4 thoughts on “Considering the Cinema Ep. 012: Once Upon a Time in Hollywood … and Rochester”

1. Great episode. I love “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.” Please tell your MPW buddies that one of the reasons they advertised that this is Tarantino’s 9th movie is that he has said that he will quit directing after either his 10th movie or when he turns 60 whichever happens first. I think one of the reasons Tarantino has been a bit indulgent is that his longtime editor Sally Menke died in 2010. She edited all of his movies until her demise and she was able to reign him in.

   Reply ↓

2. Well, that was like deja vu. Sounding like a typical MPW episode. Or perhaps it’s because I’ve been listening to the past MPW episodes. I’m currently on episode 85 from 2014 having gone through the entire current geek cast Ryan era, to now hearing the old Josh Ligairi era of MPW.

   As for this episode of CTC, I have to say in my opinion, Tarantino is THE most overrated director, perhaps in the history of cinema. Hold the phone, that title might belong to Jordan Peele instead. Since all of Quentin’s movies are disappointments to me, I won’t waste any time and money seeing his latest debacle. No joke, I do not enjoy his films.

   The passing of Rutger Hauer is sad. He made some very good genre films over his long career. The Sonata, a horror film and one of Rutger’s very last roles is being shown over in London at Arrow FrightFest in a couple of weeks. His remaining work is in post-production.

   I think pig-headed horror has become a thing. Check out Bullets Of Justice with Danny Trejo directed by Valeri Milev. Also, check out The Furies directed by Tony D’Aquino. Both films are also being shown at FrightFest.

   Thanks for the episode Jay, it was cool to hear you with the MPW guys again, just like old times.

   Reply ↓

3. Never thought some back and forth between Andy and Jay could sound so sweet. Nice hearing the gang back together again. Wish Ryan could’ve made it.

   I enjoyed dissecting the tension and suspense of particular scenes. However, I find it a bit unfair to compare the Spawn Ranch scene with the most tense scene Tarantino even produced! Comparisons aside, I believe that in the case of Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, the lingering inevitability of the Manson murders is actually acting as the “Bomb Under the Table”. We know what will precipitate from the cult, but Cliff and the gang see them merely as hippy outcasts. I like the Hitchcock litmus test, but I don’t think it applies the way William was using it to differentiate between these two scenes in particular because no bomb goes off without our being aware. Instead, we know what the bomb is and when and where it’s going to go off because we’ve been told the grisly tales for 50 years!

   I will say though, Jay. I enjoyed the Arrow Punch metaphor and thought it was apt.

   Reply ↓

4. Hi Jay – It was great hearing you with the MPW guys again!

   I absolutely loved “Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood.” It’s the only movie I can think of that portrays the day-to-day drudgery of an acting career.

   Through the characters of Cliff and Rick, we see two levels of in-front-of the camera careers on the decline. Through Polanski and Sharon Tate, we see Hollywood careers on the rise, and (unlike every other movie ever made), their journeys are told mostly off-camera.

   I loved your description of the Arrow Punch as metaphor for the bloody confrontation at the end. I think Tarantino knows about the Arrow Punch (remember “Kill Bill” – the Cruel Tutelage of Pai Mei?)

   *spoilers*

   Here’s what blew up my brain after I had a couple of days to think about this movie: the speculative angle in “Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood,” (i.e., what if Sharon Tate’s murder had been foiled by a stuntman and actor in the twilight of their careers) at first seems bright and cheery. After all, Tate is portrayed brilliantly as a likable winner whose good times have just begun. However, what we also get with this fairy-tale ending is a perpetuation of all the things about Hollywood that stink.

   Let’s keep in mind, QT shows us plenty of the crappy side of Hollywood in the first act. Racism (“Don’t cry in front of the Mexicans.”) The way the Hollywood studios chew up actors after their peak by “nicely” featuring them in media of lesser and lesser importance. (Did you notice the size of the screen Rick is on in his various performances gets smaller and smaller?)

   In the real world of 1969, after the murders, the glossy good guy/bad guy pictures of Hollywood were failing. People craved something on screen to help explain the more gritty, darker world in which they now knew they lived where people like Manson (and conflicts like Vietnam) existed.

   In real life, the Manson murders freaked out the world, destroyed the perception of the Flower Power movement, made people terrified in their own homes… and gave birth to the gritty realism movies by young upstart directors like Scorsese, Mann… and their spiritual successors (like Tarantino). It stirred something in the minds of Craven, Carpenter, Romero, Hooper, too… all my horror director heroes.

   So. I admit it’s uncomfortable to think about, but is it really so bad that things turned out the way they did in the real world? Looking back with the 20/20 vision of a die-hard Scorsese/Mann/Tarantino fan, I’m glad they gave us the art they did. I love a world with “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” and “The Thing” in it! That was the art that spoke to *me*.

   Be well.

   Best,
   Vicious Victor
   The Strange, High House in the Mist

   Reply ↓