New topic
Printable
|
EmmaMcG said: PJMcGee said: Hey, maybe he can film the events of 9/11, but someone on Flight 93 has a blowtorch in his carry-on! Or or maybe one of the kids in the Parkland shooting has a science project where he makes... a blowtorch! Yeah!!! That would rock. I'd definitely pay good money to see a 9/11 movie where Steven Seagal or somebody happened to be on the plane and prevents the crash. Throw in some cool one liners and funny quips and you've got the recipe for fantastic 90s-style action thriller. Wow. We have really different ideas of what makes a good movie, and what would make the worst movie of all time. There were real heroes on that plane. No need for a crappy rewrite. |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
|
SantanaMaitreya said: QT's rewriting of history is not a gimmick that he should pull only once; what he does is create an alternative reality where everybody who was ever oppressed, like women, blacks and jews fight back. It's like saying, in my world, the good guys win and they shoot the bad guys. Yes, we all know that the South lost the Civil War and that Hitler lost WW2, but dammit, let it be a former slave who kills the slave owner, let it be a jew who kills Hitler! It's a form of setting things right, a form of saying, this is how it should have gone. It's the ultimate Hollywood fantasy. Or Hollywood justice. And it's part of the fun, I went to Once Upon a Time In Hollywood thinking, what twist is he going to give to the story this time? [Edited 6/29/21 8:23am] [Edited 6/29/21 8:24am] [Edited 6/29/21 8:32am] [Edited 6/29/21 8:33am] Eh, it's not my thing. I don't want history as comic book. And it's one thing to write an original story where the slave gets revenge. But to take histories that many people are familiar with and rewrite the endings... It feels hollow to me. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
EmmaMcG said: SantanaMaitreya said: QT's rewriting of history is not a gimmick that he should pull only once; what he does is create an alternative reality where everybody who was ever oppressed, like women, blacks and jews fight back. It's like saying, in my world, the good guys win and they shoot the bad guys. Yes, we all know that the South lost the Civil War and that Hitler lost WW2, but dammit, let it be a former slave who kills the slave owner, let it be a jew who kills Hitler! It's a form of setting things right, a form of saying, this is how it should have gone. It's the ultimate Hollywood fantasy. Or Hollywood justice. And it's part of the fun, I went to Once Upon a Time In Hollywood thinking, what twist is he going to give to the story this time?
[Edited 6/29/21 8:23am] [Edited 6/29/21 8:24am] [Edited 6/29/21 8:32am] [Edited 6/29/21 8:33am] All fairytales start with "Once Upon A Time...". The movie's title is a nice reference to the works of Sergio Leone and possibly Tsui Hark but it also tells you that this is a fairytale. A Hollywood set fairytale but a fairytale nevertheless. It's pure fantasy. And all the better for it. If the movie had ended with Sharon Tate getting brutally murdered it would have felt like a complete betrayal to what preceded it. That isn't the story Tarantino wanted to tell and frankly, it's not the story I wanted to be told. In Tarantino's ending, the bad guys get what they deserve and the heroes live happily ever after. Just like how a proper fairytale should end. But it's not pure fantasy. It's about real people who lived and died. I think it cheapens their lives. I wonder what people who survived death camps think of Inglourious Basterds. I suppose their opinions are the ones that matter. [Edited 6/29/21 9:58am] |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Give me Promising Young Woman. A movie where the Central Park jogger is packing? No thanks. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
EmmaMcG said: SantanaMaitreya said: QT's rewriting of history is not a gimmick that he should pull only once; what he does is create an alternative reality where everybody who was ever oppressed, like women, blacks and jews fight back. It's like saying, in my world, the good guys win and they shoot the bad guys. Yes, we all know that the South lost the Civil War and that Hitler lost WW2, but dammit, let it be a former slave who kills the slave owner, let it be a jew who kills Hitler! It's a form of setting things right, a form of saying, this is how it should have gone. It's the ultimate Hollywood fantasy. Or Hollywood justice. And it's part of the fun, I went to Once Upon a Time In Hollywood thinking, what twist is he going to give to the story this time? [Edited 6/29/21 8:23am] [Edited 6/29/21 8:24am] [Edited 6/29/21 8:32am] [Edited 6/29/21 8:33am] All fairytales start with "Once Upon A Time...". The movie's title is a nice reference to the works of Sergio Leone and possibly Tsui Hark but it also tells you that this is a fairytale. A Hollywood set fairytale but a fairytale nevertheless. It's pure fantasy. And all the better for it. If the movie had ended with Sharon Tate getting brutally murdered it would have felt like a complete betrayal to what preceded it. That isn't the story Tarantino wanted to tell and frankly, it's not the story I wanted to be told. In Tarantino's ending, the bad guys get what they deserve and the heroes live happily ever after. Just like how a proper fairytale should end. Exactly. And Inglourious Basterds also starts with Once Upon a Time In Nazi occupied France... I believe that was even the original title of the movie, but I'm not sure. If you take any of this seriously, you're a bigger fool than I am. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
I appreciate EmmaMcG writing all that out, but I still don't like him! haha But hey, whatever peanut butters your jelly. Sorry, it's the Hodgkin's talking. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PJMcGee said: EmmaMcG said: I'd definitely pay good money to see a 9/11 movie where Steven Seagal or somebody happened to be on the plane and prevents the crash. Throw in some cool one liners and funny quips and you've got the recipe for fantastic 90s-style action thriller. Wow. We have really different ideas of what makes a good movie, and what would make the worst movie of all time. There were real heroes on that plane. No need for a crappy rewrite. I watch movies for entertainment. The idea of Steven Seagal or Van Damme killing terrorists sounds entertaining to me  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PJMcGee said: EmmaMcG said: All fairytales start with "Once Upon A Time...". The movie's title is a nice reference to the works of Sergio Leone and possibly Tsui Hark but it also tells you that this is a fairytale. A Hollywood set fairytale but a fairytale nevertheless. It's pure fantasy. And all the better for it. If the movie had ended with Sharon Tate getting brutally murdered it would have felt like a complete betrayal to what preceded it. That isn't the story Tarantino wanted to tell and frankly, it's not the story I wanted to be told. In Tarantino's ending, the bad guys get what they deserve and the heroes live happily ever after. Just like how a proper fairytale should end. But it's not pure fantasy. It's about real people who lived and died. I think it cheapens their lives. I wonder what people who survived death camps think of Inglourious Basterds. I suppose their opinions are the ones that matter. [Edited 6/29/21 9:58am] Tarantino was worried about that. Which is why he reached out to Sharon Tate's family before shooting to get the go-ahead from them. Sharon's sister initially didn't like the idea of it but when she seen the script and understood the concept and what Tarantino was aiming for she did a 180 and not only gave the movie her blessing but allowed Margot Robbie to wear some of Sharon Tate's actual jewelry and perfume. So if she's not taking offence to what Tarantino did, then what right do I have to sit on my high horse and condemn him for it? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TrivialPursuit said: I appreciate EmmaMcG writing all that out, but I still don't like him! haha But hey, whatever peanut butters your jelly. Once I get started I find it difficult to stop  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
EmmaMcG said: PJMcGee said: But it's not pure fantasy. It's about real people who lived and died. I think it cheapens their lives. I wonder what people who survived death camps think of Inglourious Basterds. I suppose their opinions are the ones that matter. [Edited 6/29/21 9:58am] Tarantino was worried about that. Which is why he reached out to Sharon Tate's family before shooting to get the go-ahead from them. Sharon's sister initially didn't like the idea of it but when she seen the script and understood the concept and what Tarantino was aiming for she did a 180 and not only gave the movie her blessing but allowed Margot Robbie to wear some of Sharon Tate's actual jewelry and perfume. So if she's not taking offence to what Tarantino did, then what right do I have to sit on my high horse and condemn him for it? Well I'm glad her family was cool with it. I do think he should stick to total fiction tho. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
https://youtu.be/6D79c4RKXyo For the fans! (And I know 2freaky likes Bill Maher.) If you take any of this seriously, you're a bigger fool than I am. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
'Once upon a time'.. Usually begins a fairy tale and he gave 8 months pregnant Sharon Tate a happier ending over her real life brutal stabbing to death. Also enjoyed Hitler's alternative death in 'Basterds'. Lovely stuff.
|
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
I do have fond memories of fairytales growing up. "Once upon a time, based on true events..." I think that's how they went. It's a cheap trick. Anyone can take a tragic story and make a revenge fantasy out of it. Fortunately, other, lesser filmmakers haven't followed Tarantino's lead. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
My point was that fairytales are NOT based on true events. They are concocted entirely from the imagination. Making movies about World War II and the Manson family tragedy and tacking on happy endings and calling them fairytales is just bad writing. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Like, don't believe what you see and all that. Braveheart is not how it really happened. *shrug* People need to educate themselves and if they don't that's on them. I watch movies to be entertained and QT does that for me. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Most of those movies are brilliant filmmaking, so I understand people's reluctance to accept criticism of them. You're thinking of historical fiction, but several people have defended the movies by calling them fairytales. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Historical fantasy may be a better label for what Tarantino did. Historical revenge fantasy. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |