August 19th and 20th impressions of the movie - multiple realities + In Dreams

Rating: 9/10 (20 August 2019)

My third review of the movie.
Something does not let go, after multiple viewing of the movie.
Now I believe that multiple realities exist in the movie at the same time. One, "grounded" reality is the real-life persons' life, up to a point. Another, "real-fictional" reality are the lives of Rick and Cliff, as we follow them on-screen. The third, "unreliable-fictional" reality are the flashbacks of all protagonists, as it is the way they remember them, or would like to remember them, or it is the way they perceive them. Then, we have the reality starting by Manson killers driving up Cielo Dr. This reality should be called "dream-fictional" reality, as it is the result of all the previously mentioned realities.
Some reviewers would like us to believe, that the last reality didn't really happen. Well, guess what, most of the things in this movie didn't really happen. There was no Cliff Booth coming to Spahn's Movie Ranch with Pussycat, checking everything and everybody out and leaving a bad taste for everybody involved. This thing simply did not occur. But it did. And it leads to many turning points in the finale. However, the "dream-fictional" reality of the finale can happen only within the overall framework of all the stories, that we face during the movie.
Therefore, the elements like acid laced cigarette, drinking overload, change of plan by Manson disciples, the showdown, and whatever comes next in altogether another reality from all of the above, let's call it "conditional future reality".
Such reality is completely outrageous, if we compare it to the "real" reality, the one we know from the history books.
Which brings forward certain questions:
It is not really important what happens to Rick and Cliff, they are fictional characters. Also, such things happen in Hollywood, like career crash or career revival, quite circumstantially, or on a basis of human factor decision. Some of these decisions were undertaken by QT himself, not infrequently.
It is, on the other hand, crucially important what happens to Sharon. We meet her, briefly enough, but substantially enough to perceive her, to a certain degree, for what she represents (I still think Margot is not able to replicate Sharon fully, but that's beside the point). The tendency is here, and many people can recognize it. And yet, some hippies calling themselves the Manson family decided to destroy this life, for reasons clear to them alone. The consequences of this act were fatal, to this day. Whatever would have happened to Polanski, had his wife survived, what kind of movies he would have made instead, what kind of life he would have lived, would there be a "Chinatown" at all?
There is a whole chain of events, that could have been averted, if...
...or not. If it was a "hit", it would have happened anyway, or anyway it would have been repeated. Or, was it all about the money, and Manson's musical career? Or his "religion and movement", that was not acceptable? Because, the murders that happened, meant "the end" also for the perpetrators and everything connected to them.
So far, I managed to get closer only to the real Sharon, through different materials available on the Internet: her movies, her roles, the role in the TV shows, some short interviews and fashion clips.
The observation does not waver - she was the nicest person, full of compassion, joie-de-vivre, hidden wisdom, but also secretive, mystical, and infinitely fatalistic.
Also, it is important to note her voice from the interphone (in the movie), on 2 occasions (in August) - it is a modulated Sharon Tate voice, it is not Margot Robbie's voice. Of course, QT has chosen the closest approximation possible casting Margot Robbie, as her physical looks and appearance, her inherent positive nature and goodness, all these contribute to a likeness that is fascinating. To a degree that it seems like QT really wanted to find and define Sharon closest to her real-life self. To a degree. The accent is wrong, the speech pattern is wrong, the air of mystique is missing, some other features of the character are not exactly right. And, we get to see the real Sharon on a screen, and we get to listen to her voice.
There is another quest for Sharon, that I have identified, by no other than David Lynch in original Twin Peaks. If you combine the roles of Laura Palmer (Maddy Palmer) + Audrey Horne - if you combine the 2 actresses and their respective roles in the series, you get a person, that would've been Sharon Tate, had she lived (but without getting older, which she never did).
It is an obvious fascination by 2 of the greatest film auteurs of our time, and I have already mentioned a feeling I have about Once upon a time in Hollywood vs. Mulholland Drive.
Obviously, QT is obsessed with "final" stages of the creative process. He has correctly observed, that many artists, even and especially the ones, where their outlook is not of primary concern, i.e. where aging and such does not directly influence the marketability of the person, also, sooner or later reach the point of being "less useful" or obsolete.
He has done his homework, as always. There is a number of film directors, writers, other type of authors, that have reached a breaking point in their respective careers relative to artistic development, in other words "the law of diminishing returns" kicked in.
There can be many factors to this effect, from natural aging, substance abuse, world-weariness, a combination of the above. It can be a generation (shift) thing, as well, as you may just as well be on the cutting edge of an industry for - 10 years? 20 - 30 years - perhaps? More - not very likely.
I believe this is also the background of QT's "retirement plan". He would like to stay ahead of the curve also in this department. He would like to stay faster than his opponents.
I can't say if he is right or wrong.
Yes, there are indications for all these possible outcomes.
Also, most of the great constructive artists really faced a decline in their respective outputs, somewhere after 60, or 65, or 70. Many of them also died young, so to speak, their curve was interrupted. And there are those, that did not fall into any of these categories - rare individuals, that continued and continue creating long after their peers went to obsoletion.
So it is not really a done thing. The question is, is there anything else one has to say? Is there anything more, that can be shared with the world? Is there anything, where you can still represent an avant-garde?
And, even more important: is there anybody coming up? Are there new talents of the new generations, that are up to the speed? We are talking about art, originality, creative process, ideas, interpretation, etc., not about business, sales, coal mining, etc. The natural law may not necessarily apply.
That's why we have QT. That's why we need Sharon Tate.
In Dreams (August 20th)
Fourth time a charm. This story has sequels, as I have watched the movie again, and new ideas come, that I consider worth sharing.
This time, I decided to go easy. Just like the 5th viewing of the movie. I know the story, the sets, the dialogues, the sequence of events, I recognize most of the soundtrack.
The 5th viewing was for the feeling. How does it feel to drive around Hollywood of 1969, how cool it can be at Playboy mansion on Saturday evening, what kind of music was playing on the radio, how come it's always warm in LA, WTF were Paul Revere & the Raiders?
Every scene with Sharon is a delight. It is "in dreams". As it is not 1969, and we don't live in an alternate world, that was a consequence of the story from the movie.
"Bring back the romantic age..." somebody would say. Alas, nobody can do that, as the past as we would like to remember it, did not necessarily happen. So it doesn't mean that other past (that did not happen), is actually unreal. Perhaps both these versions are equally hard to objectivize.
We know the consequences of all these moments of time. On a personal level, these are disastrous, as always. On a broader level, they may have or may not have had any impact to the course of history.
The movie is about the "factory of dreams". It is full of alternate realities, and it feels like a dream. It is an experiment of how to combine destinies of real people and fictional characters in one set-up. I can't say it hasn't been done before, but I can say that this time it has been done right.
I may have to see the movie again, or even a few more times. Some feeling is still missing. It would be helpful to have an intermission. Whatever, when the DVD / Blu Ray comes out, you can have as many intermissions, as you wish.
And if I remember correctly, it was QT who once argued, that the "home entertainment" principle of watching movies is a completely different experience compared to the theater experience...
Yes, bring back the easy life, when people could drive around listening to the radio, people could hitch-hike, people could drop in on celebrities or just hang out at Playboy mansion.