Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood | July 26 2019 | Digital Foot Technology | RIP Cinerama Dome

[Ryan Reynolds]

7 minutes ago, Alli said:

He's made so many crappy movies in the last years tho. The Mummy was just last year. 

 

And the original is such an 80s movie. I doubt it will be any good. I have already prepared my UNDER 100M club

Mummy is crap and Jack Reacher 2 was bad, but everything else has been ok or better for TC recently

 

Top Gun 2 is unnecessary, but i believe Tom cares for the property as much as MI series, he wants to make a good movie

Edited March 1, 2018 by Ryan Reynolds

[B D Joe]

Tom Cruise is just leading as many action movies as he can while he's still young and then he'll switch to more character-based stuff.

[Avatree]

Tom Cruise is always getting older,

He knows he'll never be that young again.

And when Tom Cruise looks back over his shoulder,

He sees a thousand younger leading men

 

And he knows some day he'll have to play,

An old retarded grandpa,

While someone younger plays his sexy son...

[TomCruiseTop]

Leo and Brad? Could this be QTs biggest movie yet? 

[MCKillswitch123]

DiCaprio and Pitt is a HUGE get for this movie. Could match or surpass Django without the holiday season/Oscar contender advent.

[stephanos13]

Sign me up already!!!!!!!

[marveldcfox]

Quentin without leash is going to fuck up the crime scene badly...It will be too violent/gruesome...not in a good way. I hope Tom Rothman tells him to not go over the top with the crime scene. Infact, all of that should be off-screen. 

[MCKillswitch123]

25 minutes ago, marveldcfox said:

Quentin without leash is going to fuck up the crime scene badly...It will be too violent/gruesome...not in a good way. I hope Tom Rothman tells him to not go over the top with the crime scene. Infact, all of that should be off-screen. 

I actually agree w/this. This - a real life story - is uncharted territory for Tarantino, as far as I know. If I were Sony, I'd be careful to not let him get a little too Tarantinian w/the violence in a film w/such a sensitive subject matter.

 

Nevertheless, this will be a huge ass hit for them. Tarantino/DiCaprio/Pitt is a megalomaniac trio. IF the rumors are true and they're still going to add Tom Cruise, Jennifer Lawrence, Margot Robbie and Al Pacino..... wow. Easy contender for most starpowered film of the 21st century, for damn sure.

[Jake Gittes]

Everyone is repeating themselves and so will I: Tarantino has done plenty of scenes throughout his entire filmography where the violence was mostly or entirely off-screen. And in those cases it happened to fictional characters. Seriously, where exactly this did image of him as someone whose every movie is a tasteless bloodbath come from? 

[marveldcfox]

2 hours ago, Jake Gittes said:

Everyone is repeating themselves and so will I: Tarantino has done plenty of scenes throughout his entire filmography where the violence was mostly or entirely off-screen. And in those cases it happened to fictional characters. Seriously, where exactly this did image of him as someone whose every movie is a tasteless bloodbath come from? 

Have watched only 2 Quentin movies - KB 1 & 2. I am saying that based on those movies. He comes across as someone who loves drama with violence and blood.

[Alli]

I suspect Manson won't be shown on screen. 

 

This will be huge. Leo's comeback role. Django made $425M. This has potential to go over 500M with Pitt added and the controversial subject

[Joel M]

3 hours ago, Jake Gittes said:

Everyone is repeating themselves and so will I: Tarantino has done plenty of scenes throughout his entire filmography where the violence was mostly or entirely off-screen. And in those cases it happened to fictional characters. Seriously, where exactly this did image of him as someone whose every movie is a tasteless bloodbath come from? 

 

"Is tarantino's violence glorified/unnecessary/appropriate?" has been a conversation ever since Reservoir Dogs and comes up every time he makes a movie because his movies have been always on the mainstream's radar even the not so succesfull ones. And Tarantino himself being a celebrity in a way that most directors arent (even the ones with bigger BO power like Nolan or Cameron) only makes the conversation bigger. Also many of the most iconic moments of his filmography being full of violence only help that narrative. 

[tonytr87]

10 hours ago, kowhite said:

 

Well, no lie, TC has been leaning in o working with directors who he’s comfortable with these days more than just like...every fucking great director he can find.

 

On the other hand, the ones he’s running with are still very good.  He’s living in a different world these Days.  He’s what, 55?  And he can’t sell a drama like the old days.

 

Most movie stars aren't chasing money and box office glory ALL the time. Besides, 55 is when you should start giving up the action roles and doing drama again. 

 

On the other hand, Fallout looks dope. 

[Alli]

1 minute ago, tonytr87 said:

 

Most movie stars aren't chasing money and box office glory ALL the time. Besides, 55 is when you should start giving up the action roles and doing drama again. 

 

On the other hand, Fallout looks dope. 

And the ironic thing  is that the more he chases box office, the more he fails. lol Outside of MI, its nothing but flops....BO and critic wise

 

But anyway, i'm starting to doubt these sources who said he was in talks for this movie. It doesn't make sense for him to be a double for DiCaprio. Pitt makes sense.

[tonytr87]

How this performs will depend on the plot. If it's another Hateful Eight where not much happens (I'm thinking Tarantino's version of Inherent Vice) then 90-100 mil due to the cast. But if it's more akin to Basterds or Django for its mix of action, humor, history, and vengeful theatrics then it could go as high as 175-190mil I think. 

Edited March 1, 2018 by tonytr87

[Barnack]

1 hour ago, tonytr87 said:

Besides, 55 is when you should start giving up the action roles and doing drama again. 

Or the age to start doing them !

 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2018 by Barnack

[Plain Old Tele]

6 hours ago, Jake Gittes said:

Everyone is repeating themselves and so will I: Tarantino has done plenty of scenes throughout his entire filmography where the violence was mostly or entirely off-screen. And in those cases it happened to fictional characters. Seriously, where exactly this did image of him as someone whose every movie is a tasteless bloodbath come from? 

 

His filmography, for the most part?

 

I'd argue that JACKIE BROWN is the only film of his that tackles violence and the world itself in a relatively realistic way. Putting quality aside, he's a filmmaking who paints in really broad strokes. And there's nothing wrong with that, but this is the first time he's dealing with a true-life historical situation that requires (presumably) some tact and perspective. Nothing in his filmography (aside from potentially JB) leads me to believe he's able to take that approach.

Edited March 1, 2018 by Telehilation

[dudalb]

1 hour ago, Telehilation said:

 

His filmography, for the most part?

 

I'd argue that JACKIE BROWN is the only film of his that tackles violence and the world itself in a relatively realistic way. Putting quality aside, he's a filmmaking who paints in really broad strokes. And there's nothing wrong with that, but this is the first time he's dealing with a true-life historical situation that requires (presumably) some tact and perspective. Nothing in his filmography (aside from potentially JB) leads me to believe he's able to take that approach.

THIS. I enjoyed most of Tarantino's films, but this is the first time he taking on a real life event, which impacted quite a few people who are still alive. He will have to have some tact in handling this. If he goes in for his usual in your face outrageous approach it will backfire on him badly with this material.

[Valonqar]

Q, Leo, Brad and possibly Margot as Sharon, what a combo!

[Jake Gittes]

4 hours ago, Telehilation said:

 

His filmography, for the most part?

 

I'd argue that JACKIE BROWN is the only film of his that tackles violence and the world itself in a relatively realistic way. Putting quality aside, he's a filmmaking who paints in really broad strokes. And there's nothing wrong with that, but this is the first time he's dealing with a true-life historical situation that requires (presumably) some tact and perspective. Nothing in his filmography (aside from potentially JB) leads me to believe he's able to take that approach.

I see the point about realism/true-life background, but I was talking about his framing of violence, and in that sense I don't see anything bad in his track record. Across his filmography, in nearly all the instances where the violence is tragic/painful, it is left mostly or entirely offscreen, and even if the style is otherwise broad, it is still used to communicate pathos, not thrill and entertainment (examples: all of Jackie Brown, the opening sequences of Kill Bill 2 and Inglourious Basterds, the flashback murders in The Hateful Eight, the violence against the slaves in Django Unchained, the shooting of the cop in Reservoir Dogs). When his violence is devoid of tact or restraint, it is only when the material itself is broad enough to allow it - see Kill Bill 1, the climactic rampages in Basterds and Django, shooting Marvin in the face in Pulp.

 

In my eyes, Tarantino has proven time and time again that he understands different modes of movie violence, how it works and should be used in different contexts. There is not one scene of violence in his filmography that I think hits the wrong tone or goes too far (okay, one possible exception - a certain someone getting his head blown off in the end of Hateful Eight). So when it comes to his handling of violence in this movie, I find the "Tarantino is gonna mess this up" attitude to be pretty condescending (like he's some sort of child who we've allowed to play as he pleases before but now after 25+ years he suddenly doesn't know The Right Way); I don't see why he would look at this material and not adapt his sensibility accordingly, like he did all those times before. He's not stupid. And if he is, at least wait until the movie is done and has been in front of your eyes before you claim so.