Mark Schweickart
Donna – Sign me up for Barcelona! I would love to try to make that, never having been to Spain.
Mike – I am afraid I am very much a non-Tarantino fan, so my opinion of Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is biased going in – but go in I did, to see what all of the fuss was about. I have never forgiven Tarantino for Resevoir Dogs, which I came away from feeling far more abused by his violence-pornography than I was entertained by his over-the-top smarmy dialogue that others seemed to revel in. His latest effort, as other reviewers have also decried, revisits the weird penchant he has for re-writing history – most notably done in Inglorious Bastards, a few years ago, where supposedly Jewish Reistance fighters in WWII manage to kill off the upper echelons of Nazidom, including Hitler, by burning them alive in... where else... a movie theater. This is Mr. Hollywood, Tarantino, after all. Similarly, this time he is rewriting the Manson family/Sharon Tate tragedy, that I won't go into so as not to spoil things for those who might be inclined to see this. But, suffice it to say, I find that putting all this effort into this annoying construct, a waste of talent. Tarantino surrounds himself with the best of the best when it comes to things like his art department's ability to recreate the time-period, or his cinematogapher Robert Richardson's work, which is always stunning, and his actors never fail to deliver top-notch-performances... but for what? For what in the end, strikes me as stupid, adolescent violence-fantasy. It also leaves a bad taste in my mouth because it seems to be so disrespectful of what really happened to real victims, whether it is the horrors of the Jewish plight in WWII or the wretched demise Tate and others done by the Manson family. What is the point of turning history upside down, only to take it down a different violent path? Sorry... as I said, I am not a fan.
|