'once upon a time in hollywood' is the worst tarantino film.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 жов 2024
- so many feet...
main channel ➭ / bestdressed
instagram ➭ @best.dressed
shop my thrift finds + presets ➭ www.bestdresse...
twitter ➭ @bestdressed
An in depth movie review of Quentin Tarantino's ninth film, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood starring Margot Robbie, Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, Margaret Qualley, and Margaret Qualley's feet.
F A Q
what’s your name? ashley
what’s your instagram? @best.dressed
how old are you? 21 (born in 1998)
how tall are you? 5'5"
what’s your ethnicity? half british and half burmese
what equipment do you use to film?
➭ main camera: panasonic lumix gh5s (amzn.to/2Nb0W1z)
➭ 12-35mm lens (amzn.to/2JiSrz7)
➭ mic: rode videomic pro+ (amzn.to/2QHfZBU)
➭ vlog camera: canon powershot g7x mark ii (amzn.to/2DfL4cZ)
➭ editing: final cut pro
FTC: Not sponsored.
"I'm coming off so pretentious" hunny you worked for that film degree, you better use it unapologetically
If you have a degree in film it doesn't mean you made a movie and had success with it lolz.
@@iolandahope9766 it does mean you've done your research on a deeper level than the *average* person, though, which is significant.
Iolanda Hope Are you saying only people who have made successful films are qualified to critique movies?
yesss! 100% agree.
Yaaaasss 👏🏼
u should have a segment here or sumn, called “Movie review Monday with Ashley”!! i love you and the way u analyze films!!
Aian Azarcon yes pls!
AGREE!!
YES PLS
That's why she took film in college ily ash
Yes please keep making more!
I never said I wanted to see Bradd Pitt on acid defeating two armed members of the Manson family in hand to hand combat. But I sure wasn’t disappointed.
Thats pretty much all what was intressting about that movie, this is why it is so disapointing
Almost everything else about that movie was boring as hell, i would even say you could cut pretty much anything before the ending and it would have the almost same effect. This movie is a mess.
Same!
I was.
this movie is literally leo dicaprio and brad pitt just driving around hollywood vibing
edit: oh my god it's just a joke. i love this movie and it deserves all the praise. stop being such pretentious babies. learn to joke about the things you like and stop holding things on such high pedestals
and how is that a bad thing?
@@TheDiadara1 nothing wrong with that at all
@@TheDiadara1 it's extremely boring and doesn't do anything to further the plot or even give any emotional payoff to the ending. It had no point.
@@yellinghayfire4935 this is no lord of the rings my dude,you are supposed to enjoy their day to day life and just random scenes,there is art in that,but i guess not for you
One cannot emphasize enough the cultural influence that cars gave Americans in the late 1960's, especially in smog filled cities like Los Angeles. n Especially popular when large, gas guzzling sedans and muscle cars, fueled by lead filled gasoline. During this time, buddies like DiCaprio and Pitt HAD to drive everywhere they went. There as no such thing as calling an Uber for a ride.
Skin looks so glowy plz update on skin care also I love you
*skin car*
Imagine driving a car covered in skin
@@sanriohaechan667 i subbed
Sex can give you a good natural glow like that. (Im making no assumptions about ashleys personal life here)
Anneke V.d. Berg ew that actually disturbed me😬😂😂
directors wasting amazing actresses' talent because they don't know how to write women without sexualising them is my villain origin story
Yeah Tarantino is known for never having made a film with deep, powerful female characters
@@TheLuxma kill bill does a pretty good job at that.
@@TheLuxma Jackie Brown and Kill Bill???
Screenwriters not directors in most cases:)
this is a perfect comment. god-tier.
"it's generally known that Tarantino has a foot fetish..." apparently it's not generally known enough !!! tf !!
Liesel Muñiz 🤣🤣🤣 yea, did not know this. 😑😑😑
Also Sharon Tate was known to never wear shoes and it’s was the 60s so no one wore shoes 🤷🏼♀️
Right? im about to look this up lmfao
It’s almost a running joke in his movies like Kill Bill with Uma Thurman trying to move her toe, or squishing the eyeball, Inglorious Bastards with the the whole Nazi taking off the lady’s shoe, and in Pulp Fiction with Uma Thurman dancing with no shoes and, and of course now in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
Queenie Beanie and are we forgetting arguably the worst.... from dusk till dawn
Quentin Tarantino on why Margot Robbie didn’t have many speaking lines in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood:
“For most of us, if you brought up the name Sharon Tate a year and a half ago, what would you think? Most people would think about the murder. They would think about her as the victim of this horrible crime - one of the ghastliest crimes of the 20th century. So one of the things I’m just really proud of is the fact that I wanted to show her alive, I wanted to show her as a person. I didn’t want to get her involved in a bunch of movie plots or anything like that. I actually liked the idea of just following her during the day as she does her errands - the thing that was robbed from her was living her life.”
“And now, because the movie has played all around the world, when you bring up Sharon Tate, the murder isn’t the first thing people think of. And I’m very, very proud about that. And her family is very, very happy about that too.”
PS. Sharon Tate’s sister was impressed with Margot Robbie’s performance and she even teared up and thought that was exactly how Sharon Tate herself acted in person when she was still alive, she even loaned Sharon’s jewelry and clothing to Margot Robbie to wear while filming.
To some people who didn’t really know much about Sharon Tate other than her murder, it would seem random that it’s just long shots of her doing mundane tasks, but if you’re into the 60’s style and style icons or if you respected Sharon Tate and her movies, you would love the scenes of her just being herself instead of most movies glorifying her death.
Edit: to further explain, in my point of view, the movie was all about nostalgia and evoking a sense of “feeling” to the viewers.
What was it like to follow around a regular human, not some murder victim or a rising star, but just to portray Sharon Tate as any regular person like you and I. It’s too cheesy to make too much sentimentality by giving her too much lines about how much she loved her life, but just show her enjoying life. Simple things like going to the movies, partying, going to the bookstore, driving with a hitchhiker.
Especially now that we’re under quarantine with the coronavirus, these little things really just make you see how Sharon Tate was just like anybody else. Just to go out and have fun or “being normal” and day-to-day activities. That’s the feeling I got from watching Margot Robbie as Sharon Tate, someone just living her life as a regular person. Not how the media always portrayed her before (murder victim or rising star gone too soon)
I think that was the point of the movie to have Sharon Tate not a main character, but to be there to serve a feeling of nostalgia.
Gabriel Divina thanks for this. Very enlightening.
didn't know that, thanks for sharing :)
I hear what you’re saying, but I still would have liked to see a bit more of her character. From what I looked into in the past, I really quite enjoyed the intellect she seemed to possess in her interviews. I think it’s great that it was clearly very meaningful to her sister and obviously more accurate than I would ever know but as an audience member it was odd to me that we only saw the side of her that seemed to be so carefree and unaffected and not the side of her in interviews where there is an evident seriousness to her. I wish she was just given more complexity! Regardless, I was so happy to see that she existed in this fantasy world of never being so tragically murdered. That was a crazy climatic twist. Honestly.
The best way to show her as a living person would be to give her lines and a personality. The film depicted her as a beautuful woman with no substance. Sharon tate is still more famous because of her murder because this characterisation of her left no impression at all.
@@ew3606 Silence is more intelligent way to appreciate her lines would ruin it
oh my god yes i loved this please more. Also you should go back and do film theory on older movies that are deemed 'staples' and break them down.
veryperiwinkle dude yes great idea
Omg yea please do pulp fiction
yes please that would be so great
Ok I want more movie reviews from Ashley pls
I second this! But just warn us before you watch it, so if we haven't already, we could catch up.
Agree! More film reviews please. There aren’t enough young women reviewing old white male movie directors and saying that the show is dull if it’s dull.
Love the honesty.
YES
Its a need
Yes.
I watched this with my boyfriend and I told him before about the Tarantinos feet fetish and he was like Nah that can’t be true. Well after we walked out of the theater... he believed me
Christine Gee literally exact same thing happened with my bf and i
So I'm planning to watch this movie with my wife this weekend... is the post-movie conversation going to involve Tarantino's thing for feet?
The foot thing: QT 's fetish aside, people did walk around with dirty bare feet back then.
Yeah the hippies thought it connected them to mother earth and shoes destroyed that connection.
@@supreme1572 Not only hippies, hindi people too.
So why in movie QT shows only her feet? Why only she walks bare feet?
@@GenWagen Hindi is a language.
Yea, my grandma grew up in the 60s and the 70s and apparently her and her cousin used to go around walking barefoot
MORE MOVIE REVIEWS, I want to start writing movie reviews and this would be really great and helpful
tj weaverling yes! I would definitely watch all of it. She’s so articulate and so smart in her analysis. 10/10 would watch.
The movie did a beautiful way of representing cinema history in a way. I've seen the movie twice and at first I thought the same about Sharon's character. But the second time I saw it, I thought its not what she says, but more what she does. The scene where she goes to the cinema and is like insecure about what the public would think about her film says a lot more about the character than what she says. I enjoyed the movie a lot. The feet were uncomfortable. The ending is amazing! I definitely disagree with the ending not being satisfactory.
His portrayal of Sharon is the most touching thing he has put in any of his films. Dialogue ain't everything!!!
@@defense360 exactly 💛
I tottallly agree with this. Seeing her small expressions in the theatre was literally everything, and seeing her react to how other people were reacting to her in the film was so beautiful to watch
I’m glad you enjoyed it for what it was, instead of nitpicking and expecting more from it. The movie had its flaws, only 1 part to me was “boring”, but everything was shot and told in a way like if you were right there with the characters. Breathing their air and watching them live. It was like we had the camera and we’re just recording them through their day. Their acting was enough to make me feel that way.
@@SugarW1thC0ffee 💛
KSHSHJSAK u called the manson family guys “some hippies”
Yeah I really liked the review but it killed me when she said 'some hippies' because the manson event played a pretty big part in the movie.
To be fair though i only realised it was the mason family waaaaaaay too late in the film. The name charles is the only direct mention apart from sharon tate and if youre not familiar with it, you probably wouldnt know.
jerm bot 😂 oh no
@@annac298 Yeah, this was one of the problems I had with the film. The killers could've been anybody and it wouldn't have mattered because it doesn't explain who they are. I know it's supposed to be a film that honors Sharon Tate and not the Manson family, but why use characters inspired by real life people if you're not going to flesh them out and give the audience more of a sense of why they do what they do. To me, in this film, they were random hippies too.
Wasnt that a reference to the film? In the film they refer to them as hippies in the beginning
This movie was really amazing in a lot of ways but one of it’s biggest flaws is that, like you said, you have to have knowledge on Hollywood history and that time period in order to understand everything and enjoy the movie to it’s fullest. I’ve never heard about Sharon Tate or Charles Manson so my mum had to explain it to me while watching the movie.
Romi how do you not know who Charles Manson is wtf
@@truncatepool5801 Ikr it's like saying " I've never heard of Pablo Escobar or Ted Bundy before"
I agree that everyone shouldve known about these things but in case someone didnt:
The start of the movie shouldve had some opening text that says "Sharon Tate and 4 others were brutally murdered 9th of august 1969 by the Manson family"
I know a lot about Sharon Tate because I spent almost two months going to the library all day and one of those days happened to pick up the book on her by her sister. Except for people obsessed with true crime or the 60s I don’t think many people know about her
wtf bro, how do u not know charles manson!!
A man reviewing films would never apologise for "coming off so pretentious", let alone if they had an actual film degree!!! would love to see more reviews x
Film degrees are useless, tarantino doesn’t have one. PT anderson doesn’t have one, stanley kubrick doesn’t have one. You know who does? Michael Bay
@@datgangshi they are useless when you want to make film yourself, everything depends on your imagination/creativity and that can't really be taught. But when it comes to movie criticism, it is actually very much recommended to know and understand what you are talking about. That is exactly the kind of knowledge a film degree brings.
Liisa Soveur Liisa Soveur may i remind you film critics trashed 2001: a space odyssey when it was first released. And we both know it’s now one of the most innovative films ever. You said it yourself, creativity can’t be thought, so how can they form an opinion on something they cant understand. i think it’s irrelevant to be a critic if you dont have something to show for yourself. It’s just a pretentious word of people
who failed as a director themselves
2DownToThis sexist
@@datgangshiI understand your point of view and I partially agree with it. Let's not forget that the cinema industry is, well, an industry. It is not like other arts, a movie can only be made thanks to a whole team and its only purpose is to be seen by as many people as possible. It is normal to expect people, the public, to express how they feel about it. The cool thing with art is that you express yourself and the ones around you will react. That's why 2001 was first hated by critics. Something new and innovative pretty much always scares people before fascinating them. The thing is: we need critics, professional or not, pretentious or not, failed director or not. I believe it is crucial that we keep on expressing ourselves. We must question our medias and challenge creators. And the ones who become passionate about something will want to know everything. They will want to understand every reference, every part of that subject's history. Owning a film degree means that you've worked hard, you've trained your eyes and your brain, you became sensible to things you probably couldn't have noticed without it. You may not be a director but you've reached a high level of expectations and attention to details, you are able to like or dislike a movie not only based on your personal impressions but also on your understanding of the industry. That's why some people just love Tarantino because it's Tarantino so they love every Tarantino's movie and some have analyzed his movies through an experienced mind. Obviously, lots of critics are pretentious. Lots are bitter cause they never become directors. And some actually chose that profession and genuinely love what they do.
Ashley is that kind of UA-camr I can watch all day, and never get bored of
she's fucking boring. preachy fucking feminist. like brad and leo said. fucking hippies
Lilla Sked everyone has different preferences for entertainment, leave people alone lmao
@@mossybricks8682 no
You must have a VERY low IQ then....
I’m a simple girl....
I see Ashley and I click
you shouldn’t have to do research to enjoy a movie, imagine being told to do that for every movie you watched. just bc your a famous director doesn’t mean you should alienate your audience
bts - snsd - clc mmm I def agree that one shouldn’t have to do research, but a director also shouldn’t have to cater to every person watching, in fact it’s impossible. they create what they’re passionate about and some people will resonate with it and get all the references, and some people won’t, and that’s okay.
once upon a time in hollywood was enjoyable for me but I’m not in love it, but I get why people who know all the references and are into old hollywood would feel great about it.
Lol what? So every film should be direct & void of little known historical references? Film is an art form and definitely does not need to follow rules or cater to a mainstream lazy audience.
I disagree, if you see it from other sides, the filmmakers also have their right to create movie that they want, no need to keep cater to mainstream audience. We already have so many movie like avengers, mission impossible that could be enjoyed without any research. So both sides of movie type already exist its the audience part that need to pick what movie they would enjoy.
I loved this movie. I loved it so much, I saw it two days in a row, but my first reaction was: "How was he allowed to do this?"
I'm glad he was though. And I completely disagree: the artist should be allowed to do what they want as long as they aren't breaking the law. What would be the point of art if it doesn't reflect the vision of its artist?
@bts - snsd - clc I totally disagree. I live in Perú, and I've always loved American movies, but I had to do research for pretty much 75% of all the movies I've EVER watched. Things work very differently in other countries (politics, customs, history, etc), so I often need to research when I watch an American movie, and to me, *Once Upon a Time in Hollywood* is just one from countless other movies I had to research in order to enjoy, and I still loved it (10/10) because I do this all the time. Moreover, I don't think this has anything to do with _alienation._ I loved this movie, and I believe filmmakers have all the right to make their movies that way if necessary.
girl you are GLOWING we need a skin routine asap
skin routine: being single
@@ivannazoee wait did Ashley and her bf broke up?
Ghia Payot yes
@@ivannazoee wait when and where did you know about this???i am confusion
Ghia Payot The most recent video on her main channel addresses the break up!
“Tarantino has overestimated the importance of Hollywood to the rest of the world” really ties up that movie.
I think this is true for all of Tarantino's films. Granted, his other films are not literally set in Hollywood so it's less of a problem.
That was bold
@Droo Bastard Why the hell would you assume I didn't see it? I DID and that's exactly why I'm talking shit.
i dont agree. Hollywood is important to him. He doesn't care about the rest of the world. I feel like people talk about Tarantino before actually understanding him. Hollywood started a lot. people who are ANYTHING now a days can thank Hollywood.
I saw the movie without even knowing it referenced real-life events, and I know nothing about Hollywood. The story was strong by itself, I don't think you need to know anything about Hollywood to enjoy the movie.
Just googled Quentin Tarantino and like honestly he looks like a foot guy.
he has feet close ups in every movie
@@salomew-l3897in Django there are none :) bye
He’s notorious for having a foot fetish like everyone knows he does
@@kungfukaity What's wrong with having fetishes wth
ichlinca lmao I never said anything was wrong with it. I literally just said he’s a known foot fetishist.
You're actually wrong about the roof scene. Charles Manson makes his appearance and there was a flashback memory of Pitt's character and Bruce lee if I remember correctly.
I'm guessing she didnt know a lot about the IRL murders.
@@_mark_3814 yea to u have to have a background knowledge to like the movie ????!how about people who don't live in Hollywood how about the rest of the world. A movie should be for the whole world not just for Hollywood to get an Oscar I feel like this is the whole purpose. This movie sucked my friend actually slept in half of it
Noah Norman Well, maybe don’t watch a movie about a specific historical event setting in a specific cultural context if you don’t care about said event ?
@@noahnorman3737 lol yeah having background knowledge of what the movie is centered around would be super helpful
Noah Norman it’s not like you have to read a book to enjoy the movie but it helps if you have a general idea. Half of this movies is basically about the Manson family leading up to the Tate murders from the perspective of Rick and Cliff, so if you have no idea what either of those are... idk what to tell ya.
i would love love love to see your oscar picks when oscar season gets closer and just more film reviews in general 🥺
YESSSSSSSSSSSSS
the movie has its redundant parts, but I really enjoyed the cinematography. my favorite scene was when all the neon signs started lighting up in the dusk, I'd watch the movie again just for the production design.
hey ashley! please review 'EUPHORIA: as that show is just phenomenal and its so intriguing and intrinsic YOU"LL LOVE IT!
please like so ashley can see this!
Yaaaaaaas
it has amazing cinematography and character development and soundtrack - over all it's just beautiful
Please please pleeeeaase review it!!!
Please please please do!
Y E S
Margot Robbie was playing Sharon Tate as the way Sharon Tate was. Her basic role wasn’t meant to belittle women or the image of Sharon Tate.
Nicole Jarel So Sharon Tate Never spoke and spent 100% of her time giggling? Do you genuinely believe that?
@samira Ansari yes... And she herself even said it
@C W stay fucking mad.
The film was trash. You can legitimately eliminate half the film and it doesn't change anything but Tarantino fanbabies don't want to admit that.
@@midnightswami5582 Yeah, maybe, but she was still a person. I know that there was some stuff written on her about how she was excited to be a mom and stuff. You can still be a very joyful person and have things to say. As someone who has been a fan of her for a very long time, it would've felt nice to have her *really* brought to life on the screen, and not to just have seen her the face we can see her in many of her movies. Since she has passed away, few people have access to the "real" Sharon anymore.
@@thebirdandthecricket u know the sister of sharon tate helped make her character and approved it
Ashley’s coming for my wig with all this quality content
She already snatched mine with her closest basics vid😁
Rightt😍👏🏽
Hahahaha, "quality". Regurgitating modern feminist bullshit & zooming in on interviews trying too hard to show the actors are uncomfortable while they are having a conversation and laughing. Plus implying that 2 grown woman (and very widely known actresses already) felt threatened by Tarantino's power, as if we already didn't know who played Harley fucking Quinn years ago. Ok then...
"he almost killed Uma thurman" BUT Y’*LL AINT READY FOR THAT CONVERSATION
This incident pisses me soo much!!
@@thebookwormsociety_ what happened?!
@@MelissaLynn He forced Uma to drive a car on a rough road inspite of Uma telling him that she doesnt want to do it since it was dangerous and the road was not smooth as told. However she had to do it and it resulted in an accident where she suffered from head and neck injuries.
@kris stacey ????? Whats ur point??
haha 'Y*LL'
this video is the equivalent of swinging a bat at a hornets nest and i love it
"Lonely... but beautiful" is what I hope people describe me as.
Ashley: If you haven't seen the film yet stop watching this video now
Me: *continues watching anyway*
"I would kill to have tarantino's brain"
**instant regret**
Her sister said this in an interview about Sharon’s character:
Debra added that she wished Tarantino had told the story of Tate herself, and not DiCaprio or Pitt’s fictional characters. “I would love to see Margot play [that],” Debra said. “But that was not the movie that Quentin had written, and I knew it and I understood it.”
And it would end up her getting killed, how can a pregnant lady fight off the manson followers.
@@datgangshi it could have been about her but end the way it ended in the actual film
J Conic Did you see the movie and how much the ending defied logic lol, anything would have been possible at that point
@@KG-jd9jw a pregnant woman fending off 3 intruders that had weapons and the element of surprise woulda been dumb.
didnt manson show up during the shirtless brad and dancing margot to see sharons house
And he was reflecting on working in Hollywood during the Bruce Lee scene on the roof and now he's fixing an antenna. AND that scene's purpose is to show that if he's not afraid of Bruce Lee, why in the hell would he be afraid of the Manson family at the end. This lady didn't pay attention to the movie or film school.
Do you hate question marks. That is so stupid? I read your comment like duh duh duh duh duh. Something is wrong with it? Do you see.
Voor Naam this is the internet not english class who cares
@@hollybabyyy Me! And how about a question mark? Just kidding...
@@ninjathrifty2454 period u tell her
I agree that it was his worst film, but I gotta say, that last scene had me shook.
the flamethrower was pretty badass
he smashed that girls face with a can of dog food
georgie armstrong
me : :0000
It was not his worst. If you’ve seen The Hateful Eight then you would not had think of this as his worst. The Hateful Eight was a good movie btw, but this movie would be my pick if I was to choose from the 2.
If you think its his worst film you just havent seen all of them. There's a few real stinkers that even QT will admit werent made well.
I think the extreme violence needed to be isolated though, and that's why I loved the ending. We all know she was brutally murdered along with her friends that night, seeing that potential threat and situation played out away from the focus of her stops people defining her as just a murdered woman. I think the lack of truth in the ending spoke volumes, we know the reality but seeing this universally loved woman given the ending she deserved was beautiful and it left me speechless afterwards. We are left with the image and memory of Robbie's Sharon as the warm life of the party, I felt the ending actually really did pay tribute to her.
Thank you
💯
That was so weird that it was just at the end.. that's probably the only part that made it rated R
Han T thank you! 👏🏻
VagabondsVintage
Minus the several references to sex (especially with the Manson girls), the numerous cussing and the subject at hand.
I agree with a lot of the things you said, especially about male gaze and how the whole feet thing is kinda creepy and weird.
But I have to disagree with you on the depcition of Margot Robbie's Sharon Tate. The whole point of Margot Robbie's character is to create a misdirect where the audience sympathises with her and fears for her, especially when we see how nice she is and how she treats other people (such as the hitchhiker). It creates tension and so when the final scene does happen, it's shocking and almost bittersweet. If you know what actually appened to Sharon Tate and if you understand the true horror behind it, then you feel this big emotional pay off at the end. (Which is kinda Tarentino's fault that you can't really underatand this movie without knowing the history behind it) And yes I agree that a feminist ending of Sharon killing those members of the Manson family would have been awesome but I also think it would have been a bigger insult to her legacy and would really undermine the true tragedy of her murder.
as someone who lives in LA (suburbs but same thing lol) when she said that driving at night is lonely but beautiful bruh u best beLIEVE I felt that
i feel like the tension was supposed to build up by you knowing how things are supposed to happen and everything leading up to that
Envy Unknown yess!! I was on the edge of my seat but everything was also so chill so i was tense to the point where it was frustrating actually
EXACTLY
@@ezgigulec987 yes! Thanks what i liked
I completely agree!
exactly
watching the actress describe how she didn't wanted to show her feet on screen was soooo uncomfortable. Especially when they were talking about him seeing her reaktion as a challenge. You could feel how awkward it was for her just remembering the situation.
It's all voluntary, no one is forcing anyone to do anything or lying about it. Tarantino has a foot fetish, and in most cases the scene is in the script. If you don't want to do it, don't audition and don't appear in the movie.
TheTruthIsRacist You’re being way more dramatic than you’re trying to mock OP into appearing. The actress was clearly recalling how awkward it was for her and Tarantino’s wanting to see her reaction after being asked does imply that he knew that it had a shock value to it that he was willing to take.
Ok.. I’m just gonna say it. People like Tarantino don’t create art for themselves, they create for worldwide audiences. His choice of scenes including feet has nothing to do with his own sexual interests, nor is it personal to the actress involved. They’re simply creating art to be interpreted by millions of other people.
(People love or hate feet, there is equally a reaction from both sides. It’s not rocket science. It’s barely psychology)
Being an actor requires a high level of confidence and versatility and this actress clearly found the moment difficult. In the video she uses the word ‘pornographic’ more than once regarding this scene...there was no nudity involved. This is misinformation. For someone who boasts a film degree and specialized knowledge, it’s sickening to see another person using their power just to mislead people to believe their own ideology.
Give people the truth with cold facts or nothing at all!
@@hugh.munguzs lol get off your high horse you fucking idiot.
@ "notorious" LOL foot fetish is the most common fetish in the world. Literally 85% of men have a fetish for women's feet.
we must protect ashley from the filmbros that are going to find this video
Kaleigh Schaefer opps I guess I’m one of them.. I do disagree with her review 😅😂
OUTIH is driving around doing nothing in Grand Theft Auto then in the last 20 minutes you decide to do a mission.
Sounds like u missed half the movie
Hey Ashley, I know movies are your thing but you should definitely watch Killing Eve
and while you're at it, Fleabag!! 👐
TASTE Phoebe Waller Bridge is a legend
YES TO THIS
yes yes yes
The Brad Pitt rooftop scene was a reference to a Robert Redford film
what's the point on doing a reference only made for hollywood (as she says) and that doesn't serve the movie ??
@@clementinejune835 It serves Tarantino though ;)
You don't have to do a movie where everybody gets everything immediately, Tarantino is a movie lover and has put in these little scenes for people who enjoy discovering the meaning of certain scenes and love movies as much as he does, nothing wrong with doing something not everybody gets I don't know what your problem with that is
But he also introduces Charlie Manson in this scene because he kinda waves at brad Pitt I guess
@@wutanglza1235 it feels like movies are not made for everyone and creates an idea of "elite" (don't know if my point is clear, i don't speak english)
I find what you said about the whole feet thing and the #MeToo movement so interesting and frustrating at the same time
And I do agree on why don't they ask the Director about the point of all the unasked for foot shots instead of asking the actresses to justify them ?
Because Tarantino answered it a million of times, he just wants bizarre trademark shot. Plus all the actors said yes to Tarantino about it. You dont ask why michael bay focuses on butts?
Tarantino has a well known foot fetish. he’s a toe sucker.
Hoe Lander
Or Zack Snyder on up-skirt shots
I hear your points and see you're very passionate about them, so I respect that. However, the movie goes a lot deeper than the points you've made here. The movie, taking place in 1969, is essentially about the end of the 1960s which coincided with the tragic death of Sharon Tate and her friends. Leo's character is an actor who's career is in decline and is almost outdated by the social trends and the 'hippie' culture that arose in the late 60s. Brad's character is his counterpart who though is in a similar position doesn't allow the end of the 60s defy him and is content to where is life is going, keeping Rick's confidence afloat, encouraging him to start a career in spaghetti westerns and finally saving him from the Manson family's attack. Cliff is Rick's stuntman he does the heavy lifting in Rick's life (taking down the killers) and allows Rick to steal the show afterwards (the flamethrower), we see this consistency through the whole film and I think it is carried out with great pay off in the finale. As for Sharon Tate, her character is there as a parallel of Rick's. Tarantino perfectly and delicately depicts her as the joyful rising star that she was. The scene of Sharon in the theatre, listening to people laughing and praising her scene in 'The Wrecking Crew' plays next to Rick's agonising time on set, where he forgets his lines and dramatically comes to terms that he is a failure. I understand you may feel Margot Robbie deserved more stuff to do in the film but I believe Tarantino wrote her character as more of an homage to Sharon Tate in the movie and as an optimistic and inspiring symbol of happiness. Therefore your point on how you would've liked her to take on the Manson Family (not "random hippies") could move into a distressing and disrespectful territory for Tate's family and her legacy. Additionally, it would've been completely out of character for Sharon to begin fighting her killers, making sense that Cliff (a stuntman who proves his skills many time throughout the movie) would be the one to defeat them. Sharon also takes many qualities of the 'hippie' culture in Hollywood (putting her feet up in the theatre) because she was a modern woman who is trendy unlike Rick who feels uncomfortable wearing tassels on his jacket. Tarantino simply uses moments like character's having their feet out to depict the time and especially the Manson family's lifestyle. With that being said, I think it's unfair to throw out allegations the shots of women's feet were shot for Tarantino's sexual desires and for no real purpose merely because you find it offensive that women show their feet in this film, I mean it's just feet. Also, comparing Tarantino to men who have sexually abused women in Hollywood for including these shots of actor's feet is disrespectful and a cheap shot to strengthen your argument about the movie.
I really enjoy the movie and think you get a lot more of Tarantino's genius out of it by looking further into it's context and after multiple viewings. I'd recommend watching it again as I certainly got a lot more out of it which now I think proves it as one of Tarantino's best!
YESSSS thank you for saying all of this!
Ashley LITERALLY says in her video that she knew she was judging it out of context, saying it was a hollywood movie "made for hollywood" because only insiders or people who have knowledge about the subject would really understand the movie's context. Which is what made it not up to par in her judgement, in addition to a bunch of other points.
She also says she understands the motives of why Tarantino depicted Sharon in the way that he did in the movie (ditsy, carefree, happy, regular life) as a homage to her BUT everyone knows that people have more depth than that; it would've been nice if he'd gone a little further in depicting her character.
And the feet thing? They seem completely unnnecessary; you don't need to actually SEE people's feet UP CLOSE to understand if they were barefoot. Just showing the person taking off their shoes or a brief shot would be enough. The main point here is that the emphasis on the feet were excessive to the point that it detracted from whatever message it was supposed to send. It seems rather unnecessary to me. And clearly, the actresses were UNCOMFORTABLE about it and were the ones being questioned rather than Tarantino. It seems obvious to others that those feet shots were... odd, and the ones who had to explain them were the actresses (females) rather than the director himself. So no, it's not "just feet", according to the majority of people. I think that justifies Ashley bringing up the topic of power dynamics in Hollywood which is closely related to sexual abuse.
In the end, I think a movie where you have to look into further context is not one that will be very memorable in the long run. Ashely mentions how the story lacks a "tie" for all the scenes to come together in the end, making a lot of them seem pointless. Like, we get that it is supposed to be a homage to an actress in the past but do you really need to spend so much time depicting their character when there really is no depth besides being happy, optimistic, joyful, etc.?? That is not enough to interest most people no matter how cinemagraphic it is, a good film also needs a good plotline. And most people don't want to have to do research to understand the context, it's too much work. So I think that justifies her rant as well.
I feel the same! And I absolutely love this movie
I completely agree!!
Imma keep it real with you, chief. If you gotta go into that much detail to explain why it's not a bad movie...
When you said “some hippies just decide to murder them” i was like noooo that’s the Manson family: a bunch of psycho hippies
Yeah after I watched the movie my friend said Jesus hippies were crazy I was like nah you can't say all of them just because Charles Manson was sick and she was like who?
Same XD I'm surprised that so many people my age and younger didn't catch that they were part of the Manson family. A lot of millenials seem to not even know who Charles Manson and the Manson Family were, so I think Ashley was right when she said that an older audience can probably enjoy this film more. I liked it, but it's definitely one of my least favorite Tarantino movies.
She probably jumped on the camera to film this “review” without researching about the whole context of the film oof
@@datgangshi The thing is though, you shouldn't have to do research before watching a movie. A movie should explain itself, and not expect everyone to have knowledge on it.
@@cattledogandstaffy actually, in this case you do need to have knowledge about the real events that inspired the movie before you watch it. "a movie should this, a movie should that", it's just wrong to think like that. tarantino made the film with a purpose, and if he explained the entire story of the manson family in the movie so people who don't know about it would understand, it would just ruin it. a lot of movies are made in a way that they don't totally explain themselves and it's okay.
Ashley this video will upset so many black-haired skinny guys who smoke
wow I did not pick up on the foot fetish power dynamic that could be going on between tarantino and the actresses before you said this. Thank you for highlighting that.
Super creepy. And he's not even the worst one.
Don't forget the like 5 scenes of people literally just driving.
Spillage Studios feet and driving 😂
The 60s were the golden era for cars around the world and Tarantino has made those scenes beacuse the whole movie it's a love letter to 1969 L.A. and that city in that year has a lot of good and iconic cars around the streets. If you don´t like it you should take your Prius and get out of here.
driving around in a la with his dad is what he remembers from that time :) its a very personal movie for him
I thought the way he represented bruce lee was kind of odd
Hannah K678 maybe, but it was kinda hilarious
It was actually kinda factual
Regina Rome According to Tarantino, not his close friends or daughter. But of course Tarantino knows Bruce Lee better than his own daughter or his close friends.
@@aliceyhu bruce was sometimes a dick and Tarantino did show that with a bit of parody. But then there is a scene where Bruce is teaching (like in real life) Sharon Tate some martial art moves. He was a bit full of himself becaouse...he was Bruce Lee. But he is not a bad guy in a movie.
@kris stacey Who could kick your ass without breaking a sweat !!!
I had exactly the same thoughts about Margot's character in that although Tarantino was trying to encapsulate the innocence of Tate's life, he ultimately reduced her to a ditzy pretty blonde girl who is eye candy for all the men in hollywood. As bell hooks would say, Margot's primary role in this film was her "too-be-looked-at-ness"
I also had a problem with how Bruce Lee was played as a caricature of his film roles and not actually who he is in real life: a professional and humble guy. No way in hell could Brad Pitt beat Bruce Lee in a fight.
*As a loyal viewer to your channel and a fellow film student, I loved this film review! Pls do more!
my theatre was howling at the bruce lee scene and it made me so uncomfortable. and you could cut out sharon's character/storyline and nothing would have been lost. what a mediocre film.
Bruce lee was actually super full of himself. He wasn’t necessarily a bad person but he was super arrogant irl.
@kris stacey I've read multiple accounts from Lee's family and close friends who were not happy with this portrayal of him as it did not do justice to his professionalism as an actor. He would never have suggested a sparring match on set.
@kris stacey wut
In what ways was she ditzy?
*it’s been said before but I’ll say it again* make👏🏽a👏🏽podcast👏🏽 pleAse i love hearing you talk ab stuff :’)!
This doesn't happen often, but I'm always so glad when it does: I disagreed with a lot of your points, but I had a blast watching it!
And even though I didn't agree with you on a number of things, your critique was intelligent, thoughtful, and witty, and offered a new insight on several aspects of the film.
I will absolutely be subscribing and checking out some more of your content.
Also, I loved seeing someone else who throws their hands around when they talk.
sis your hair looks so damn good here
I was just about to say that 😂
I don’t have a foot fetish or anything but I actually think that Margot Robbie’s feet in the theatre scene is a really good note to her character like it shows how chill and and a lil childish she is and the entire scene were she hears everyone laughing is beautiful she is so proud of her and it’s just great idk
Sacha Saliba exactly! and while she lived this elite life she was perhaps a bit of a hippy too herself
Agree! And her feet are a lil dirty just to show that she’s just down to earth and not fake
Yea you got a foot fetish buddy, all good 👍🏽
Yes! And her sister Debra has said that Sharon loved walking barefoot, even to restaurants.
Metal Monkey failed English well if that’s so funny to you I bet you enjoyed the movie
I'm french so i'm used to the "Boring" kind of scene 😂
It's called Modernistic Movie Style, learned it today.
Ce film était merdique , les film français sont des chefs d'œuvre à côté de ça
@@Den-xb5og Pas tout les films Français
Genre vraiment
Est je n'irai pas jusqu'a dire que c'était de la merde c'est ok.
Your not getting the whole point of the movie it’s literally about the Hollywood lifestyle and Manson murders. It’s referenced to all the Quentin Tarantino movies. At the final part the line “the moment you’ve been waiting for” meaning the moment we’ve been waiting for, the violent part of Quentin movies
@Will Fryer 2 he probably should have gotten some explosions and car wrecks in there so you wouldn't be "bored."
@Will Fryer 2 Transformers was playing at the same time, way fucking better than this.
i thought it was boring for a big part :/ The bromance and the last scene were worth the watch but i expected more
Jaasmin e honestly brad pit was the best part of the movie
Agreed, it drags on for so long until you get to somewhere exciting. The ending and Brad Pitt makes this movie worth watching but the first half is pretty boring.
my thoughts:
this is tarantino’s most chill movie compared to pulp fiction, reservoir dogs, django unchained etc. because it was, what he called it, “his movie”. he wanted to capture the 60s which he remembers very well from his childhood and to him it was more about the mindset and the aesthetic rather than the whole plot, which i do understand. about the feet: tarantino said, it was his movie, and what can you do, the man loves them feet. was i uncomfortable? yes. did it ruin the whole movie? absolutely not. i personally give it a 7/10 because it was indeed an enjoyable movie for me, something i kind of needed after watching all the badass, intense tarantino movies, and i do appreciate the movie very very much for what it is and how it’s created. thank you for reading, goodbye
IluvAmerika i feel the exact same way! i actually really enjoyed it, the aesthetic and the whole homage to the 60’s and to sharon tate and to tarantino’s works. I like that it was a little bit of everything from everything tarantino has done but in a more calm 60s setting. Idk if that makes sense but loved it
also, it was a beautiful homage to sharon...and the ending was pretty hilarious
IluvAmerika no I absolutely agree, it felt like Tarantino’s portrait of the things he loves most about his job. And he ended up casting some of Hollywood’s most talented actors to portray it. The Manson story had a nice twist to it but he didn’t want to distract from everything else so that was just a little tribute to Sharon Tate. I personally thought he should’ve focused on the other storyline and maybe include the Manson family but leave out Sharon Tage entirely. Her character was too huge of a mission to accomplish. Other than that, the movie’s pretty good
i do kind of agree, but i feel like it's lazy to just make a movie for the aesthetic. a good film needs a plot and good characters before a pretty aesthetic or a cute soundtrack. it needs to make you feel or think. i feel like tarantino knows that whatever he puts out there people are going to watch and praise, so he just did whatever he wanted and that's what he got.
IluvAmerika i totally agree with you! It was nice getting to sit in a theatre for a couple of hours and being invited inside of tarantino’s mind. like it’s so pure. after seeing all his movies and the complex plots and twists and everything, you just want to see what’s really inside of his mind. and i think this movie really captures all of his art/inspiration/artistic sense if i may say it that way
Agree partially, wished you would have mentioned the Manson family more bc they obviously weren‘t just a „bunch of hippies“. I personally loved the scenes where you see the girls on the street and the interactions between the one girl and Brad Pitt because you just know the whole time that she‘s part of the Manson family. Also liked that they only showed Charles Manson one time, to me that‘s the ultimate tension build up.
Mila A I don’t think she knew anything about the backstory
Chloe Walker that would be unfortunate bc that‘s kinda the whole point right, no wonder she didn‘t like it
Can I say that, as someone who saw this film and is not from the US, it took me a long time to understand who those guys were. Like, it dawned on me during the movie when their names were dropped, but at the beginning it was very confusing, even though I have heard of the Tate murders.
And I think maybe she felt the same- even if you know the history, of you didn‘t research the film beforehand and already know what it‘s about they do seem like random hippies for most of the movie.
Exactly how did you know they where the Manson family? I didn't know until after the movie and I felt annoyed that the movie expected me to do research in order to enjoy it
It's a bit irritating that you mentioned Brad Pitt's shirtless scene as "pretty nice" but the feet scenes as unjust sexualization of women.
Enoch Bird exactly what I was thinking. It’s just hypocritical. I don’t understand how showing feet is more sexual than a guy shirtless. This is a prime example of “woke culture” in a nutshell. They take a simple ideal with good intentions and radicalize it.
It’s not that it was a sexualization of women, but the actress was clearly uncomfortable with it but had to go along with it. That’s the unjust power dynamic she’s pointing out.
While Pitt did have his shirt off, from my understanding he didn’t have a problem with it.
It’s not black and white, c’mon let’s think a little bit deeper than just seeing what you want to see.
It's hypocrisy. Straight up.
100%, this is dependent on comfort level of the performer. Qualley was vocally uncomfortable with the filming and publishing of her scene. Robbie and Pitt, unknown but consent is key.
For what it's worth, Lindsey Ellis has a fantastic explanation of the male gaze theory in her Transformers series. Highly recommend
@@amnasubhan119 If a role calls for you to be barefoot and you don't want to be, either ask for a stand-in or don't do the role. An artist shouldn't have to change the concept to fit your comfort zone. Now, if he was asking her to do something outrageous or put her safety at risk, like he did to Uma, that's another thing.
SPOILERS
2:15 - that scene builds up to the first glimpse of Charles Manson who talks to Sharon Tates husband, Polanski, and is a foreshadowing of the Manson Family murders... The knowledge of which is a massive tension builder *throughout* the film.
It also actually happened in real life.
Yep, this 'reviewer' doesn't get that though because she doesn't know what she's talking about
Not the 'first' glimpse of charles manson - the ONLY glimpse of charles manson for the rest of the movie pretty much. I knew the real story going in the movie and I still found it boring as hell. If you have seen anything of tarantino, you'd know straight away that the movie isn't going to end like the things happened in real life. So, I still agree with this review. A couple of interesting scenes do not justify another 2 hours of pointlessness. At least in my opinion.
@@aresa8948 yeah even then the build up was for nothing so who cares about the tension when the end of it was just a dud
It blows my mind that some people do not know who Charles Manson is or who Polanski is
No, I think it would extremely disappointing and exploitive to Sharon’s memory, she was 8months pregnant and two weeks due, she freakin begged the Manson family to let her son live.
Iris A.
How
lol @both of your avatars
Buuut he didn't depict her dying. I think that was out of respect. In a perfect world, she'd be alive and the killers would have gotten fucked up. Why make a film just to stroke murderers' cocks...I'm glad he didn't glorify those pieces of shits.
the movie relied far too heavily on Tarantino being the director
SAY IT AGAIN FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK!!!!!!
Literally one of the best movies I've seen in a while, the ending was the most satisfactory ending possible to a movie like this, I enjoyed every bit of it, the deep character portrayel by Leonardo and the badass character Brad Pitt plays, it's just wonderful.
She was too forgiving. This wasn't just Tarantinos worst movie, it was one of the worst movies of the decade. I was shocked not only of how God awful the movie was but that CRITICS LIKED IT. It was 100% made for Hollywood. The majority of the scenes went nowhere, a complete waste of time.
to understand this movie you have to a great grasp on the manson family murders to understand the immense amount of foreshadowing and detail
Yessssss
And also the other inspirations of the time. I watched some commercials and a few westerns that really gave me the history of the time.
Anna Palamountain you also have to have an open mind throughout the whole film because the “boring scenes” usually have an artistic take on it, you know?
@@jess2.039 yes! I actually think this movie is being critized by the wrong things. I think Tarantino's take on the story was about two friends struggling and I think it shows that he wanted to portray the story and dreams that were stolen from Sharon. And I do think there were so many scenes that the movie could be cut out and be perfectly fine without and that Sharon's story could be a little bit more related to Rick and Cliff's storyline but I think we should start criticizing from what the director tried to portray and if he succeed or not and separate our own tastes from the movie itself.
Lina Stardust YES! Thank you. You just completely said everything that I was thinking. I feel like people now a days tend to criticize films too harshly based on their own beliefs system instead how the film was executed, and if it was done well or could have been done better. Like focusing more on how scenes were shot and if the transitions were done smoothly or even the dialogue, was it enough or too much or should they have said this instead of this.
Also think that people are so use to seeing a lot more action from Tarantino’s films and having a balance out dialogue and action sequence, that this film took them completely off guard, which I understand, but then again you need to always have an open mind to every movie you go into because you never know what you will expect.
Wish people saw more of the beauty and artistic side of it instead of the “lack of tension” it had when this was not made to be a suspenseful film.
I could be wrong, but who knows. Sorry for the rant by the way. Just very passionate about movies.
i definitely feel like this was a film that people who didn't do their research on (aka me) would not understand the plot nor appreciate the small "boring" scenes as much as tarantino mean for it to be.
Funny enough, I knew a lot about the manson murders beforehand and I didn't like the movie. Many Scene could have been cut out and it was just boring a lot of the time. Like the whole rick storyline, it was gar too much without any depth.
you shouldn’t have to do research to enjoy a movie
Yeah, and at the end of the day it should come down to picking up the narrative and the allusions directly. I didn't get what tarantino was trying to convey with Sharon Tate's character. I feel like if he wanted to show her as a regular person aside from just a murder victim then you would just devote more of a plot to that.
Because it isint a midwit movie where something has to happen or some plot to exist and be concluded , its slow a burn to appreciate the archetype and live in those times even if only for 2hours. There is not need for any explanation you just understand it and soak it in as you go.
@Will Fryer 2 this is one of the best movies ever made by Q and should have won the academy award. 1917 and this movie are best of the year. Parasite is so horrible.
What? I loved this one! I thought all the „pointless“ scenes painted the characters so well. They gave all the details and backstories to the different sides of the characters. I had so much fun and laughed so hard at the end (even tough it’s actually not funny). The story basically is: how Sharon Tate and Rick Dalton finally met. And everything else just leads up to that.
Julia yeah! It was super cool to see everything finally coming together, and personally I did feel like the last puzzle piece was put into place with that final scene where they meet. And the meandering scenes of each character in their car, or seeing Cliff on the roof, seeing Sharon alone in her house, it let you get to know the characters SO well! Can’t say I approve of the foot fetish move, which was obvious...
i agree ! i loved the cinematography and the 'day in the life' of the characters. i thought the lack of drive for the storylines were really unique and the ending was gold !
these "pointless scenes" actually weren't unimportant. All of these scenes slowly build up and add small details LEADING UP to the end. it's a patient movie. Its not meant to be in your face and for most it will prob take a few watches to get fully into it. Thats why when i see reviews that don't fully understand what He was doing PERTURBES MEEE. That being said its definatley not the BEST tarintino movie but in my opinion one of my personal favs.
She might be too young to appreciate the "slowness of a movie" or I don't know.
God watching Chantal Ackermann must kill her lol
I loved it!!! But I did see the story differently. I saw it as the psychological journey of Rick Dalton. Starts out as an insecure man that leans on Cliff Booths strength. But as the movie grows so does his confidence which got him to the point where he felt equal to Sharon Tate. He grew up, got married, started standing on his own two feet. Brilliant work.
The roof scene with Brad Pitt is actually very intersting and important. Its the only time you see Charles Manson, the man who basically horribly killed Sharon Tate and her friends. The scene goes on with Charles going to the house of Sharon and asking about the guy who charles actually aimed to kill.
Okayy so in defense of it (by a non-native speaker btw so this may SUCK)
Honestly i think it was pretty well done!! The audience knew that the movie was going to come to the point of murder of Sharron Tate and i think that set tension all through the film. Margot was like the heartbeat of it, she didn’t have that much depht but that wasn’t the point of her character, her character was consistent and was always sweet almost reminding of “oh look how nice she is too bad we’ll see her die”keeping the audience reminded of what’s to come
and like the countdown-ish element to the event, Cliff going into the Hippie camp were all filled with tension and it misguided the audience at the end which was very very cool and put the whole thing together
And my answer to all the other points is that yes, it was very very personal to Tarantino and Tarantino only which may make the audience disconnect from the movie but it wasn’t to the point that we didn’t care about it
Exactly my thoughts, couldn't have said it better
Completely agree!
I would agree except for the fact that then I feel like then the movie isn’t doing enough work on its own and relying too much on the context of history
Now that I've seen the film, I agree with your comment. However, I saw the movie with my boyfriend without knowing anything about it, so there was no tension for us since we didn't know about Sharon Tate's story. I guess it's just a movie for those who know more about Hollywood or films in general because we didn't really get some of the jokes either.
Answer to all other points except the foot scenes I believe
girl ur aware that the hippies r the Manson clan and the reason Sharon tate was so «boring» was to show that shes just like everybody else she was a happy beautiful woman who didnt deserve to get killed
Carina Sophia she missed the whole point of the movie, she criticized the movie without researching Tarantino’s intention on why he made the movie oof
@@datgangshi she literally addressed his intentions though, she just believes that tarantino couldve portrayed her in a way that did her memory more justice.
Hannah Allexandra they made her like that to show us how kind and beautiful she was, not to make men satisfied..
Carina Sophia, but she pointed out how they constantly put the camera near her butt and made her ditzy and lacking in depth, this isn’t rocket science, you can put together the pieces.
Aticole Nickle yeah it wasn’t near her butt SO many times that it becomes a problem, and besides what’s wrong with that? just because some shots is of her butt doesn’t mean it’s to satisfy men, we shouldn’t hide our body for men anyways
As a fellow recently-graduated film major, i would adore more of this kind of content!! It literally made me so happy :)) (also not pretentious at all! lol i always get worried about coming off that way when i talk about movies too tho, so i feel ya)
I think this is a movie that one needs to see more than once. I too wasn't very fond of the lack of momentum during my first viewing, but when i watched it the second time i found myself having a deeper appreciation for every line of dialogue spoken, every piece of music played and just the overall laid-backness of the movie. Once you accept that it's just a "hang-out" movie about 2 dudes at at the end of a Hollywood era, you start to lay back and to enjoy the smooth ride towards that fairy tale ending.
Honestly, I think that this movie was extremely tense the whole time. Do I know shit about film? No. But, the fact that there were so many scenes that were so calm and ominously slow-paced made the build up to the infamous murders so much more intense, and thus, so much more satisfying when the tension breaks.
Margot Robbie isn’t meant to be a character that talks a lot. She’s meant to represent the innocence and carefree attitude of the 1960’s. Many people say that Sharon Tate’s death was what “ended” the 60’s, or at least its mindset. Something (or someone in Sharon’s case) with so much promise and potential, radiating positivity and innocence, being abruptly ended in sudden violence. (Think the Vietnam War, protests and unrest, assassinations, etc.) Just because she doesn’t actually talk much does not mean she has any lesser of a role. She is essentially a living, breathing manifestation of the 60’s nostalgia filling this movie. When history is altered, and she lives, it’s the ending to the decade we *should’ve* gotten. When Sharon survives, we are given a happier and more peaceful alternate timeline. This movie is a fairytale, and fairytales are often just projections of the real world with hopeful happy endings. This is the happily ever after that we never got. So, in that way, Sharon Tate may be the most important character in the movie. All of this is why she isn’t necessarily a “real person.” Also the feet thing? I read somewhere that she didn’t like wearing shoes in real life. I don’t know if it’s true, but even if it’s not, beyond the *extremely obvious foot fetish,* I think the carefree explanation also kind of works.
This movie is a love letter to Hollywood. The references, the people, the aesthetic; it’s not meant to be necessarily a global movie. It is dedicated to the people that either remember that era of LA, or the people that admire it. Michelle Phillips, Cass Elliott, Steve McQueen (don’t know if you can really validate your arguments on this if you’re going to call him “some guy telling us about Sharon Tate”) Bruce Lee, etc.
Also, the ending was incredibly satisfying. The thing is that it couldn’t of been Sharon fighting them off. It would’ve been badass in every way, but the fact the Manson Family made the last minute decision to kill Leo and Brad’s characters made the alternate history feel a lot more organic. When Sharon invites Rick up for a drink afterwards, it seamlessly ties this incredibly Tarantino badass fight to the death into reality, making it feel almost eerie.
These are my ramblings from 4AM so if something doesn’t make sense that is why.
To Meme or Not To Meme
This
i give your essay a 5/5
pops severely thanks fam
Very, VERY well said
Perfect 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Its very interesting to hear what someone studying film and actually living in L.A. has to say about this film. Im from Germany and have never been to L.A. but I loved the night driving scenes you are talking about. I dont think I got all the movie references in "Once upon a time in Hollywood" and I agree that the movie was lacking tension. However, I dont think that movies about Hollywood are boring to the rest of the world. Even though Ive never been to L.A., because of all the movies Ive seen - and also because of your videos - it feels somewhat familiar. I remember when I went to NYC for the first time and I was so amazed to see all those things in real life that I grew up seeing in my favourite movies: yellow school buses, the skyline, hot dog stands, kids playing baseball. Hollywood might take itself too serious at times but I also think the US film industry has a much bigger influence on the rest of the world than most Americans might know.
Lena Jakoby totally agree w this
True true true true !!
i agree!
I'm Brazilian and I totally agree with you here.
Yessss! I agree
I personally loved the movie! I do see what you're saying about the loose storyline, but I thoroughly enjoy every minute of it. (granted I've lived in LA my whole life haha) I think the way Sharon Tate was depicted in the movie felt really lovely. I connected to her character a lot. I felt that the view of her came across as the outside looking in catching glimpses of her depth and free spiritedness.
i will agree, most of the audience when i went to see this movie where middle aged, and everyone was cracking up in the theatre. but i enjoyed this movie so much!! I didnt get most of the reverences, buy i went to see this with my then-boyfriend, and he knew literally every little detail about this movie, but hes also freaking insane, lol! and he does his research about everything he's interested in. but we absolutely adored this movie. I love this movie because its literally "once upon a time in hollywood." like, what if sharon tate had this crazy neighbor who owned flame thrower and saved her life, instead of her dying the way she did. how if the empty house next door to them was actually inhabited by leo's character, and because of that, leo was targetted instead of sharon, so she lived. how "hollywood" is that, to have someone save the day in such an over the top way, and no one die, and everyone live happily every after, you know? also loved how all the other charcters were real people except the main charcters. so like, this is literally placing two fictional people in a historical time and how things would change if there were two extra people there. idk, i have so much more to say about why i love this movie, but i love that odd take on a slice of life kind of thing. there's something so... you know "subverting expectations" about that.
but another thing that i thought was cool was how he also subverted expectations by it not being a traditional Tarantino film. (shoutout to my ex, im stealing all his research lol) it wasnt overly violent or graphic at all, the only violent bit was the ending, so it made so much more of an impact in that way, where all of a sudden all that gore in one scene, out of no where, the build up and all the time leading up to the violence, made it really hit me, i think. I'm sensitive to violence on screen anyway, but i literally had to walk out of theatre when that scene happened because it was so violent, i felt sick. and i feel like thats a good tactic to use in general if you want to make something super memorable, you know? anyway, all of this to say that just , long story short, im surprised you found the movie boring! it was super entertaining to me, and i LOL'd various times throughout, lol. i did find myself thinking though, "what is the point of this movie? whats the storyline here?" and by the end realized, that it was just supposed to be a day in the life kind of thing, which, although simple, i was pleasantly surprised by and enjoyed. also absolutely LOVED the cowboy acting scenes with the little girl.
anyway, i enjoyed your video! you should do a film review series!
I personally don’t agree with your opinion.
I didn’t find the film boring.
Brad Pitt on the roof gave brad Pitt a thicker character because of the flash back and it also emphasises the closeness of Sharon’s house, it also hints at the murders.
I thought it was respectful that Margot/Sharron didn’t have loads of speaking roles because she was a real person that you are supposed to only see from afar. I thought it built up her character to show her as an innocent kind person, which kept the character as a realistic person. I really don’t think her fighting off the hippies would have been very respectful to Sharon’s death, especially with her being pregnant, but having them attack a different house emphases the tragedy of the event.
I cried at the end of the film and I personally don’t cry at films very often. I thought Margot gave a very good performance as she portrayed the character in a way that wasn’t just things that she was saying but her day to day actions and facial expressions.
I did find the feet thing weird though.
I’m not a film graduate, I just liked the film. Also love you Ashley so not trying to be argumentative.
emma laurie you said it perfectly! I fully agree with what you are saying
i agree with you so much. i was intrigued the entire film, and having the knowledge of what happened in real life to Sharon Tate made it even more heartbreaking to see how she was portrayed by Robbie as an extremely kind, beautiful, normal person. on another note, the character detail in this film was one of my favorite things about it. with all the "boring" driving or Sharon Tate simply watching a movie, these scenes to me shaped the characters into normal people who did normal activities. i loved the film and didn't find it boring at all either. i can definitely see how people could disagree though, and i can understand Ashley's views as well.
Completely agree. And besides, Tarantino talked to Sharon’s sister & family and they all agreed in representing her that way. They show her living.
I loved the ending! I feel as if that if they did make Sharon fight off and kill the Manson Family it would be disrespectful as it would kinda show a way of “she should’ve done this” or “if she did this she’d still be alive” etc etc. I found the very end so sad, especially when Jay Sebring started talking to Dalton because it was a reminder that when this night happened he was actually murdered. I got the same feeling when Sharon, Frykowski and Folger walked outside and welcomed Dalton in. It was a nice and respectful way of keeping the memory of Tate alive. I also found myself waiting for Margot Robbie to have more lines but when I was thinking about the movie afterwards, I really liked how her character was portrayed. I think people need to remember that the movie isn’t about her, but she’s apart of the context. I think she was just more heavily featured in the promoting of the film because she had a bigger role than a lot of the other characters in the film, even if she didn’t say much.
agree 100%
2:10 - Actually the scene with Pitt on the roof and Margot in the next house dancing, Charles Manson shows up to the door looking for Terry Melcher (record producer) and Dennis Wilson (The Beach Boys) because I guess they owed him money for some songs he had written. You can briefly see his face and then leaves immediately.
exactly, actually what really happened was Manson was very angry about that guy owing money to him that he sent his ''family'' to that house to kill everybody because he thought dennis was still living there
ASHLEY PLEASE START A PODCAST YOU'RE A NATURAL
An 8 and half months pregnant woman fight off the 4 most violent and vicious members of the Manson family? Sounds like a plausible ending
Would love to hear your thoughts on Call me by your name.
Now THATS an overrated film got hyped up so much but really u shouldnt take my advice on it because ive only seen bits and pieces of it on it youtube but it was so boring
Well this aged badly
@@andieschronicles wait did she comment on it somewhere? bruh I didn’t really get the hype
@@TrangThu-hb9iy oh no it’s just that armie who plays Oliver now has allegations (that are probably true) of c*nnibalism and r@pe
@@andieschronicles woah 😦 I didn’t love the movie but enjoyed their interviews together for some reasons. oh well
Putting feet in the thumbnail...😂 Ashley I see you😂😂 You know how to get the attention of the internet
I didn’t know he was going to change the ending so I was the whole movie super tense expecting the horrible destiny for Sharon so the ending was for me just spectacular and I honestly cry when the “Unce upon a time... in Hollywood” appeared on screen! I loveee Cliff he was definitely my favorite and I feel the Sharon Margot played was one full of life so it really touched me! (English is not my language so apologize if some grammar is incorrect or incoherent in order 😂)
omg sameee! I don't know what I was expecting but the ending was such a pleasant surprise!
Yes, I think it is a great "what if" movie with an homage to Sharon and Roman. Im sure Roman Polanski wishes it had happened that way.
On some points I agree with you (like the feet thing) but for the most part I disagree. Especially the part where you wished Brad Pitts character would've died. That would've been melodramatic and cliche. It's called Once Upon a time.." precisely because it's playing the fairy tale ending, which was very refreshing, and made the movie feel sweet, something unexpected
The reason for the antenna scene where we get a flashback to when brad pitt “most likely” killed his wife and the bruce lee scene was to foreshadow the violent events in the ending scene, makes perfect sense, and not boring at all, without them, the ending wouldn’t have been so powerful
Tarantino is my favorite director and so far I've watched the movie 3 times. It definitely gets better on subsequent viewings. What gets me the most is the pacing of it and on the first viewing I didn't realize how awesome the music is. Your just riding the fairy tale wave. Also I thought Margot and Margaret both gave stellar performances with the limited time and dialogue they had(the feet scenes were kinda weird though). Also also, young Julia Butters stole the show! I'm fascinated by kids who are that smart, really interesting character that totally came out of nowhere. I don't think Rick Dalton could've pulled out that performance if it wasn't for her pep talk. Probably saved his career when you think about it.
If u wanna do more movie reviews or film chats DO EM we all gonna be delighted to watch girlie
the way Ashley talks just makes me so happy, it's so soothing and mature sounding (in this type of video lol)
This movie reminds me of that one episode of Jane the virgin where Jane spoke for like 20 minutes straight ranting about something and had no cuts or music and was just a really awkward scene and I didn’t know how to feel 😂😂😔
That scene was iconic
paranoid android sameeee 😂😂 Ginas acting was amazing, I was just confused why the sudden change
cookie et broownie yessss,,,,Ginas acting was soooo good😤😤 she’s a queen
I could listen to you dissect film and call out the creepy patriarchy for hours. Please do more!
when i got out the theather i just screamed "DID THEY REALLY CAST MARGOT ROBBIE FOR >THIS
Tbh I feel like this movie was perfect for someone like me. I don't need a plot, I hate most forms of tension and I really don't want a movie to seem realistic, I want to KNOW that what I'm watching isn't supposed to be realistic. I completely agree that it is a non-enjoyable movie for most people, but if you're like me, consider giving it a watch
i would watch this stuff all day! bestdressed? i’m bestimpressed with this!¡!
Ashley pls move to NYC
sincerely, a small youtuber aspiring to be your bff
Holy crap you literally have the best channel ever, just checked it out and u have a new sub❤️
alex oh my gawd thank you so much! 🤩🥰
haley in the details honestly- same
chloesthetic 😭😭
Checked out your channel too! you have great content and earned another sub ;) i also want to help you make thumbnails hmu if u need someone to make thumbnails for you :))
in the second interview you can hear Brad Pit say "Quentin likes 'em dirty" like????
Eryn Shipley dude i was waiting for someone to mention that cuz i heard that and i went 😳
It’s called a joke
@@cw8682 yeah when you put feet in each one of your movies... its not a joke
@@NaomiIsSoAwesome98 and females love it when male actors take their shirt off in movies. What is the issue here?
> Tarantino says it's a love letter to the golden era of Hollywood
> casual movie enjoyers complain they don't understand anything
the movie is the most detailed Tarantino's movie. Everything what you see was deeply planned, every song, the perfect editing, SCENOGRAPHY, characters, western movies and shows. There is so many references and easter eggs so casual movie enjoyers can't spot.
There is a reason why Brad was driving for 5 minutes - this is how it was and it was perfect because of its chillin vibe. I feel it because it reminds me even early 2000s.
The purpose is to be a postcard in form of a movie.