Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood: The comedy of the stars of the past, present and future.

You may read the premise of this article being a complete cult movie buff and ask yourself, How can you consider "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" an underrated comedy when everyone else saw it? To which I will answer you with a different approach than the one you have about this movie. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, I call it an underrated comedy beyond its own humor (which is very good), but for its great social impact by bringing out what would be the new generation of actresses in the current decade, marveling with the consolidated present, and reinforcing with the adored past of cinema by creating a plot in honor of one of the saddest episodes in Hollywood's history. Join me to read below my particular point of view about this comedy gem and the closure it gave us to say goodbye to the decade of the 2010s, but giving us a bright future for the beginning of the 2020s.

The drive towards a new era

Before we get into talking purely about the film, I want to highlight a detail that I think is very important to mention. Considering that this film was released on July 26, 2019, it marked a beginning and end for the stellar generations of the new decade, becoming poetic as the very plot of the film handles this kind of dilemma with the brilliance and decadence of the actors. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying at all that Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt, or Margot Robbie are faded Hollywood stars, not at all. However, my point is that it brought to light actresses like Margaret Qualley, Sydney Sweeney or Mikey Madison, the latter having taken home an Oscar at the last Oscars 2025 ceremony for her performance in "Anora".

Several of those I mentioned have been categorized as having risen to stardom in recent years, such as Sydney Sweeney with her roles in "Euphoria", "Anyone but You", "The White Lotus" or "Immaculate". 

Also, Margaret Qualley in "Poor Things", "Kind of Kindness", "Maid" and finally, with her biggest hit, in "The Substance".

Why doesn't anyone understand it?

The story is about Rick Dalton, a television actor in the late 1960s who is experiencing a major slump in his successful career. He realizes how the industry works, how actors' periods of brilliance are short-lived, and then they are replaced by someone new. At the same time, his relationship with his chauffeur and stunt double, Cliff Booth, develops. A somewhat broken down and lonely character, but one who is loyal to Rick. It is important to emphasize that this is Rick Dalton and Cliff Booth's film, not a historical drama in which the murder of Sharon Tate is depicted as the core of the plot... Wait, you don't know who Sharon Tate is?

Sharon was a beautiful actress married to director Roman Polanski. The beautiful woman who was brutally murdered along with friends of hers at the hands of a gang of hippies called "The Family" at her residence on August 8, 1969. The murders were horrific; Sharon alone received 16 stab wounds. News that shocked Hollywood and to this day is a completely heinous and disgusting act. Well, the plot of the film is set in those two years, with Tate's subplot as an important part, but the story is not the event itself, but the journey of Rick Dalton.

The first thing you will notice when watching this film is that the first hour and a half can get considerably long, and yes, it really is. This film, unlike Tarantino's previous works and what we are used to due to his particular tone and rhythm in his films, is out of that convention and style. But this is not necessarily bad; all the progress or evolution is for Rick's character. If we compare with other Tarantino's films, this is the first one where the objective of the character is not so tangible that leads to situations of action or violence. I don't think it's appropriate to label this movie as "boring" since the narrative is always kept interesting, combining scenes from the movies and series starring Rick Dalton to make comic moments or use flashbacks for the same purpose, besides understanding the characters well.

Despite this, I think it's safe to say that this is Tarantino's slowest film, regardless of tone and genre. It's probably due to the fact that the original cut of the film was 4 hours, as the director really crammed a lot of stuff into it. I guess he has the right to experiment at this stage of the game; therefore, this installment is like an homage from him towards cinema. Now, does this make the movie bad? Not at all; the ending manages to capture such a nice feeling that it makes you want to watch it again with a new perspective, but it does make many people who are casual Tarantino fans consider it his worst film simply because it's so different.

A different, but unique ending

Now it's time to talk about the ending of the film, which in a way gives sense to this film. There was a very big reason why, at the time of its release, those who knew the Sharon Tate story I briefly explained a few paragraphs ago, were looking forward to seeing Tarantino's portrayal of this event, and what he did was the best he could have done to avoid falling into the cliché and give a unique touch to this film.

As in "Inglourious Basterds" this plot is not faithful to the story; the events occur arbitrarily as Tarantino would have wanted them to happen. "Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood" the mere title refers to what happens in its story; it is the tale we all would have wanted to happen, the justice that never happened. 

Sharon Tate's plot, as we mentioned, is just a subplot in this film; at the end is when the threads come together and complements the plot of Rick and Cliff. The interesting thing is that the existence of these characters in the story of Sharon Tate changes absolutely everything, because their intervention makes that in that universe the murders never happen because the gang of Charles Manson (Leader of "The Family") decides to kill Rick Dalton first instead of going for Sharon Tate, and this results in... Well, in a sequence with the magic and unique touch of Quentin Tarantino.

Cliff Booth kills them in the most brutal, violent and cruel way we can imagine, but let's not focus on what happens but on what this means to us as an audience. For me, the murder sequence is one of Tarantino's best because of how it makes you feel; the catharsis and release of the moment are incredible. You're smiling! Your heart relaxes, and the endorphin sits in your body. What you are seeing is pure justice, poetic justice that in real life we will never see.

What this scene accomplishes is how the anticipation is built up. Quentin is aware of what the audience knows; he builds the anticipation based on that, and there are times when he subtly breaks the fourth wall by referencing that we are all waiting to see the murder scene. First, they give us almost the whole third act full of rising tension because it looks like we're already going to see the deaths we're expecting, but then they subvert what we expect, and we have the sequence where the killers die instead of the original victims, the victimizer is victimized, and that feels very, very good. It's the way Tarantino, in his own way, pays homage to Sharon Tate, giving those who took her life the fate that we all would have wanted them to have, the fate that even you as a viewer would want to be giving her personally.  

Watching Cliff smashing skulls was extremely exciting; that's the magic of the film and Tarantino, how with the same violence he can disturb you or, as in this case, make you feel happiness, fun, cathartic violence, deliberation. It's like the ending of "Django Unchained" where we enjoy when he kills all the slavers in Calvin Candie's house. Besides the fact that this is a very funny sequence, it changes your whole perspective of the film and gives it meaning; it makes you want to watch it again, no matter how slow it is at the beginning. Because even this event is the one that concludes the arc of Rick Dalton, since throughout the film we see how he suffers ups and downs in his thinking of himself, the whole footage is spent feeling unworthy, even seeing Tate herself as if she did not deserve to live next to him. And the ending, when he unconsciously saves her and she invites him to have a drink at her house, marks the end of that arc. He is finally worthy of meeting and greeting her, even though they have lived next door to each other for so long. So important is this, that throughout the film they are never seen or interact directly until the final shot, where she embraces him and invites him into her home, thus ending the film.

I thought this was brilliant; it gives a lot of strength to the ending not only because you understand the tribute to Sharon Tate, but because the air of hope can be breathed; that's what prevails in the end, hope. Rick ends up with possibilities of a pleasant future, Sharon is alive, the night is young, and they go to party to have a good time. This is interesting too because Tate's whole subplot is to show her as a pure soul, an innocent, good, white, white character who exudes sympathy and love. And everyone thinks all that is to make you hurt when she gets killed, but no, that's what makes you feel so good at the end, because that purity and happiness are kept intact, because Tarantino granted her what was taken from her, life. A story that everyone expected to be dark and tragic ends up being beautiful and warm. That's why they applaud it, for that ending that makes you feel so many things that you never expected at any moment. It may not be Tarantino's best film, but it is the one that takes the most risks and moves away from his marked style; this makes it unique in his filmography, and thanks to the original tribute he was able to make, it becomes a film that is totally worth it, to watch on the big screen and repeat it from time to time, a very good film.