Movie Review - Quentin's latest flick

I’m often conflicted on Quentin Tarantino movies. Some can be so good (Pulp Fiction, Inglourious Bastards) and some can stink (Hateful Eight).  Once Upon A Time in Hollywood is a winner. Whew! Quentin captures the 1968 and 1969 vibe with the look, the music, and so many nuances. Leonardo DiCaprio plays an actor on the downhill slide, and Brad Pitt is his stunt double with some issues. Both are excellent. Trust me, there’s a scene with Brad facing off against an actor playing Bruce Lee – it’s priceless.  

Margo Robbie plays Sharon Tate. She’s not in it a lot really, but she does shine and, obviously the Tate figure with the whole Manson ordeal plays a big part of Tarantino’s rewritten history. It’s good to know the backdrop from that time period and understand the references. A younger guy at my workplace thought the flick was boring…but he didn’t “get” it. With Tarantino, you do have to think  a bit (in a good way).

My husband thought it was a tad long and would have edited it down. I can understand his point, but I was okay with the whole flow and mood of the movie. Plenty of laughs and good acting. And I was curious where some of the twists would take us. All in all, I give credit to Quentin for his efforts as a very creative director. He’s unique. Yes, there’s a blast of violence at the end and it works. Plus stay through the credits – some funny touches there with Leo. Plenty of famous faces show up with bit parts – Al Pacino is funny. Once Upon A Time in Hollywood totally entertained me on a rainy Saturday morning – yes, three hours of movie amusement.  Worth the tub of popcorn.

Bummer Movie Review: The Great Gatsby

The Great Gatsby is not so great. As a matter of fact, I give it a C+. Read the book by F.Scott Fitzgerald instead - trust me - same use of 2-1/2 hours. I can't explain the problem with the movie except to say it was a lot of flash without substance, and it was trying to be bigger, to have "meaning", and it just didn't get there.

Baz Lurhmann is an interesting director and I liked his Moulin Rouge. The Great Gatsby had the same rich cinematography, eye popping colors, huge cast, dazzling costumes, and decent acting. But, I just was not entranced. As a matter of fact, the theater I was in had a power surge and the movie stopped in the middle for about twenty minutes. I probably could have left without serious remorse. That's not a good sign.

Tobey Maquire narrated as Nick and he did a good job as the wide-eyed observer, protector of his cousin Daisy Buchanan (played by a dewy Carey Mulligan) and in awe of Jay Gatsby (played by Leonardo DeCaprio). Leo has the look, the intensity, and the panache, and yet...a little something was missing in the connection between him and Daisy. They said all the right lines, but I didn't feel scorching heat or intensity of love. Joel Edgerton, as Tom Buchanan, was suitable as the old money brute, carouser, womanizer, and foe to Gatsby.

There just wasn't a natural flow to the movie. We had scenes that were busy and pretty, and yet the tension didn't build at the pace it should have. It was choppy and disconcerting. With the kick-off of summer movie season, there are plenty of other movie competitors for your dollar. If you must see it, wait for The Great Gatsby to hit Netflix. Go see Ironman 3, or new Star Trek:Into Darkness (that's what I plan to see next) in the theater. And play some serious Jazz Age music, not rapper stuff for 1922. That's just wrong.