This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.
Zamir Humud’s review published on Letterboxd:
This review may contain spoilers.
This the worst film I've seen this year.
It's also kinda morally reprehensible.
This is Tarantino at his self-indulgent worst all the scenes are terribly paced and cut, slogging from scene to scene building to little ultimately, which could be excused for "character development" but these characters don't go through any transformations really, they start and end the same.
And where the film is at it's worst it's the end which I can't find it as anything else than morally repugnant. In this alternative New Hollywood timeline the Manson family murders are brutalized before ever getting a chance to even walking up to Sharon Tate's estate, which could probably be spin to "saving" Tate, but this film plays with the assumptions that the audience has some knowledge of Mason Family Murders, but not wants to ignore what happened after with Polanski, with exception of some vague illusion said by Damien Lewis' Steve McQueen "That Polanski is going to fuck up one of these days". But instead Once Upon a Time in Hollywood chooses to "save" Polanski by having Brad Pitt's Cliff Booth and then Leo DiCaprio's Rick Dalton gleefully brutalize two young girls to death, which in turn change history and "spare" Sharon Tate and by Roman Polanski.
I can't read this film outside the context of a post-MeToo Hollywood and from a Director who's most well known work was made possible because of Harvey Weinstein, and who once said of the survivor of Roman Polanski's drugging and sexually assault as "California party girl" who was "down with it " and who signed a petition spearheaded by Harvey Weinstein to free Roman Polanski when he was arrested and faced extradition.
If Once Upon a Time in Hollywood wants play with the audience's knowledge of Manson Family Murders and Sharon Tate's death, then I'm not going forget everything that happened after.