Fart Domination | From The Official Archives

TL;DR

Critics express disappointment in Tarantino's film lacking substance despite strong technical elements.

Transcript

[Applause] we wanted to kick off this bonus episode by talking about Once Upon a Time in Hollywood a movie that I got [ __ ] on for criticizing just because it's Tarantino by people who hadn't seen it yet well Jackson has now seen it you get [ __ ] on for every movie though that's not special yeah but Tarantino's a special breed Charlie you got to ... Read More

Key Insights

• 👻 The hosts believe "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" showcases Tarantino's stylistic prowess but falters in the narrative department, offering little engagement for the viewer.
• 🖤 They discussed the risks of fandom culture where critics are often labeled as lacking understanding rather than offering constructive feedback.
• 🎥 The show highlighted the tension between artistic intention and audience reception, particularly regarding how historical figures are represented in film.
• 🫵 They critiqued the slow pacing of the film, suggesting it left viewers feeling disinterested and often questioning the relevance of various scenes.
• 🎥 The conversation underscored a broader commentary on the challenges of navigating film critique in an era driven by passionate fan bases.
• 🦶 The humor surrounding the film's unconventional elements, such as foot shots of Margot Robbie, served as both a critique and a source of comic relief in their discussion.
• 👻 The hosts noted an emerging trend where minimalist storytelling can sometimes be mistaken for depth, especially among prolific filmmakers like Tarantino.

Questions & Answers

Q: What specific elements of "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" did the hosts find technically strong?

The hosts praised various technical aspects, including the set design, which authentically recreated the 1960s atmosphere, as well as stellar performances from the cast, particularly Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio. However, they felt that these strengths were undermined by a lackluster narrative.

Q: Did the hosts agree on whether the film was effective as a hangout movie?

While the hosts discussed the concept of hangout movies, they concluded that "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" failed to embody this genre effectively. They defined hangout films as character-driven experiences, but felt Tarantino's film included too many tedious conversations that did not engage the audience.

Q: What was the hosts' viewpoint on Margot Robbie's character, Sharon Tate?

The hosts characterized Margot Robbie's portrayal of Sharon Tate as largely superfluous, feeling her character did not contribute meaningfully to the film's plot. They expressed disappointment that her presence was more a nod to historical events than a fully developed role.

Q: How did the hosts react to audience defenses of the film?

The hosts were critical of audience defenses that suggested viewers simply didn't "understand" Tarantino's artistic choices. They argued that criticism of the film is valid and reflect viewers' capacity to engage with storytelling, regardless of Tarantino's reputation.

Q: What significance does the film’s portrayal of history hold according to the hosts?

The hosts noted that Tarantino has a trend of reshaping historical narratives in his films, which they found less impactful in "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood." They felt this creative liberty did not enhance the storytelling and instead detracted from character development.

Q: Did the discussion touch on any broader cultural themes related to film criticism?

Yes, the hosts reflected on the sensitivity of modern fandom, indicating that passionate fans of directors like Tarantino often react defensively to any criticism. They lamented a cultural tendency where personal affinity for an artist can overshadow the critical evaluation of their work.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• The discussion highlights a shared disappointment in the narrative of "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood," which many felt lacked depth despite impressive production elements such as set design and acting.

• The hosts criticize the film for its slow pacing and meandering plot, suggesting it feels like a collection of disconnected scenes rather than a cohesive story.

• They explore the phenomenon where fans defend the film fervently, attributing its merit to Quentin Tarantino's reputation, rather than its actual content or storytelling quality.