Bad news. You're dumb.
*2024 Edit -- I try not to be this snide anymore. But, if this scene upset you, maybe rethink your priorities in life. I bet anything Bruce Lee would have found the scene hysterical for numerous reasons.
LMAO.
shareSo, when a movie (that claims to be based off of real life events) completely fabricates an event, and makes a global icon out to be a complete fool, it's okay?
Bruce and Gene Labelle were friends in real life. So, not only is the altercation a fabrication, so is the hostility between the two.
Honestly, the scene didn't upset me, but (in my mind) it does expose Tarantino for the hack that he's always been. I never understood what anyone enjoyed about any of his movies, but to each his own.
WHAT?? This claims to be based on real events? I don't think so. That's about like saying Amadeus is based on real events.
This film is pure fiction, albeit good fiction mind you but still fiction.
Now, in regards to the OP, that scene with Bruce is hilarious, I'm really not sure why people are so caught up in it. If you watch Lee interviews, he was a little snooty at times. But still a great film icon in his day.
The movie was supposedly inspired by real events that occurred in Hollywood. Not that it was true story, but that it was interwoven in-between real life events that happened. I should have been more specific.
Yeah, Bruce could be a bit snooty. I am not denying that. Still, to take a global icon and portray him like that is highly questionable. Although since Tarantino is a complete douche in real life it doesn't surprise me
As for Amadeus- don't get me started on all of the historical inaccuracies of that film. The only things that they got right in it were the names of the characters.
Yep, Amadeus was never sold as a true story, it's total fiction too. Like you said, the names were the only thing that was accurate, pretty much like what we saw in OUATIH. The only thing that's accurate are the names. Both great films though.
But I guess Mozart wasn't a big enough icon for you to get angry over. What is it about Bruce that makes you so angry with Tarantino and not Milos Forman?
Personally, I've never really cared for Tarantino that much but I think he does make good films.
Amadeus was a good movie in its time. When it originally came out and up until the mid 1990s I (and many other people) actually thought that it was a true story. When I found out that it was a complete fabrication I never watched it again.
In reality once Mozart became established in Vienna, He and Salieri were actually friendly. Salieri performed many of Mozart's works, they composed music together, and Salieri trained Mozart's son. So initially, they were in competition when Mozart first arrived, but eventually they grew to respect one another.
What led to all of the rumors about Salieri, and Mozart was mostly due to Salieri's opposition of the monarchy. As a result the monarchy actively destroyed his reputation, and it has only recently begun to recover. His music was really amazing. He had his own style that was identifiable to him. Whenever, I hear one of his pieces (that I haven't heard before) I usually know that it's him.
I will say this about Amadeus, the cast was great, and so was the music (obviously). I even like Tom Hulce's goofiness. However, I wish they would have stuck to the actual true story. I think a story in which the truth about the two of them would have been much more interesting.
Tarantino's film style never clicked with me, and his personality is off putting- at least to me.
I do agree, Tarantino's personality is grating but I suppose I can forgive him to some extent because I do like his movies. I can see his "Bruce Lee caricature" in this movie as being almost like a portrayal of himself. He can be quite obnoxious.
And yes, Amadeus has some historical flaws but I got to give it major props for being such an entertaining movie. It just has one great scene after another which is kind of rare in a film. Best drama film ever in my view... well, this or Magnolia (1999) as a close second or tied perhaps.
Anyhow, just my two cents...
Magnolia was a great. The first time I saw it I didn't want it to end.
shareThe actual story of Mozart would make a far better movie than "Amadeus". Unfortunately, since the debut of that stage play and the hype over the movie version, most of the world now believes Salieri was a bitter hack and Mozart was a giggling imbecile.
shareI know what you mean. In a film that was otherwise careful to perfectly mirror the real history of the events shown it was a glaring error to include that scene.
shareWhat part of ONCE UPON A TIME suggests the author is in any way beholden to 'the way things actually happened'? Were you equally upset about the end? Because I'm pretty sure that's not how things went down when the Manson idiots showed up that night.
That thud and feedback? That's the sound the mic made when I dropped it.
shareThe issue isnt how "true" the story as a whole is
Its about deliberately taking the likeness of some who really did exist and ... taking the piss
especially when that persons not there to defend themself
I was unaware of this whole "based loosely on real shit" angle when i watched it and thought the whole thing was total fiction. But the scene still stood out as "film deliberately dissing Bruce Lee"
BL being the only "real name" in the film as far as I know.
Not that it really bothered me , and im not a Bruce Lee fan , but it still seemed .... rude.
> taking the piss especially when that persons not there to defend themselves
Well put, and in this case a pejorative way that comes off as racist.
Sure Bruce Lee isn't alive today to defend his reputation but what's stopping his legion of fans from defending it? If the movie came out within two years of his death, I'd say it's not fair on his family while they're still mourning but BL died fifty years ago. Just because a famous person has passed on, that doesn't mean the public should suddenly stop making any negative judgements about their public life, right?
In relation to my above point, I never saw any of BL's films and knew almost nothing about him when I saw Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. But from what I did read, BL might have been a little fragile with a short temper but wasn't full of himself the way he was portrayed (https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/quentin-tarantino-bruce-lee-opinion-correct/).
You've never seen a BL film?
You should definitely watch Enter The Dragon and Way Of The Dragon. They might be the two best martial arts films ever made.
Game Of Death would be another good one to watch but Bruce died the year they were filming it and they had to use a double for some of the scenes. Film is still really good though.
I like the scene. It was a fun characterization of an icon. It didn't stop my enjoyment of real Bruce Lee movies. It was just another character.
When you have a movie in which the Sharon Tate murderers were stopped by a guy with a flamethrower, you may as well just enjoy yourself.
The problem is not so much the scene but the fact that Tarantino "justified" himself by explaining that Linda Lee said that Bruce Lee would have beaten Muhammad Ali, which is not true. What she said was that some people believed Bruce would have beaten Ali.
The scene is great but it's built upon incorrect facts.
Your post proves yer dum 2.
shareNah, it took a global icon that pioneered the popularity of MMA (even Dana White calls Bruce the Godfather of MMA), and then turned him into a joke in a horribly choreographed fight scene.
Watch the fight scene from Once Upon A Time In Hollywood and then go watch Chuck Norris vs Bruce Lee in Return of the Dragon. Somehow a film made in the 2010s/2020s (whenever it came out) has WORSE choreography than the guy it's supposed to be mocking.
Bruce was known for practicing leg checks because he trained with Joe Lewis (world famous, world-class kickboxer), along with Chuck Norris and "Judo" Gene Lebell. This idea that Bruce would be out-struck by a Korean war vet (where they teach you basic karate/boxing/judo) is laughable. If they had made him tackle Bruce and ground-and-pound... maybe, but having him OUT-STRIKE Bruce with sloppy footwork and (as I mentioned) awful choreography is why a lot of people have an issue with it. Notice in Ip Man, Donnie Yen upstaged a young Bruce Lee, but NO ONE complains about it. Why? Because one: Ip Man was one of his teachers, and TWO, the choreography was slick and left little for anyone to complain about.
That was the best part of an otherwise bad movie.
shareThis just in: Fictional movie isn't reality! News at 11!
shareThe reason this movie was not shown in China was because Bruce Lee's family requested it not to be shown.
What do you think of that?
I don't.
shareI am guessing there are people who are just cheap A-holes willing to tail ride on other people's fame, to create controversy, in the end simply to make a buck.
To think of it Quentin Tarantino spent most of his career writing and directing movies about low lives, maybe because he was one.
I think Lee's family did the right thing, hit where it hurts.
I think getting upset about it is stupid. Bruce Lee himself would have found the scene hilarious.
But I get it--People cop a dopamine rush from getting offended over things that aren't offensive. Go on then, get your fix.
That is the thing about internet, you get to meet a lot of incredibly shameless people.
shareFor what it is worth, QT himself said that he had "heard that Bruce Lee would not pull punches on stunt men" and that he had heard this happened more than once. Evidently, the Gene LaBell story wasn't the only source reserach on this.
So QT ran with it for that scene. He also said that "ONLY Bruce Lee's daughter has rightful reason to complain about the scene," and he would accept that but he still wrote the scene based on what he had heard.
"Related but unrelated": The late James Garner wrote an autobiography while he was alive, and he took a look at all the movies he made, with little anecdotes along the way.
One forgotten movie was "A Man Could Get Killed" (1966) now famous only for introducing Frank Sinatra's hit "Strangers in the Night" to the world(Sccobie doobie doo.) James Garner's male co-star in the movie was an actor named Tony Franciosa. Garner wrote something like "All through the picture, Franciosa wouldn't pull his punches and kept hitting the stunt men -- who could do nothing about it -- for real. I kept telling Franciosa to knock it off, but he wouldn't -- so I had to pop HIM."
Makes sense, yes? Now, we don't see Bruce Lee hit any stuntmen in OATIH but evidently QT based his "cocky and arrogant" take on the actor/fighter on those stories.
Also, I don't think that Bruce Lee's heirs had the clout to stop OATIH from being released in China. Reportedly, QT refused to cut the scene and HE had power over distribution(for one thing, Sony wouldn't be able to bid for his next movie if they disobeyed his wishes.) With the loss of Chinese markets, OATIH ended up being only QT's SECOND highest grossing film. I expect he had enough money already.
Also, I guess in a first draft, Cliff Booth BEAT Bruce Lee in the fight, but Pitt refused to play that. So the fight is stopped before it can end, at a tie in falls.
So QT justifies his writing base on his self claimed hearsay, but we know he fabricated the events as @Enigmaticocean77 already pointed it out, so QT being a lying low life is pretty much an undeniable fact, why would we believe his other claims?
Bruce Lee's family did make a formal request. If it weren't for disrespecting Bruce Lee, I see no other reason why China would not show such a star vehicle.