Light! Camera! Action! Is it this film watchable? Yes, but this film's limelight is not so bright.

Rating: 7/10 (20 August 2019)

Although, the 9th motion picture from writer director Quentin Tarantino was hyped up as retelling of the infamous Manson family murders of Aug 1969, it really isn't the main focus. There isn't even one mention of the Beach Boys or Helter Skelter. In truth, 'Once a Time in Hollywood' shines a spotlights on the trials and tribulations of show business, by following the story of a washed up TV cowboy, Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) on his pursuit to manage his fame and fortune during late 1960s. Without spoiling the movie too much, while, there is no business like show business. The movie could had been a little bit better. Some parts of the 2 hour and 41 minute runtime didn't quite dominated the red carpet or kept my eyes on the screen. Much of the film's flaws come from the fact that there isn't much of an uphill struggle for Rick to stay on top. It's not like he lost a lot of money, associates or gain a dangerous nearly deadly level of substance abuse during the majority of the movie. He's still living a pretty good life in a lap of luxury with friends like stunt performer Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt). Because of that, I really couldn't get too invested in his side of the story. Don't get me wrong, Leo is fine in the role, but maybe an older more season actor could had made the 'Lancer' arch scenes seem visually a little more powerful to me. Plus, it would make more sense in story, why, Dalton is so traditional when it comes to change. Another thing that bugs me is that Booth & Dalton rarely have any conflict or disagreements with each other, as Cliff is way too pretty easy going with his boss. I was hoping for, at least, one skirmish, in which, the conservative Dalton would get a little mad at Cliff for his counterculture lifestyle & connection with the Manson family. Sadly, we don't even see that. As there is little conflict between him and the main villains. As for Booth, while he has a good amount of screen time, the character rarely has much of a story in this, besides laziest introduce us to the villains in the third act. In truth, the movie would work best if Tarantino establish and focus more on the relationship between Booth & the family a lot earlier in the film. It really could had save time, rather than having him aimlessly go around doing errands and feeding his dog. Because of that, I felt Booth was a little bit underused. To added to that, while Pitt was great in the role. The part should had gone to somebody a bit younger. Why, because it would make Booth's feelings for the hippie culture, a more believable & complex. It would allow a really needed boost in drama. How great the movie could had been if Booth saw both Dalton & Charles Manson (Damon Herriman) as father-figures; each with their own views on how to live life and gain notoriety. It would had make a great dilemma. Sadly, this never came. Subplot like the rumors about him, murdering his wife goes nowhere & his fight with an over the top negative portrayal of Bruce Lee (Mike Moh) really doesn't add much. To make it worst, there is really no connection between the fictional versions of actress Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) with Booth or Dalton besides living on the same road. You would think, in story, they would be friends, or had work together in the past. Sadly, we don't get that. Because of that, the Sharon Tate scenes like her going around shopping and watching her movies didn't really mashed well with the main plot. It felt like time waster. The movie could had made her move to Hollywood to pursue a career in acting a little more a challenging endeavor. It would intercut much better with the scenes where Dalton is trying stay on top; much in the same vein as the 'A Star is Born' films (1937-2018). Regardless, I do like the over the top 2009 'Inglorious Basterds' like altered history changing ending, somewhat. I just wish they went all the way, by killing all the Manson members. It kinda stinks that Charles didn't mean his end in a gruesome matter. Nor did they mention anything about the murders of LaBianca family or Gary Hinman. As exploitative and jarring as the whole sequence can be, none of the scenes didn't felt disrespectful to the real life victims. However, the action in this film does not have the masterful building of suspense of Tarantino's other movies. It lack focus. The same goes to the many mishmash of styles. The blockbuster CGI is jarring and in certain scenes, hurts to see, such as Leo's awkward photo shop input in the 1963 'the Great Escape'. The comedy is a bit lackluster as many of the jokes fell flat for me. The sex factor is really awkward with all those foot fetish shots. Even the storytelling is sporadic and randomly with poorly plan time jumps. The inserted narration from Kurt Russell as Randy, a stunt director is also way out of the blue. Besides the set pieces, the acting, pop culture references and music. It's still sadly not well made. Overall: The 1960s version of the television show 'Entourage' has little rewatch value for me. It was too little over the place for my taste. However, what do I know! For others. They say it's worth checking time and time again. So go seek it out if you haven't watch it. Just note, the film might not have that movie magic, fanatics of this flick were talking about. It not quite a Hollywood Icon.