Once Upon A Time In Hollywood: Second times the charm. 

I went to go and see this film in the cinema right at the beginning of august assuming it was out already due to the fact I was reading so many reviews online that I now realise were all coming from America. I was very aghast and outraged to find out it wasn’t going to be out in England for another two weeks!!! So yes I’ve been waiting for this film to come out for a while now, and I don't mind telling you, with a bit of a rocky start. 

Like most Tarantino movies I walked into the cinema a fortnight later not really knowing what to expect. No matter if I’m watching his films, talking about his films or even just thinking about them I’m tense, which I can only assume is learnt behaviour from repeat exposure to his methods. True to form there was a sense of a low churning undercurrent of paranoia right from the beginning of this one, until classically, the gruesome finale leaves you with all the right endorphins from the grateful release of pressure. It’s a very clever film trope that has “done Quentin” very well throughout his career. With most of his new films, ie 'Inglorious Bastards' and 'Hatefull 8' this creative tension has been a bit more in your face whereas in this film it was far more subtle. 

We follow the three main characters Rick Dalton (Leonardo De Caprio) Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) and

Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) in their day to day Hollywood lives the three days leading up to the famous tragic event - don't worry i'll explain later. - Rick Dalton is an Actor on the verge of becoming irrelevant with the big modern changes (in the 1970’s) happening in the industry. Cliff Booth is his stunt double who tied himself closely to Rick , a very loyal character, a close friend, driver and general handy man. The slow demise of Ricks career obviously affects Cliff's too, so their relationship and destiny is very intertwined and established brilliantly very early on. 

Brad and Leo were just so bloody good in this film. Instead of a hardy story line the audience can get their teeth into, this movie is made from lots of little "sketches." Some were based in the real world, small intimate one person scenes showcasing normal life and daily routine. One such stand out scene was Brad Pitt feeding his dog. Sounds simple, but it built a character and his world very quickly and very well. 

Other “sketches” were scenes we see Rick acting in. Leo does an incredible job of acting an actor acting his very last socks off, which is a mind fuck in itself. We also see Rick chastise himself very harshly in his trailer after screwing up a scene. This very comical but at the same time very moving, as this is a man cashing in his last chips, a desperate last hora for a flagging actor. 

These scenes perfectly set up the characters stories and as always Tarantino’s dialogue was utterly spellbinding. Yes these scenes sometimes left you thinking “where in the Sam Hill is this film going?” but that was all part of the suspense. 

The biggest tension building scene was when Cliff was invited by an underage girl, brilliantly played by Margrette Qualley, (one to watch out for) who (as we’ve all done) falls under Brad’s charming spell. When we arrive to the Ranch things are quickly established as "not as they seem." There’s a large family with plenty of young and attractive women. They’re all starting, and they keep referencing a man they call “Charlie” .... Dakota Fanning plays one of the daughters and some what of a ringleader that has a lovely exchange of dialogue with Brad that really makes you feel uneasy. Cliff (Brad) just about escapes with his life but that is the through-line of the story set up for our grande Tarantino finale. 

Before we get to that I want to quickly talk about another lovely “sketch” where Margot Robbie (Sharon Tate) goes to the cinema to watch herself, unannounced, in her break through film with Dean Martin. The gorgeousness of the scene paralleled Margo’s own beauty. I connected so much with this character enjoying the positive reaction from the unassuming audience around her. As an actor I can’t wait to experience this for myself and Margot portrayed that sense of achievement and self congratulation to a tee. 

So in true Tarantino form I’ve probably made you wait long enough for the conclusion to this review and film and yes SPOILERS Quintin does rewrite history again! 

The Manson family end up attacking Rick and Cliff who live next door to Sharon Tate instead. However with their far more aggressively Wild West and war movie experience they kick the shit out of these “hippies” and when I say “kick the shit” I mean Kill Bill level of bloody grotesque violence, which - as always- is thoroughly satisfying. Therefore in this universe Sharon lives on and Rick and Cliff get the break they need from the freshly introduced “new wave of cinema” who live next door .... 

"And they all lived happily ever after."

Very clever Quentin.

Overall this wasn’t my favourite Tarantino film. I much prefer Inglorious Bastards but it’s still darn good film making and acting so I’d give this film A RATING OF 8.2/10. Go and see this and please be patient with it. It’s well worth it, trust me. 

I've been Christopher Whitmore, thanks for reading. 

The Lion King (2019): And I can honestly say I wasn’t "prepared" for what I saw.


       For this review I’m going to pretty much set aside all the was wrong about this film. Yes it’s a shot for shot remake, and yes I thought yet again after Aladdin and Dumbo the music was a bit lack lustre. But for what this film has done to revolutionise the film industry, by using this popular remake to showcase what is possible now to create in a computer graphics studio, it cannot be ignored. This new technology should not be shunned to one side, mislabelled as unimaginative, uncreative "not art" when the creation is SO beautiful!

       I was openly saying before I saw The Lion King to anyone who cared to listen to my film ramblings and rantings, that the problem with these remakes is we lose the anthropomorphic element that we engage with so readily in cartoon/animated animal films. The reason for this is it is much easier to add human like emotions and expressions, like eyebrows  to an animal cartoon character than to a photographic realistic image (see every Disney 90s/early Noughties movie from Flounder the fish to Donkey in Shrek). This makes it easier for an audience to empathise with a non human narrative in relation to these films as opposed to a documentary. This is the tricky tight rope that Jon Favero and his team were walking with the first film of this kind, The Jungle Book. In my opinion it wasn’t quite there and it's where I based a lot of my initial opinions on "Photoreeltm" (Reel-Easy's coined expression for the new art form) films . I naively believed that was the limit of that technology but The Lion King kicked it up another gear and the visuals were jaw droppingly extraordinary. There is such a tactile element to the “animation” of Africa and you keep having to remind yourself that you’re watching a something created on a computer rather than a very well sequenced documentary that just so happens to follow the story of The Lion King. I can’t wait to see what can be done with this technology, especially when it comes to original material that really holds no boundaries or limits of what is possible to depict. 

      Character wise I seem to have gone back full circle in terms of my favourite characters. When I first watched the original Lion King as a very young child, my favourite characters were obviously Timon and Pumbaa. Voiced by the brilliant Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella they were the easiest for me as a kid to relate to with their seamless comedy timing and high energy scenes, they seemed most natural behind the mic. This changed a lot with multiple viewings.

      When my sense of humor became more complex, the dry wit of Zazo, voiced by the legend of sarcasm that is Blackadder’s own Rowan Atkinson, had me in stitches. Then when I started to appreciate acting performances, Jeremy Irons and James Earle Jones as Scar and Mufasa blew me away. However, in this remake Seth Rogan and Billy Eichner with their incredibly infectious, improvisational witty banter was script wise the only fresh part of the film. There was a lot of tongue and cheek fourth wall breaks and nods back to the original that had me laughing out loud a fair few times.

       What The Jungle Book did do well in their remake is increase the plot and story line, expanding The Jungle Book's original film to include more of the Rudyard Kipling novel. In the same way as The Jungle Book increased our understanding of the "Law of the Jungle" I would like to have seen The Lion King expand on the idea of "The Circle of Life". Therefore, unfortunately despite my efforts to overlook it, the slightly lazy shot for shot attitude is what let the film down from being a real success-but you still have to appreciate what the film makers achieved.

Overall I would give this film a rating of 7/10 and a recommendation for everyone to go and see it in the cinema for the pure spectacle of the thing. Just don't expect anything else from it.


I've been Christopher Whitmore, thanks for reading and happy watching.