Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (Quentin Tarantino, July 26, 2019) Movie • Page 22

I’m just trying to explain why I think people are concerned. The fact that he’s physically in the movie when he doesn’t have to be has sent up warning signs for people.

 

Terry Mulcher was more responsible for the murders than Dennis was, especially since the house Tate and her friends were murdered in was his originally and he left when he found the bullet on his doorstep.

 

I understand that and it’s total valid to have those concerns.

 

you assume that there is going to be some connection with Leo living next door to her, her dating Polanski, Leo's character loving polanski as a filmmaker/what he did with rosemary's baby and its popularity.

Polanski's character I think has 1 line in the movie, is in 1 scene

 

Right and if that’s the extent of it then I personally see no problem with it

 

He’d just be another aspect of how bizarre and sprawling that web was, as well as another real life celebrity being portrayed. Can’t remember if it has been talked about at all though.

 

I should be clear that I’m not against monstrous figures from history being portrayed on film, nor am I against Polanski being a character in this in general. I just don’t want the film to go any farther in praising him than would be realistic for that time period.

 

Also my concerns are more about the Polanski portrayal as a whole within the film, not just literally how much he is seen or how many lines he has or what the actor does specifically. It all will come down to what we are supposed to take away from the story by the end of it. The only thing I would be totally against is it being viewed through rose-colored glasses, which I’m hoping is not the case given that quote about it “cheekily” suggesting that Hollywood innocence never really existed.

 

Plus Emile Hirsch’s presence is a bigger problem anyway. Wish his scenes could be cut instead of the others that were discussed, but that would be pretty impossible given who he’s playing.

 

Sounds like he might be tweaking the Cannes version, which came in at 2 hours 39 minutes, and adding some footage

 

they're not real people Quentin, like he could have just made a fake version of the Tate La Bianca murders but fuck this justice for Sharon

 

Quentin Tarantino Considering An Even Longer Cut Of ONCE UPON A TIME IN HOLLYWOOD

 

If Tate’s sister approves of the movie I’m not sure anyone else’s stance matters

 

QT might be a dick, no argument there, but I don’t see the issue with what he’s saying. This whole thing feels ludicrous to me.

 

Does anyone have a link to her sister’s comments about the film? All I can find is some very recent stuff where she praises Margot’s performance, but not necessarily anything about the film in general. Is that the only thing she has spoken about specifically?

 

she had sit down meetings with QT, read the script, and was on the set for a number of days

 

Costa Ronin playing Frykowski might actually be too painful to watch even if everything else lines up for me wanting to see it. Love him so much.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/birthm...-with-tarantinos-once-upon-a-time-in-holl/amp

 

I understand why it happens, but I really wish we wouldn't keep getting upset and condemning alleged choices in a movie none of us have seen. I'm all for having this conversation when the movie is out, but right now we're just punching at ghosts.

 

Man, maybe he really did do something that doesn’t fit with what actually happened. Some of that specific wording is very interesting. Of course maybe it just means that the film doesn’t show the violence on screen.

 

I seriously don't know when so many people got it in their heads that the movie was about Sharon Tate. From the beginning it was always described as taking place at the same time as the Manson murders, and that she would be a periphery character in comparison to DiCaprio's. The movie isn't about her, I kind of don't know what's going on here. It's like everyone is just ignoring what the movie is and condemning it for what they think it should be.

And as a result of this non-issue, the legitimate criticisms (like Emile Hirsch being in it) are being completely drowned out/ignored.

 

yeah that's what I saw too, remember he did the same thing after IB screened at Cannes

 

I feel like including Manson and Tate in the story made people automatically assume that

 

People started calling it his "Manson Murders Movie" all on their own. That's not what it is.