Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019)

[SeanJoyce]

Originally Posted by spiritinblack82

Down to $9.99 on Amazon, ordered a copy as this was the price I was waiting for. I saw it in the theater, then Redbox rental, now it's time to own it.

The original poster art is beneath the hideous slipcover, right?

If so I might finally move forward on this too.

[spiritinblack82]

Originally Posted by SeanJoyce

The original poster art is beneath the hideous slipcover, right?

If so I might finally move forward on this too.

I'm waiting on mine to ship but we can only hope. I like some cover art variants but this isn't one of the better covers.

[MJD64]

Got my copy yesterday gents, and the retro-looking poster art is indeed under that slipcover on the actual Blu-ray case...and that same retro art is on the opposite side of the slipcover itself, so it's a win-win.

Dunno if this has been mentioned elsewhere already, but I had to let out an appreciative chuckle watching the deleted scenes - there's a cut scene of the "Lancer" TV show where a nattily-attired Luke Perry exits a stagecoach wearing the exact same cane worn by Jonathan Frid's Barnabas Collins on "Dark Shadows".

I should note Perry has the cane in the film itself, but it's not as easily identified as the Barnabas cane as it is in the deleted scene.

[spiritinblack82]

I got to enjoy this film again yesterday with my Dad for Father's Day. He's been wanting to see it so I brought it over and his Blu-ray player broke 45 min into the movie. I helped him hook up his replacement DVD player and this was the one time that extra disc came in handy. Finished watching on a lesser format but saved our evening. My Dad thought the movie was great as he grew up in that area and time period.

[Jobla]

Reminds me of when I introduced my ex-girlfriend to the film CHINATOWN on laserdisc. We were watching the widescreen version, and the disc froze up just at the most critical point of the film, toward the end.

I still had a copy of the old laserdisc that was full frame, so we had to finish the film in full frame. She still loved the movie, but switching discs during the climax was very disappointing, especially given that this was her first viewing of CHINATOWN.

[spiritinblack82]

Originally Posted by Jobla

Reminds me of when I introduced my ex-girlfriend to the film CHINATOWN on laserdisc. We were watching the widescreen version, and the disc froze up just at the most critical point of the film, toward the end.

I still had a copy of the old laserdisc that was full frame, so we had to finish the film in full frame. She still loved the movie, but switching discs during the climax was very disappointing, especially given that this was her first viewing of CHINATOWN.

I can imagine your frustration with that situation! Chinatown is a great film, not one you want to have ruined on your initial viewing.

[Flixster]

Originally Posted by Partyslammer

I watched the Blu-ray release about a week ago, my first time seeing the movie. I know my opinion isn't going to be popular with most here but I thought this was a bloated, self indulgent film that could have told the story in half the running time. Don't get me wrong, there *are* things to like about this film, casting and acting is great as usual for any Tarantino film, there's plenty of little details that continue to reveal and reward with repeated viewings, but it's a long slog to get to the controversial pay-off.

And Hollywood in the Summertime doesn't look like Mars. Even in the 60's.

This just about sums it up nicely. I thought it was ok, but really a self indulgent bunch of crap, much like most of QT's movies. Aside from the totally fictional story line he could have at least got the Pan Am 747 correct (see 0:03:35). The aircraft shown is a 747-300. Pan Am introduced the 747 in 1970, yet this movie is set in 1969.

Also, as much as I adore Margot Robbie (she is stunning), she's nothing whatsoever like Sharon Tate.

Just pure nonsense from one of two of the most overrated directors working today, the other being Nolan!

[bootsy]

Originally Posted by Flixster

This just about sums it up nicely. I thought it was ok, but really a self indulgent bunch of crap, much like most of QT's movies. Aside from the totally fictional story line he could have at least got the Pan Am 747 correct (see 0:03:35). The aircraft shown is a 747-300. Pan Am introduced the 747 in 1970, yet this movie is set in 1969.

Also, as much as I adore Margot Robbie (she is stunning), she's nothing whatsoever like Sharon Tate.

Just pure nonsense from one of two of the most overrated directors working today, the other being Nolan!

What's overrated is the ridiculous, lame, tired use of the word overrated like you did.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Flixster

This just about sums it up nicely. I thought it was ok, but really a self indulgent bunch of crap, much like most of QT's movies. Aside from the totally fictional story line he could have at least got the Pan Am 747 correct (see 0:03:35). The aircraft shown is a 747-300. Pan Am introduced the 747 in 1970, yet this movie is set in 1969

Took me right out of the f*cking movie.

[drush9999]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

Took me right out of the f*cking movie.

That Tarantino attention to detail bullcrap...

[Flixster]

Originally Posted by bootsy

What's overrated is the ridiculous, lame, tired use of the word overrated like you did.

It's so funny to observe people getting so defensive over movie directors who they believe are perfection, when the reality is that these movie makers (esp Nolan) are just average at best!

[hungrywives]

Originally Posted by Flixster

It's so funny to observe people getting so defensive over movie directors who they believe are perfection, when the reality is that these movie makers (esp Nolan) are just average at best!

It's not "reality," it's subjective. It's all subjective.

[happydood]

Originally Posted by Flixster

It's so funny to observe people getting so defensive over movie directors who they believe are perfection, when the reality is that these movie makers (esp Nolan) are just average at best!

I'm not sure that's what's happening here.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Flixster

It's so funny to observe people getting so defensive over movie directors who they believe are perfection, when the reality is that these movie makers (esp Nolan) are just average at best!

That's a minor detail easy to forgive, as is the use of the "GP" MPAA rating on a marquee in the film when that particular rating was still called "M" in 1969, it has nothing to do with their film-making acumen and raising that as an issue in a movie where history has already been altered (i.e. the Tate murders) is particularly egregious because it could all be part and parcel of an "alternate history".

[bootsy]

Originally Posted by Flixster

It's so funny to observe people getting so defensive over movie directors who they believe are perfection, when the reality is that these movie makers (esp Nolan) are just average at best!

The only person getting defensive is you. You felt the need to call something overrated and included Nolan who has nothing to do with this movie. You just throw out that word with no thought or context and you continue to do that in your response. "Nolan's overrated." Yeah ok so what. It's such a tired lame ass OVERRATED view.

[Flixster]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

That's a minor detail easy to forgive, as is the use of the "GP" MPAA rating on a marquee in the film when that particular rating was still called "M" in 1969, it has nothing to do with their film-making acumen and raising that as an issue in a movie where history has already been altered (i.e. the Tate murders) is particularly egregious because it could all be part and parcel of an "alternate history".

It's not a minor detail. For a movie maker who supposedly prides himself on his technical prowess, it's a major booboo, and sticks out like a sore thumb. If you're an aviation fan it's glaringly bad! Even good old John Travolta spotted the same thing.

That said, the movie (upon second viewing) is even more crap than on the first viewing...haha!

I seriously believe that Mr T's best movies are Jackie Brown and Inglorious Basterds, both super amazing and endlessly re-watchable.

This, is a total dullfest until the long. long, long painfully long wait for the final payoff.

[Flixster]

I think what's happened in society in general is that their expectations are so low now so any old bunch of crap passes as great moviemaking.

In 10 years from now, we'll probably be giving Oscars to animated dogs!

Sad, sad, very sad!

[Jay H.]

Originally Posted by Flixster

I think what's happened in society in general is that their expectations are so low now so any old bunch of crap passes as great moviemaking.

Or maybe...just maybe...

...everybody has their own opinions.

Silly concept, I know. But it is possible.

[Dragun]

Originally Posted by Flixster

The aircraft shown is a 747-300. Pan Am introduced the 747 in 1970, yet this movie is set in 1969.

Magic Xylophone - Simpsons - YouTube

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Flixster

It's not a minor detail. For a movie maker who supposedly prides himself on his technical prowess, it's a major booboo, and sticks out like a sore thumb. If you're an aviation fan it's glaringly bad! Even good old John Travolta spotted the same thing.

What do you mean “even” John Travolta noticed that? He’s been a pilot for 40+ years I’d be disappointed if he didn’t notice something like that. Just because aviation is your pet interest and you noticed a gaffe has nothing to do with Tarantino’s technical prowess.