Once Upon A Time In Hollywood

mspence

mspence

Banned
The new Quentin Tarantino flick, which has received good to mixed reviews, is set in what is described as an alternate TL. Without giving too much away, it involves a TV actor and his stuntman friend, Sharon Tate, and the infamous Manson family in 1969 Hollywood, at a time when the industry is changing as Old Hollywood gives way to the New Hollywood of movies like Easy Rider and Midnight Cowboy. So, does it count as alternate history or not?
<iframe width="962" height="541" src="
" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Mr_Fanboy

Mr_Fanboy

Firstly, the critical consensus does appear to be very positive, according to Rotten Tomatoes.

Secondly...

I heard about the ending, which involves Sharon Tate escaping death at the hands of the Manson Family and joining with Bruce Lee, Leonardo DiCaprio’s character, and Brad Pitt’s character to kill them in a climactic showdown.

This certainly qualifies as alternate history to me, as such an event would noticeably change the history of Hollywood and California.
 

thekingsguard

Wouldn't be the first time Tarantino has dabbled in some casual alternate history.

Inglourious_Basterds_Hitler__Goebbels_shot.jpg


Okay, maybe not SO casual, given last time he had Eli Roth barbecue the entire Nazi chain of command.
 

ANARCHY_4_ALL

Just finished seeing the film last night. And while Mr. Fanboy's spoiler is not too far off. In the actual ending it is Cliff Booth, his dog Brandy, and Rick Dalton who kill the fuck out of the three Manson family members sent to kill the occupants of the house on Cielo Drive. Dalton sees the would be murderers preparing to attack the Polanski home and proceeds to ferociously cuss them for their obscenely loud muffler. They go back down the road and come back on foot. Recognizing who Dalton is they change their plans to murder him for his contributions to violence on film and television. In an epic display of irony and Tarantino violence they receive the"totally destroy everyone in [it], as gruesome as you can" treatment.

Several months ago I predicted something a little closer to what Mr. Fanboy heard was the ending. I said that Steve McQueen and Bruce Lee happen to be at the residence on the night of the attack. And the two of them proceed to beat the life out of the Manson family attackers. I still believe this would have been a much better and fitting ending. Also, Charlie never receives his just desserts in the true ending of the film too which disappointed me. Otherwise it was an alright movie but only that IMO. I'd still suggest you see it if you are a Tarantino fan and I would def like to re-watch it to possibly get a better opinion of it.
 
Mr_Fanboy

Mr_Fanboy

ANARCHY_4_ALL said:
Just finished seeing the film last night. And while Mr. Fanboy's spoiler is not too far off. In the actual ending it is Cliff Booth, his dog Brandy, and Rick Dalton who kill the fuck out of the three Manson family members sent to kill the occupants of the house on Cielo Drive. Dalton sees the would be murderers preparing to attack the Polanski home and proceeds to ferociously cuss them for their obscenely loud muffler. They go back down the road and come back on foot. Recognizing who Dalton is they change their plans to murder him for his contributions to violence on film and television. In an epic display of irony and Tarantino violence they receive the"totally destroy everyone in [it], as gruesome as you can" treatment.

Several months ago I predicted something a little closer to what Mr. Fanboy heard was the ending. I said that Steve McQueen and Bruce Lee happen to be at the residence on the night of the attack. And the two of them proceed to beat the life out of the Manson family attackers. I still believe this would have been a much better and fitting ending. Also, Charlie never receives his just desserts in the true ending of the film too which disappointed me. Otherwise it was an alright movie but only that IMO. I'd still suggest you see it if you are a Tarantino fan and I would def like to re-watch it to possibly get a better opinion of it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the spoiler I read turned out to be technically inaccurate, but not so far off.

It occurs to me that Quentin Tarantino, intentionally or unintentionally, has perhaps done more than any other Hollywood director to thrust alternate history into the mainstream.
 
Pkmatrix

Pkmatrix

Monthly Donor
Having seen the movie too, and having been completely unaware of the rumors surrounding the ending, yeah my friends and I were pretty stunned. Definitely an alternate history film.

@ANARCHY_4_ALL - While that would've been cool too, the movie is ultimately not about them. It makes more sense, story-wise, for it to go where it does and end how it does. (At least IMO.)
 
Harry_Z_Trumen

Harry_Z_Trumen

With my interest in ATL and 1950/1960's culture I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, but my partner who has absolutely no idea about the Manson Family (or even who Sharon Tate was), thought it was kind of "meh".
 

Danthefan28

I enjoyed the film. The acting was great, even from characters who are barely in the film, or have limited roles. Leo and Brad were fun as hell, Brad Pitt especially.
I found the ending surprisingly uplifting and almost heart warming. It makes me want to make a "Tarantinoverse" TL or a story thread.
 

Carl Schwamberger

Thought I'd venture a reply, vs starting a new thread that would have inevitable redundancies.

Its a no brainer Taratinio is doing alternate history here. He's done it overtly, and covertly is at least two of his movies. I suspect if one looks theres alternate time line elements in others. In O...in Hollywood the PoD of team manson stumbling into the wrong address & into the wrong people is plausible. OTL they were looking for the owner of the residence & not expecting tenants. So Taritinos story line is simply a slightly different divergence there. Running into people capable of kicking team mansons ass is not exactly ASB either. Hollywood never has been & is still not entirely people incapable of defending themselves. A off duty cop working as a celebrities body guard would be not more implausible than a slightly drunk and pissed off stuntman. ASB territory would have been Charlies Deamons running into Bills Angels and the story ending with Lucy Liu, Uma Thurman & the rest staring at the broken corpses on the floor and asking each other "Who the f..k was that we just wasted". Cute but not as satisfying as Brad Pits stuntman effort.

The consensus seems to be Taratino did alternate history well here. I enjoyed this above most of his movies & the twist/s at the ending were a large part of that. I suspect Taratino put a bit more AltHist in this than just the surprise ending. But. Im not the expert on late 1960s Hollywood or the Manson Family, so that is left for others. Hope someone else can weigh in on that aspect.
 

faddllz

someone had wrote that this likely would save careers of four people : rick dalton, cliff booth (maybe), sharon tate, and (likely) roman polanski.

someone wrote this on the comment section :
Screenshot_20220702-033451_YouTube.jpg

Screenshot_20220702-033508_YouTube.jpg
 

Carl Schwamberger

Im more interested with the inner workings of Taratinos stories than the knock on effect. But, yes I can see your point in careers enhanced. Need to see ..Hollywood again. Only watched in once & a couple of analysis. Unlike Jackie Brown - three times, & Death Proof - twice plus endless out takes of DP. As before, I suspect Taratino worked in some side stories or refrences to alternative history or universes into ...Hollywood. Anyone else think so?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top