alternate storyline, when their is a real life story and your using the real life people in the movie. Stupid it.
I can go on and on how this movie was very disappointed but i think i did this movie its justice.
Overall, once upon a time in hollywood is a very dissappointed movie.
:(
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated From Dusk Till Dawn (1996) in Movies
Jan 23, 2021
From Dusk Till Dawn is a good enough Tarantino/Rodriguez style crime caper for the first hour, carried by its cast and polar opposite characters. On one side of the coin, there's the wholesome Fuller family, played by Harvey Keitel, Juliette Lewis, and Ernest Liu. These characters are the good guys if you will, with just enough development given to be on their team. The other side of the coin serves us the Gecko brothers, played by George Clooney and Quentin Tarantino, two criminals who take the Fullers hostage on their way to Mexico. These two are fucking deplorable, Richie (Tarantino) being a dangerous psychopath with no regard for human life, and Seth (Clooney) just being an arrogant asshat who flits between condemning his brothers behaviour and encouraging it. They're so damn unlikable, but when the five characters are together, it provides us with an electric dynamic, one where they end up depending on eachother to survive.
Other than that, it's good enough. Sure it's stylish, but it's not a scratch on Pulp Fiction or Desperado in what's it's trying to be.
But then the twist kicks in, and Christ does this movie ascend to near greatness. When the Fullers and Geckos arrive in Mexico and head to The Titty Twister bar, shit hits the fan pretty quick, and it goes from good enough crime movie, to all out sticky gross gore filled vampire horror show in seconds. The mix of practical effects and CG is wonderfully balanced, and the aesthetic is hugely reminiscent of Evil Dead II. It's no surprise to see Greg Nicotero among the credits.
This second half is just a whole boat of fun, and is the reason why FDTD is rightly considered a cult classic. Tarantinos screenplay is great (casually ignoring the fact he wrote himself into a scene where he could have Salma Hayeks toes in his mouth) and the addition of actors such as Hayek, Danny Trejo, Cheech Marin, Tom Savini, and Fred Williamson for this tongue-in-cheek, splatter fest of a third act is the cherry on top.
From Dusk Till Dawn is a blast for sure. Its stumbles here and there, but is another fine entry in the Robert Rodriguez catalogue.
Other than that, it's good enough. Sure it's stylish, but it's not a scratch on Pulp Fiction or Desperado in what's it's trying to be.
But then the twist kicks in, and Christ does this movie ascend to near greatness. When the Fullers and Geckos arrive in Mexico and head to The Titty Twister bar, shit hits the fan pretty quick, and it goes from good enough crime movie, to all out sticky gross gore filled vampire horror show in seconds. The mix of practical effects and CG is wonderfully balanced, and the aesthetic is hugely reminiscent of Evil Dead II. It's no surprise to see Greg Nicotero among the credits.
This second half is just a whole boat of fun, and is the reason why FDTD is rightly considered a cult classic. Tarantinos screenplay is great (casually ignoring the fact he wrote himself into a scene where he could have Salma Hayeks toes in his mouth) and the addition of actors such as Hayek, Danny Trejo, Cheech Marin, Tom Savini, and Fred Williamson for this tongue-in-cheek, splatter fest of a third act is the cherry on top.
From Dusk Till Dawn is a blast for sure. Its stumbles here and there, but is another fine entry in the Robert Rodriguez catalogue.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Band a Part (1964) in Movies
Jan 28, 2021
Of all the directors I have flirted with in my opening months with the BFI player, Godard is the one I am finding most accessible and least intimidating. He is the guy whose movies I am most tempted by when I don’t want to think or analyse too much, but simply sit back and enjoy for being cool. I also wanted to see why Quentin Tarantino named his production company after this movie. And now I have seen it his whole oeuvre makes total sense, at last! The exact feel of this Nouvelle Vague cornerstone is exactly what you find in 80% of what Tarantino is trying to do. The plot is incidental, of course. What is happening is only there to pin the characters and quirky dialogue on. Being cool is all. And this mid 60s confection is so cool, so French and so much style over content in the best possible way.
On the surface it is about two dodgy guys who take a shine to a girl and rope her into a heist. But the most memorable moments are the trivialities of them dancing the Maddison in a cafe because they are bored; reading the news aloud from newspapers whilst sat in the woods; driving erratically in a speedy little jalopy with a broken roof; and just making faces at one another as they flirt and express the bittersweet tediousness of being alive. It epitomises the time and place almost more than A Bout de Souffle, and in my opinion is the more mature, more knowing film. Ultimately it means very little, but is impossible not to like. It also sparked a greater interest in Anna Karina as a film icon, being the 2nd film on this list in which she impressed me.
On the surface it is about two dodgy guys who take a shine to a girl and rope her into a heist. But the most memorable moments are the trivialities of them dancing the Maddison in a cafe because they are bored; reading the news aloud from newspapers whilst sat in the woods; driving erratically in a speedy little jalopy with a broken roof; and just making faces at one another as they flirt and express the bittersweet tediousness of being alive. It epitomises the time and place almost more than A Bout de Souffle, and in my opinion is the more mature, more knowing film. Ultimately it means very little, but is impossible not to like. It also sparked a greater interest in Anna Karina as a film icon, being the 2nd film on this list in which she impressed me.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Hateful Eight (2015) in Movies
Aug 30, 2019 (Updated Sep 11, 2019)
A modern masterpiece
Honestly, there is nothing I dislike about the 8th film from Quentin Tarantino. Absolutely nothing.
From the minute The Hateful Eight starts it's meaty runtime, we're treated to some stunning long distance shots. The setting is gorgeous, and every shot in the opening moments has been shot with care.
It's not long until the cast start getting introduced, specifically Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L. Jackson), John Ruth (Kurt Russell), Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh), and Chris Mannix (Walton Goggins), as they all make their way to the town of Red Rock for various reasons.
All four of them are fantastic, as they masterfully work Tarantino's wonderful script. As usual, the dialogue throughout The Hateful Eight is thoroughly engaging, and didn't lose my attention for one second.
On the way there, they stop at an inn to shelter from the violent blizzard - Minnie's Haberdashery - where the rest of the film takes place. It's here we meet Bob (Demián Bichir), Oswald Mobray (Tom Roth), Joe Gabe (Michael Madsen), and General Sandy Smithers (Bruce Dern), rounding out our eight strong cast of hateful characters.
What follows is a dialogue heavy, intense ride as these characters begin to find themselves at odds with each other, revealing hidden secrets along the way, in the aftermath of American Civil War.
It's an intriguing set up that I can't say anymore about without spoiling anything.
It's certainly a film that benefits from knowing nothing about it before going in.
As I said, this is an amazing looking movie, with an extremely solid cast, and a tight and often funny script. The music score is beautiful just to add a lovely finishing touch.
I can't praise this masterpiece enough - Tarantino at his best.
From the minute The Hateful Eight starts it's meaty runtime, we're treated to some stunning long distance shots. The setting is gorgeous, and every shot in the opening moments has been shot with care.
It's not long until the cast start getting introduced, specifically Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L. Jackson), John Ruth (Kurt Russell), Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh), and Chris Mannix (Walton Goggins), as they all make their way to the town of Red Rock for various reasons.
All four of them are fantastic, as they masterfully work Tarantino's wonderful script. As usual, the dialogue throughout The Hateful Eight is thoroughly engaging, and didn't lose my attention for one second.
On the way there, they stop at an inn to shelter from the violent blizzard - Minnie's Haberdashery - where the rest of the film takes place. It's here we meet Bob (Demián Bichir), Oswald Mobray (Tom Roth), Joe Gabe (Michael Madsen), and General Sandy Smithers (Bruce Dern), rounding out our eight strong cast of hateful characters.
What follows is a dialogue heavy, intense ride as these characters begin to find themselves at odds with each other, revealing hidden secrets along the way, in the aftermath of American Civil War.
It's an intriguing set up that I can't say anymore about without spoiling anything.
It's certainly a film that benefits from knowing nothing about it before going in.
As I said, this is an amazing looking movie, with an extremely solid cast, and a tight and often funny script. The music score is beautiful just to add a lovely finishing touch.
I can't praise this masterpiece enough - Tarantino at his best.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Kill Bill: Volume 1 (2003) in Movies
Nov 12, 2020
Bloody Brilliant
A woman seeks revenge on the man that tried to kill her along with his gang of deadly assassins. Director Quentin Tarantino is known for producing masterpieces and this is definitely one of his finest.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Talk about a movie that sucks you in right from the very beginning. The opening scene is jarring and so amazing. I was anxious and excited to see what would happen next.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The cinematic appeal of Kill Bill Volume 1 is out of this world. The fight scenes are shot with flare and an intensity that ramps as each battle works towards the climax. I love how daring Tarantino is, even incorporating animated scenes to flesh out the story. One of my favorite moments is the main character’s final showdown against an assassin shot against the backdrop of a snowy landscape in Japan. It’s so incredibly beautiful, even as droplets of blood spatter against the snow.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
Captivating from beginning to end. This is why we watch movies. There was never a dull moment as intensity lingers around every corner. The entertainment comes from a combination of conflict and sheer originality. As you sit there, you realize you are seeing something you have never seen before. I loved every minute of it.
Memorability: 10
Tarantino operates with the flare of a man who has been there and done that. I appreciate the fact that he’s not afraid to try new things. As a result, we get something new in every single scene. It’s brilliant how all the puzzle pieces come together. We think we are watching something simple and straightforward, but it ends up being amazingly intricate.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
You already know going in there’s going to be a sequel as the title indicates. But this movie wraps up quite nicely with a beautiful cliffhanger that gets you stoked for the sequel. No matter how many times I’ve watched this movie, the ending always pushes me into watching the sequel right after. Not many movies can say that.
Overall: 100
I’m not saying this lightly: Kill Bill Volume 1 is one of the greatest movies ever made. See it. I’ll end it there.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Talk about a movie that sucks you in right from the very beginning. The opening scene is jarring and so amazing. I was anxious and excited to see what would happen next.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The cinematic appeal of Kill Bill Volume 1 is out of this world. The fight scenes are shot with flare and an intensity that ramps as each battle works towards the climax. I love how daring Tarantino is, even incorporating animated scenes to flesh out the story. One of my favorite moments is the main character’s final showdown against an assassin shot against the backdrop of a snowy landscape in Japan. It’s so incredibly beautiful, even as droplets of blood spatter against the snow.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
Captivating from beginning to end. This is why we watch movies. There was never a dull moment as intensity lingers around every corner. The entertainment comes from a combination of conflict and sheer originality. As you sit there, you realize you are seeing something you have never seen before. I loved every minute of it.
Memorability: 10
Tarantino operates with the flare of a man who has been there and done that. I appreciate the fact that he’s not afraid to try new things. As a result, we get something new in every single scene. It’s brilliant how all the puzzle pieces come together. We think we are watching something simple and straightforward, but it ends up being amazingly intricate.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
You already know going in there’s going to be a sequel as the title indicates. But this movie wraps up quite nicely with a beautiful cliffhanger that gets you stoked for the sequel. No matter how many times I’ve watched this movie, the ending always pushes me into watching the sequel right after. Not many movies can say that.
Overall: 100
I’m not saying this lightly: Kill Bill Volume 1 is one of the greatest movies ever made. See it. I’ll end it there.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Fairly Tale In Hollywood But Lacks Finesse And Excitement
Once Upon A Time In Hollywood is a 2019 dramedy (drama/comedy) movie written and directed by Quentin Tarantino and producers David Heyman and Shannon Mcintosh. It was produced by Columbia Pictures, Bona Film Group, Heyday Films, and Visiona Romantica and distributed by Sony Pictures Releasing. The movie stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad, Margot Robbie, Emile Hirsch and Al Pacino.
In 1969 Los Angeles, actor Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his best friend and stunt double Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) navigate their way through an ever changing industry they hardly recognize anymore. Rick laments to Cliff that his career is over, having been the star of Bounty Law a 1950s Western television series and having trouble landing acting jobs as the lead in films. Dalton dreams of befriending actress Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and her husband, director Roman Polanski (Rafal Zawierucha), who are now his neighbors, in order to resurrect his career. Booth, who lives in a trailer with his pitbull, Brandy, relies on Dalton for work because of rumors he killed his wife, and drives Dalton around town and does other odd jobs for him.
This movie was definitely not what I expected from Quentin Tarantino. It was very slow building, and honestly boring in a lot of ways. I kept waiting for something to happen, but half way through the movie, still nothing really did. The acting however was outstanding. Leonardo DiCaprio was excellent as Rick Dalton and Brad Pitt was a charmer, I think this movie was awesome in its portrayal of Hollywood from that time and was almost like a fairy tale about Hollywood in a way. The ending of the movie really didn't fit with the rest of the film and was controversial, but to me it didn't fit because it hyper violent like most of Tarantino's other films. To me the ending kind of saved the movie but I see how to others it didn't go with it. I usually really like Tarantino's films but I didn't particularly like this one altogether. It kind of was a collection of good scenes and acting but didn't deliver on an actual story that was good or compelling enough for me personally. But then again I didn't like Inglorious Bastards that much, and thought The Hateful 8 could have been better too. But I loved Django Unchained, and the Kill Bill films and pretty much all his other films. So I would give this movie a 6/10, it's above average in a lot of ways but just fell through for me equally in a lot of ways that can't justify a higher rating from me. Maybe it was overrated or over-hyped, or maybe I just had too high of expectations.
In 1969 Los Angeles, actor Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his best friend and stunt double Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) navigate their way through an ever changing industry they hardly recognize anymore. Rick laments to Cliff that his career is over, having been the star of Bounty Law a 1950s Western television series and having trouble landing acting jobs as the lead in films. Dalton dreams of befriending actress Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and her husband, director Roman Polanski (Rafal Zawierucha), who are now his neighbors, in order to resurrect his career. Booth, who lives in a trailer with his pitbull, Brandy, relies on Dalton for work because of rumors he killed his wife, and drives Dalton around town and does other odd jobs for him.
This movie was definitely not what I expected from Quentin Tarantino. It was very slow building, and honestly boring in a lot of ways. I kept waiting for something to happen, but half way through the movie, still nothing really did. The acting however was outstanding. Leonardo DiCaprio was excellent as Rick Dalton and Brad Pitt was a charmer, I think this movie was awesome in its portrayal of Hollywood from that time and was almost like a fairy tale about Hollywood in a way. The ending of the movie really didn't fit with the rest of the film and was controversial, but to me it didn't fit because it hyper violent like most of Tarantino's other films. To me the ending kind of saved the movie but I see how to others it didn't go with it. I usually really like Tarantino's films but I didn't particularly like this one altogether. It kind of was a collection of good scenes and acting but didn't deliver on an actual story that was good or compelling enough for me personally. But then again I didn't like Inglorious Bastards that much, and thought The Hateful 8 could have been better too. But I loved Django Unchained, and the Kill Bill films and pretty much all his other films. So I would give this movie a 6/10, it's above average in a lot of ways but just fell through for me equally in a lot of ways that can't justify a higher rating from me. Maybe it was overrated or over-hyped, or maybe I just had too high of expectations.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Harder They Fall (2021) in Movies
Nov 13, 2021
Terrific Ending
I am a “bitter-ender”, I will stay until the end of a Sporting Event or a Movie in the hopes that something interesting will happen.
And, in the case of the Netflix Original Film THE HARDER THEY FALL, I was rewarded for my patience.
Based on real-life African-American characters - and with an All-Black Cast - THE HARDER THEY FALL tells the tale of 2 rival gangs in the “Old West” (circa 1880 or so) as they rob, cheat, outsmart and kill each other.
This 2 1/2 hour epic has 2 distinct parts. The first 2 hours is all set up. A film that looks like a pale imitation of a Quentin Tarantino film by Writer/Director Jaymes Samuel (best known as collaborating with Baz Luhrman and Jay Z on the soundtrack for THE GREAT GATSBY). He is clearly influenced by Tarantno and tries to mimic Tarantino’s style - and, like most imitators - falls short mainly because he focused on the style and not the substance of what Tarantino does.
He populates this film with some of the finest Black Actors working today - Idris Elba, DelRoy Lindo, Jonathan Majors, Lakeith Stanfield and Zazie Bettz are all underutilized during the first 2 hours of this film and I had myself wondering why they agreed to do this film.
And then came the last 1/2 hour.
The final portion of THE HARDER THEY FALL is about as good a piece of film-making that you will see, with the showdown between the 2 rival gangs really paying off and Majors, Lindo and Elba (especially) finally get their chance to shine - and answers the question as to why these fine performers were in this film. It’s as if Samuels had a great ending in mind and patched together a film (and plot) that would get the characters to that point.
And then there is the case of Regina King - who was acting in a different kind of film all along. She reigns in this film like a true MOVIE STAR, commanding the screen - and your attention - whenever she shows up. She has a wonderful monologue in the underwhelming first 2 hours of this film - that is worthy of Tarantino - and shows why King is undeniably a MOVIE STAR. This monologue alone almost makes the first 2 hours bearable.
You will have a conundrum when contemplating seeing THE HARDER THEY FALL. Will you be willing to sit through 2 hours of a B- film (a “C” film, if it wasn’t for King) to, finally, be rewarded with an A+ ending?
The choice is yours.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And, in the case of the Netflix Original Film THE HARDER THEY FALL, I was rewarded for my patience.
Based on real-life African-American characters - and with an All-Black Cast - THE HARDER THEY FALL tells the tale of 2 rival gangs in the “Old West” (circa 1880 or so) as they rob, cheat, outsmart and kill each other.
This 2 1/2 hour epic has 2 distinct parts. The first 2 hours is all set up. A film that looks like a pale imitation of a Quentin Tarantino film by Writer/Director Jaymes Samuel (best known as collaborating with Baz Luhrman and Jay Z on the soundtrack for THE GREAT GATSBY). He is clearly influenced by Tarantno and tries to mimic Tarantino’s style - and, like most imitators - falls short mainly because he focused on the style and not the substance of what Tarantino does.
He populates this film with some of the finest Black Actors working today - Idris Elba, DelRoy Lindo, Jonathan Majors, Lakeith Stanfield and Zazie Bettz are all underutilized during the first 2 hours of this film and I had myself wondering why they agreed to do this film.
And then came the last 1/2 hour.
The final portion of THE HARDER THEY FALL is about as good a piece of film-making that you will see, with the showdown between the 2 rival gangs really paying off and Majors, Lindo and Elba (especially) finally get their chance to shine - and answers the question as to why these fine performers were in this film. It’s as if Samuels had a great ending in mind and patched together a film (and plot) that would get the characters to that point.
And then there is the case of Regina King - who was acting in a different kind of film all along. She reigns in this film like a true MOVIE STAR, commanding the screen - and your attention - whenever she shows up. She has a wonderful monologue in the underwhelming first 2 hours of this film - that is worthy of Tarantino - and shows why King is undeniably a MOVIE STAR. This monologue alone almost makes the first 2 hours bearable.
You will have a conundrum when contemplating seeing THE HARDER THEY FALL. Will you be willing to sit through 2 hours of a B- film (a “C” film, if it wasn’t for King) to, finally, be rewarded with an A+ ending?
The choice is yours.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Inglourious Basterds (2009) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019 (Updated Jun 22, 2019)
It's the middle of World War II and France is overrun with Nazis. A group of Jewish-American soldiers is making a name for themselves as, "The Basterds," as they have the full intention of scalping each and every Nazi involved in the Third Reich. The Basterds soon become a real nuisance to The Fuhrer as their reputation strengthens and fear spreads like wildfire amongst the Nazis. Shosanna Dreyfus, a French-Jew whose family was killed by the Nazis, now owns a movie theater that catches the eye of Joseph Goebbels and his new film. The smaller, more private theater gets handpicked by Fredrick Zoller, a Nazi war hero and star of Goebbels film Nation's Pride, for the premiere of his new film. As the premiere becomes an intimate gathering of the Nazis, including the most important people of the Third Reich, The Basterds realize this may be their chance to end this war once and for all.
Inglourious Basterds had the potential to be one of the greatest films of the year. It's the first full-length film from Quentin Tarantino since Death Proof and his films from the past 12 years have escalated him into being one of the most well-respected filmmakers of our time. That along with an incredibly strong cast led by Brad Pitt and the fact that the film took place during World War II had me incredibly excited for the film. I'm a fairly big admirer of most of Tarantino's previous works and there's something about World War II and Nazis that I've always found fascinating. The final product was still good, but just didn't wind up meeting my expectations.
The concept of Inglourious Basterds is rather ingenious. A group of Jewish-Americans coming together and killing as many Nazis as they can. An ultimate form of revenge. Not only that, but an incredible sense of satisfaction washes over them while they partake in it. It's great and is pulled off rather flawlessly when we actually get to see The Basterds in action. As much as I love Tarantino's dialogue, it just seemed like the majority of the film was spent waiting around and talking about what was actually going to happen. Significant events still took place, but there's really only three or four scenes that come to mind that you could label as being exciting. Whether the film needed more of that is fully up to the viewer, but I'm under the impression that the film was a bit lacking in that department. Something else that should be mentioned, the film is not historically accurate. It's more of a World War II set in the Tarantino-verse kind of deal and is more of an alternate universe. Knowing that before seeing the movie helped a great deal in enjoying the film a bit more.
As enjoyable as Brad Pitt's performance as Lt. Aldo Raine was, I believe the real performance worth noting is Christoph Waltz's portrayal of Col. Hans Landa. He's somehow able to walk the thin line between being polite and charming to being a frightening lunatic rather flawlessly. Even as he closes in on The Basterds and their plans, he still manages to steal most of the scenes he's in (the discussion about comparing Jews to rats at the beginning of the film, the "That's-a-bingo!" conversation with Aldo, etc). Landa is just an incredible detective with a marvelous personality that might just be one of the greatest characters Tarantino has ever written.
Inglourious Basterds is an extremely solid effort from Tarantino. The dialogue is definitely up to Tarantino's standard greatness, the performances are quite incredible, and the story is an entertaining one even with it straying away from what actually happened during that time period. It's just a shame it didn't meet the expectations I had based on the trailers and how much I enjoyed the past few Tarantino films. The hard hitting action scenes are magnificent, but it felt like there were too few and far between. The best suggestion I could give would be to go into the film expecting nothing and I think you'll walk away satisfied.
Inglourious Basterds had the potential to be one of the greatest films of the year. It's the first full-length film from Quentin Tarantino since Death Proof and his films from the past 12 years have escalated him into being one of the most well-respected filmmakers of our time. That along with an incredibly strong cast led by Brad Pitt and the fact that the film took place during World War II had me incredibly excited for the film. I'm a fairly big admirer of most of Tarantino's previous works and there's something about World War II and Nazis that I've always found fascinating. The final product was still good, but just didn't wind up meeting my expectations.
The concept of Inglourious Basterds is rather ingenious. A group of Jewish-Americans coming together and killing as many Nazis as they can. An ultimate form of revenge. Not only that, but an incredible sense of satisfaction washes over them while they partake in it. It's great and is pulled off rather flawlessly when we actually get to see The Basterds in action. As much as I love Tarantino's dialogue, it just seemed like the majority of the film was spent waiting around and talking about what was actually going to happen. Significant events still took place, but there's really only three or four scenes that come to mind that you could label as being exciting. Whether the film needed more of that is fully up to the viewer, but I'm under the impression that the film was a bit lacking in that department. Something else that should be mentioned, the film is not historically accurate. It's more of a World War II set in the Tarantino-verse kind of deal and is more of an alternate universe. Knowing that before seeing the movie helped a great deal in enjoying the film a bit more.
As enjoyable as Brad Pitt's performance as Lt. Aldo Raine was, I believe the real performance worth noting is Christoph Waltz's portrayal of Col. Hans Landa. He's somehow able to walk the thin line between being polite and charming to being a frightening lunatic rather flawlessly. Even as he closes in on The Basterds and their plans, he still manages to steal most of the scenes he's in (the discussion about comparing Jews to rats at the beginning of the film, the "That's-a-bingo!" conversation with Aldo, etc). Landa is just an incredible detective with a marvelous personality that might just be one of the greatest characters Tarantino has ever written.
Inglourious Basterds is an extremely solid effort from Tarantino. The dialogue is definitely up to Tarantino's standard greatness, the performances are quite incredible, and the story is an entertaining one even with it straying away from what actually happened during that time period. It's just a shame it didn't meet the expectations I had based on the trailers and how much I enjoyed the past few Tarantino films. The hard hitting action scenes are magnificent, but it felt like there were too few and far between. The best suggestion I could give would be to go into the film expecting nothing and I think you'll walk away satisfied.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Director Quentin Tarantino is well known for his language and excessive violence-based movies. All one needs to do is look at some of his earlier works such as Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction to really get an understanding of how over-the-top they really can be. So, when I saw the initial previews for his latest dramatic comedy Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, I wasn’t sure what to expect. This only fueled the expectation and interest I had going into the film.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood takes place in 1969 near the end of the golden age of Hollywood. Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) is an aging star of Westerns trying to desperately remain relevant in a world that considers those even in their 30’s as ancient, much like the black and white film common even to that day. His stuntman and best friend Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) is happy to go along for the ride. More of an assistant and better known as the man who got away with killing his own wife, Cliff is content with his role in the world and isn’t looking for the next big break.
You can’t have a Hollywood story in 1969 without involving one of the most brutal murders of the time, that of Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and the now infamous Charles Manson and his “family”. A dark cloud that would leave a lasting mark on Hollywood itself. Their presence reminds us of the chilling reality to the evil that is lurking just outside the amazing set pieces and bright lights of the city itself.
Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio do a phenomenal job as one would expect. It’s always interesting to watch a movie where the actor is portraying another character in an entirely different movie and Leonardo delivers in spades. Brad Pitt brings his usual lovable charm to the otherwise tough persona as Cliff, the dog loving, Bruce Lee ass kicking sidekick. The chemistry between the two is undeniable, displaying both touching and comedic undertones throughout. It’s almost surreal to think that they are portraying characters that do represent themselves in the real world. It’s hard not to make the comparison of Brad and Leo to their onscreen characters, as aging stars wondering what the future holds for them.
Tarantino does a marvelous job of transporting his viewers back to 1969. Everything from episodes of old television shows, to advertisements on the street envelop the viewers in the tie-dyed/hippy reality of what the 60’s was. It’s hard not to be impressed with the cinematography that has been so lavishly recreated before us. The streets, the cars, even the film itself all take their cues from the time period. Car scenes are shot with laughably fake backdrops at times to remind us exactly the types of effects that went into filming back in the day. It’s a mix of old school and new school filming that takes you from one reality and places you in another. Tarantino does his best to make the audience more than spectators to what is developing on screen and instead as active participants.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is a fairytale of sorts, of what made Hollywood so special back in the 60’s. It lacks much of the brutal nature that has become second nature to Tarantino films, and those who are going to see it for its brutality will likely be very disappointed. It’s a film that is incredibly difficult to talk about without spoilers, because outside the general plot synopsis the viewer is left with more questions than answers. The film is long, coming in at two hours and forty minutes, and there are scenes that tend to drag on a little longer than necessary. Thankfully though, Tarantino has weaved a story of what was and what could have been, if Rick and Cliff both had existed…Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
4 out of 5 stars
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood takes place in 1969 near the end of the golden age of Hollywood. Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) is an aging star of Westerns trying to desperately remain relevant in a world that considers those even in their 30’s as ancient, much like the black and white film common even to that day. His stuntman and best friend Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) is happy to go along for the ride. More of an assistant and better known as the man who got away with killing his own wife, Cliff is content with his role in the world and isn’t looking for the next big break.
You can’t have a Hollywood story in 1969 without involving one of the most brutal murders of the time, that of Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and the now infamous Charles Manson and his “family”. A dark cloud that would leave a lasting mark on Hollywood itself. Their presence reminds us of the chilling reality to the evil that is lurking just outside the amazing set pieces and bright lights of the city itself.
Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio do a phenomenal job as one would expect. It’s always interesting to watch a movie where the actor is portraying another character in an entirely different movie and Leonardo delivers in spades. Brad Pitt brings his usual lovable charm to the otherwise tough persona as Cliff, the dog loving, Bruce Lee ass kicking sidekick. The chemistry between the two is undeniable, displaying both touching and comedic undertones throughout. It’s almost surreal to think that they are portraying characters that do represent themselves in the real world. It’s hard not to make the comparison of Brad and Leo to their onscreen characters, as aging stars wondering what the future holds for them.
Tarantino does a marvelous job of transporting his viewers back to 1969. Everything from episodes of old television shows, to advertisements on the street envelop the viewers in the tie-dyed/hippy reality of what the 60’s was. It’s hard not to be impressed with the cinematography that has been so lavishly recreated before us. The streets, the cars, even the film itself all take their cues from the time period. Car scenes are shot with laughably fake backdrops at times to remind us exactly the types of effects that went into filming back in the day. It’s a mix of old school and new school filming that takes you from one reality and places you in another. Tarantino does his best to make the audience more than spectators to what is developing on screen and instead as active participants.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is a fairytale of sorts, of what made Hollywood so special back in the 60’s. It lacks much of the brutal nature that has become second nature to Tarantino films, and those who are going to see it for its brutality will likely be very disappointed. It’s a film that is incredibly difficult to talk about without spoilers, because outside the general plot synopsis the viewer is left with more questions than answers. The film is long, coming in at two hours and forty minutes, and there are scenes that tend to drag on a little longer than necessary. Thankfully though, Tarantino has weaved a story of what was and what could have been, if Rick and Cliff both had existed…Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
4 out of 5 stars
Mike Wilder (20 KP) rated True Romance (1993) in Movies
May 30, 2018
I know people that hate this film, but I know far more that love it.
Contains spoilers, click to show
The film was written by Quentin Tarantino, and it really shows with the sharp dialogue and crazy plot. The film centres around Clarence (Christian Slater) who meets and marries Alabama (Patricia Arquette). After Clarence goes to get Alabama's belongings, through a series of mishaps, he ends up with suitcase of coke and they decide to sell it. This leads to a wild adventure involving drug dealers, police and movie executives.
The casting in this film is amazing with Hollywood greats turning up and each one adds something special to the film. But by far the best performance is by Brad Pitt as the roommate of Clarence's friend Dick. He is on screen for a total of about 5 minutes but steals every scene he is in. However every one of the characters in the film brings something special. The performances by Hollywood greats, including Dennis Hopper, Christopher Walken and Gary Oldman all come so close to being over the top, but the incredible script and brilliant directing manage to hold back just enough to stop it going too far.
This film is a true masterpiece where everything just falls in to place. The film is not for the faint of heart though. There are very graphic scenes of violence. One particular scene involving a woman getting severely beaten. The perpetrator definitely gets his comeuppance though. While the violence is very graphic, as with most of Tarantino's films, it is very bloody but also portrayed in a realistic manor. This adds to the shock and also to bring you closer to the victims.
I cannot praise this film enough. It is one of the greats that has been overlooked by many including Hollywood. Almost all of the performances are worthy of Oscar nomination, as with the script. But this film was overlooked by all the major awards.
If you are a fan of Tarantino films, or films with a good cast and great story give this film a try. I know people that hate this film, but I know far more that love it.
The casting in this film is amazing with Hollywood greats turning up and each one adds something special to the film. But by far the best performance is by Brad Pitt as the roommate of Clarence's friend Dick. He is on screen for a total of about 5 minutes but steals every scene he is in. However every one of the characters in the film brings something special. The performances by Hollywood greats, including Dennis Hopper, Christopher Walken and Gary Oldman all come so close to being over the top, but the incredible script and brilliant directing manage to hold back just enough to stop it going too far.
This film is a true masterpiece where everything just falls in to place. The film is not for the faint of heart though. There are very graphic scenes of violence. One particular scene involving a woman getting severely beaten. The perpetrator definitely gets his comeuppance though. While the violence is very graphic, as with most of Tarantino's films, it is very bloody but also portrayed in a realistic manor. This adds to the shock and also to bring you closer to the victims.
I cannot praise this film enough. It is one of the greats that has been overlooked by many including Hollywood. Almost all of the performances are worthy of Oscar nomination, as with the script. But this film was overlooked by all the major awards.
If you are a fan of Tarantino films, or films with a good cast and great story give this film a try. I know people that hate this film, but I know far more that love it.