Making a movie with neither a plot not a narrative is NOT innovate ...

Rating: 4/10 (19 August 2019)

You're sitting there waiting for the movie to start only to realise it's not going to start, this random sequence of scenes is the ENTIRE MOVIE, 90% percent is just meaningless dialouge (while sometimes funny) ultimately leads to nothing. literally speaking there are just 2 scenes that contribute to what can be considered a story. And now to my biggest criticisms for this movie:
Not having a plot, storyline and/or narrative is neither ingenius nor a new genre it's just BAD. A movie that requires background knowledge to understand and does not convey this background information in the form of exposition is a BAD movie. A movie that portrays a character (Sharon Tate played by Margot Robbie) that has no impact on the story, or anything at all is a Bad movie. but we do get alot of stylish shots of her driving/doing mundane things that tell us nothing about her as a person and of course her feet.
I can't stress this enough, a well constructed narrative and plot is the MOST important aspect in any film, we want to be told a story, and if there is no story to be found, what can we as the audience actually appreciate? Yes this movie had great cinematography and was filmed in a stylised manner and the soundtrack was fun, but that all doesen't matter because there was simply no story being told, scenes just happen and then the end just happens and thats the movie.
If a new director did the exact same movie with unknown actors it would flop for the reasons I just mentioned. Don't let directorial hype get the best of you, this film is a miss. Let's keep it real guys. This is coming from someone who considers inglorious basterds and pulp fiction as (among other titles) some of the greatest movies in modern cinema,