I honestly don't know if this is a good movie or not. In some ways, I fall under the intended audience for it, meaning I am extremely well-versed in Hollywood history, black-and-white westerns, and the events surrounding the Sharon Tate murder. But...if there's a story, a progression, a reason the camera needs to keep filming, I couldn't find it. It's two days in the lives of an aging cowboy star and his close friend and stunt double, and the circumstances they run across...followed by a tag that has nothing to do with story and everything to do with spectacle. They also needed to justify the marketing and Margot Robbie's existence in this movie as Sharon Tate.
Let me qualify some statements. I can get behind reasonable nostalgia and a man coming to terms with his has-been status. There are some truly vulnerable moments in the movie, all of them come from DiCaprio, unsurprisingly the most talented actor in the cast. There's also a little bit of La La Land in that Tarantino documents a Los Angeles that no longer exists. The monuments have mostly been torn down and the city has a short memory.
On a personal level, I connected with the episode wherein Tate finds herself in Westwood and heads to the Bruin Theater to watch the movie she is in. I went to UCLA. I know Westwood and its twin movie theaters real well. Going to a movie by myself was something I did, hoping either to be entertained for a couple hours or for the creators to impart some wisdom I can use in my own filmmaking pursuits (I still do this, though I'm in grad school in Texas). I also got a kick out of watching how other film-goers reacted to what was happening on the screen.
Enough personal nostalgia, back to the review.
I once had someone tell me that Tarantino's schtick is "Look how many movies I've seen and how much I know about them!" He's a fan lucky enough to find himself behind the camera. It goes without saying that one should love movies if they're going to make them, but outside of a handful of moments, the movie is just interesting. The substance is lacking.
Being a big Bruce Lee fan, I have to address his inclusion in the film. Inadequate portrayals are nothing new to me. Not once has Hollywood gotten him right. Tarantino joins the list of failures. Yes, he talked a big game. Yes, he was a bonafide character big on theatrics. Yes, he knew Tate and Jay Sebring (who got Lee his first break in the American film industry). No, he didn't say he would cripple Muhammad Ali, he said the size of Ali's fists would be too big to handle. And no, he wouldn't lose a fight to a stuntman. Lee didn't just fight on screen. He was forced to leave Hong Kong at 18 because he got into street fights for fun. The point is, Bruce Lee isn't a joke or a strawman for Brad Pitt to certify his macho credentials.
I consider this movie an imperfect mess with the occasional high point.
