Trey_BigTime_Film_Crit

Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood (2019), is not an exploitative crime drama. It subverts the historical trauma of the Sharon Tate murders by not concentrating exclusively on the murders in the final sequences. It could be considered his most sophisticated movie, in fact his coming of age as a filmmaker. So, that really does say a lot for the acclaim inserted into his eight previous works (he says nine, as per Parts 1 & 11 of Kill Bill), it says a lot about the untrained given cart blanche as film critics (now where have I heard that term used in the creative sphere, recently? Hog dam I'm a regular card.) Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood, is not only his best movie but where we should begin this discursive discussion, as many plant their creative critical thinking flag into his other lesser works but let me start with it. I won't even bother with the others, the brainwave of putting the beginning at the end or whatever he was up to in Pulp Fiction and that cringeworthy dance sequence and the twelve year old's dialogue about hamburgers on the continent, just leave me out of it, and the rest are just people talking shit, that comes out of his head, where there is only B grade movie lines contained within. Couple that with derivative steals from Japanese and Spanish cinema and I was never on board; and his colour palette might have been a nod to Almodovar's Kika or Flower of my Secret, but I just saw it as post The Simpsons with the four primary kindergarten colour range, that attracted the fan-club moppets. Tarantino's visual palette borrows the emotional heft and sophistication of Almodóvar, but undercuts it with the playful, often violent, cartoonishness of the made for colour TV 1960s Batman series and The Simpsons type.

The result is visual and tonal dissonance: emotional colours telling serious stories (Revenge! Loss!) and are rendered in a style that reminds us of the fakeness of pop culture violence. This creates a meta-commentary: Kill Bill and Pulp Fiction aren't just about blood and guts - they're about how we consume violence, colour, and storytelling, but Tarantino is a director foremost, his writing lacks depth. It is said he went for a sojourner for six months to Amsterdam and Paris, but the writing observations could be picked up, if you only visited the airport.

What impressed me mostly about Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood, was the mise en scene had finally come together for the filmmaker, and not a jot of stage setting, or homage out of place, (the scene where the camera shoots between the hitchhiker girl's legs a la The Good, The Bad and the Ugly) and at no-time was any actor's credibility out-of-place (we did not need to suspend disbelief which is a sign of the perfect movie, and something very rare.) As well, other flairs of genius was the casting of Brad Pitt and Leonardo di Caprio, as main actor and stunt double, that was enlightened, as I have always seen them as the Bobbsey twins, so to cast them as doppelgangers - inspired!

So, long story short, why would he jump ship on his film career, when he only just got going, or has he revealed his true motivation, and to quote Frank Zappa's shibboleth, "We're Only in it, For the Money."

I was fascinated by this and seeing Sting explain how the song he wrote "I'll Be Watching You." ( He has a whole new take on it, mainly because he would have been pulled up about it being a Stalker's Lament -- if that's a music sub category -- and he now says, it's a song about surveillance and power, yep that's what it's about Mr Sting but don't worry a good back beat can enable any kind of drivel, all in retrospect because I can assure you it never was so, when it was current) How, this guy wrote the highly rated, Fields of Gold is beyond me, I have never seen such a self-serving individual, only possibly John McEnroe. So, there you are another review by a completely unbiased musicologist. I will say having to write 600 characters for this character did make my pithy review rather drawn out.

How it could get 7/10 from the generally misinformed contributors, beggars belief. There is absolutely nothing to watch, just endless stories from wanna be so-called storytellers. So I watched the two series over three nights, with the last episode, Series Two, Episode Six stand-alone on the third night. A completely enthralling entertainment, and I couldn't fault it. The mise en scene was also faultless. Believable sets, believable houses, parks - perfect lighting; with expressive acting, and genuine talent in the cast. Compared to the Aliens on Blue Lights or the endless third scene in, last person on the list, did the deed whodunnits like Vera. No wonder I'm stuck watching old DVDs of The Wire & Curb your Enthusiasm, that I missed when they were current, not believing there was anything around in that era, either. I'll never forget the comment of a person who knew the people that The Godfather was based on, and his conclusion, "they were boring people." This fiction of how charismatic the Mafia are was made up by Hollywood, you would say. That's why I never watched, The Sopranos. On the other hand The Responder, is actually realistic, even though most people wouldn't get that. Beautiful TV drama, and worth the time. Makes the unrealistic fantasy of filling in the nights watching fiction, worthwhile.