This was a Tarantino movie?

Rating: 2/10 (17 August 2019)

Quentin's movies have consisted of aesthetically beautiful scenes, intriguing and gripping dialogues, as well as interesting characters in mix-matched, blended scenes.... oh, and plots.
This movie did not have a storyline at all. The Charles Manson plot was built up in the trailer and on the internet in general before the release of the movie, when he was only shown once, and the only motive and drive for their actions was given slightly before the end in the car with his followers; this felt like a cop-out. They filled the movie with meaningless scenes of DiCaprio's character doing less than the bare-minimum.
I tried to look at it from a different perspective. Many people have been saying this movie, and especially the ending, have been as a sort of "tribute" to Sharon Tate. This confused me, since Margot Robbie's overhyped role in the movie turned out to be nothing but 3-4 scenes in 3 hours and Sharon's personality wasn't even brought out on the screen (shame as well, since Robbie's talent was wasted). The only potentially interesting characters and plots were replaced with Rick's insecure egomaniac complex scenes.
Not to mention the almost caricature-like, borderline problematic scene with Bruce Lee. That one shouldn't be hard to dissect.
3 stars go to the scene with Cliff killing Manson's followers. In a movie with less-than-substantial scenes and wasted potential, this sequence was genuinely so well done and only part that felt 'Tarantinoesque'.
Inglorious Basterds had a scene where Shoshanna simply sat in a crowded restaurant with Hans Landa, clearly a setting where nothing bad can happen to her, and it was more intense than virtually this entire movie.
Cut 2 hours and 35 minutes of this movie and it won't be detrimental to the story... since there isn't one.