- Posts: 16929
- Thank you received: 10375
Bugs: Recent Topics Paging, Uploading Images & Preview (11 Dec 2020)
Recent Topics paging, uploading images and preview bugs require a patch which has not yet been released.
INGLOURIUS BASTERDS
- Michael Barnes
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Mountebank
- HYPOCRITE
Now, I'm not much a Tarantino fan. I liked KILL BILL and PULP FICTION was good for its time although it hasn't held up, but I find his endless references to the movies that he and I both have seen very tiring. I also think he's a gimmicky director that has more tricks than confidence.
However, INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS was a masterpiece. I think it's the best film of the year, and it's definitely his most assured and confident film to date. There's a lot less trickery and more raw and very entertaining filmwork, and the references to other movies were so obscure that they'll sail right over the heads of all but the most ridiculuous film nerds (Antonio Margerheti? Emil Jannings? Winnetou?). It's not a big action picture like the trailers seemed to suggest, and it's not a war movie at all. It's almost like a hybrid of a spaghetti western, the "men on a mission" film, and a Hitchcockian suspense picture. It's one of the more tense films I've seen in a while and it's all done through dialogue. Long, extended dialogue scenes with multiple layers and agendas resulting in explosive or shocking outcomes.
Cast was uniformly great, whoever that dude was that played SS colonel Hans Landa should win an Oscar. Brad Pitt chews every piece of scenery he can find as Aldo Raine (hmm...Aldo Ray?) and even though we only see a brief sample of the Basterds in action, it's one of those kinds of things where you imagine their exploits almost like legends. You don't need to see more of what they do. Even Eli Roth was pretty cool in the film.
And yes, I _loved_ the 1980s music video part with the Bowie song. It was totally appropriate. Out of chronology, yes. But it completely worked.
There's one moment...and this is a spoiler so stop reading now...that I thought was as profound a statement on the power of cinema as anything that has ever been filmed. When Shoshanna shoots Zoller and looks out to see him on the screen and then back at his body...that was incredible. I got goosebumps.
Anyway, if you've seen it, let's rap. If you haven't you should go see it now. Just don't expect some kind of WWII film, it's not about WWII at all. The tank skirt brigade should just stay home.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
The guy who plays Landa is called Christoph Waltz.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
I hate every movie that people on this site like, though.
I finally took the time to watch THE LIVES OF OTHERS recently. I've owned it on DVD since forever. Now THAT'S a great movie.
EDIT: What I'm trying to say is that it's a good movie; entertaining, stylish, and thought provoking. It just doesn't happen to be a masterpiece, as far as I can tell.
To Schweig: It's not violence porn like KILL BILL (especially VOL 1). Man, I hated KILL BILL VOL 1. There are a couple of intense scenes, though. One of them literally made me feel like I was going to through up, but I'm a wimpy sensitive artsy type, so that happens a lot.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
It made me uncomfortable the entire time I watched it, the tension it built was just insane. I found myself laughing and being bothered by what I was laughing at.
It was wonderful.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Here's my critique of the film which, as I've already said, I quite enjoyed. However, it is not a masterpiece because...
...the ending was a big letdown. Now, I know that the story isn't meant to be plausible, so criticizing it for a lack of plausibility is silly. However, one of the themes of the film is the building of dramatic tension, and I feel that there is little payoff for any the tension because the ending is an anticlimax.
PULP FICTION *is* dated, but at least the diverse subplots intersect. I was frustrated that Shoshana's plot thread failed to intersect *at all* with the Operation Kino plot thread, even though both concluded, by coincidence more than anything else, at the movie theater. Shoshana never learned about Operation Kino, and the Basterds never learned about Shoshana's resistance effort (except for Eli Roth and that other guy, but they just seemed to take it in stride).
If the Basterds had never gained entrance to the theater, Shoshana would still have killed the entire NAZI high command. The Basterds simply didn't need to be there, except to distract Landa. That's why the film was anticlimactic to me. The Basterds didn't really succeed at anything, except disfiguring Landa at the very end. The main subplot was actually a two-act story about Shoshana: ACT ONE -- family is killed by Landa; ACT TWO -- Shoshana burns the high command to death. That's it. Just another Tarantino movie about female revenge.
So, Tarantino's careful escalation of dramatic tension is admirable, but he kind of blows it at the end, because the story just isn't very well constructed. Throughout the movie, there's all this suspense about the fate of the Basterds, but ultimately, they're the ineffectual thugs that they appeared to be at the outset. Our concern for them was misplaced all along because they were useless, and their heroics were futile. Shoshana didn't need them. In fact, if they hadn't been there, she'd have assassinated Landa, too.
I get that, when we're laughing at the sight of Hitler laughing at the propaganda movie, it's supposed to be heavy irony and shit like that. Whatever. I think that INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS takes the stylized and excessive cinematic violence that is one of Tarantino's most overused stylistic tropes and turns it on the structure of his story and, figuratively, on his audience.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Michael Barnes
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Mountebank
- HYPOCRITE
- Posts: 16929
- Thank you received: 10375
And I do think it's significant that
I think too that you've got to keep in mind that it is a movie about movies in a lot of ways, and elements like the Basterds are really kind of signifying placeholders than meaningful plot motivators.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Space Ghost
- Offline
- D10
- fastkmeans
- Posts: 3456
- Thank you received: 1304
I think too that you've got to keep in mind that it is a movie about movies in a lot of ways, and elements like the Basterds are really kind of signifying placeholders than meaningful plot motivators.
It would be interesting to hear more about this. I fear I am too dense to recognize this on my own or be able to interpret it if I did.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Michael Barnes
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Mountebank
- HYPOCRITE
- Posts: 16929
- Thank you received: 10375
But yeah, all Tarantino movies are about "the movies", and this is no different. Cinema language and storytelling methods are all over the place, but it's much less gimmicky than usual for Tarantino.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Ah, but see, I think you're missing the point that
It doesn't matter than ShoshannaWarning: Spoiler!none of the film's ostensible heroes emerge as heroes- the bad guy effectively wins.Warning: Spoiler!didn't know about Operation Kino or vice versa- both were fairly absurd schemes to begin with that were doomed to some degree of failure.
I don't think I missed that point. I'm just saying that it was a bad dramatic choice. Tarantino works so hard at the construction of nail-biting suspense...
It was really Landa's
Warning: Spoiler!involvement that made both work, and he's the one that really emerged as the winner
I disagree that...
...Landa was involved with Shoshana's plot to burn down the movie house. He didn't know about it, and he wasn't there. He provoked it by killing Shoshana's family in the first act, but I don't see him as a linchpin that holds together the fifth act. He doesn't know about Shoshana or the fire, and he doesn't react to it in any way. The film would have been way better if he knew what Shoshana was planning and did nothing to prevent it. Then the bargain that he struck with Aldo would have been a deliberate fraud. That way, Shoshana's subplot would at least have had *some* implication to Aldo's. It would have made Landa even *more* evil.
Warning: Spoiler!
And I do think it's significant thata whole brigade full of hard-ass action movie motherfuckers with zero morality and little characterization beyond 1) Jewish 2)on a mission 3)ruthless.Warning: Spoiler!the wronged Jewish woman winds up wreaking infinitely more havoc in the larger scale of things than
But part of the gag is that these hard-ass action movie motherfuckers are...
...stereotypically nebbishy Jewish guys, except for Hugo Stiglitz and a couple of others who die before the last act begins anyway. I guess I'm saying that I don't understand their purpose in the movie at all. They don't ultimately do anything, and even Tarantino forgets to tell us what happened to several of them at the end of the film. By my count, four of the original eight Basterds are unaccounted for when the credits roll; they didn't die in the shootout in the basement, they didn't die in the movie house, and they weren't present when Aldo delivers Landa to the Allies. Where did they go?
I think too that you've got to keep in mind that it is a movie about movies in a lot of ways, and elements like the Basterds are really kind of signifying placeholders than meaningful plot motivators.
Like I said, I guess I don't understand their purpose.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
1. the scene with Hitler in front of the huge stylized map of Europe
2. the fact that Hitler looked like something from a Mel Brooks movie, rather than Bruno Ganz
3. the projection of Shoshana's face on the smoke was cool
4. Hugo Stiglitz *was* pretty kickass
5. Landa, of course
6. the idea of using celluloid film to accelerate the fire
7. the way that Landa figures out about Operation Kino
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Black Barney
- Offline
- D20
- 10k Club
- Posts: 10045
- Thank you received: 3553
Tonight I'm off to see the Cove, yo
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Michael Barnes
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Mountebank
- HYPOCRITE
- Posts: 16929
- Thank you received: 10375
You know, I was going to continue the defense of the film but I realized that it's pointless. The movie was simply massively entertaining to me, I thought it scored on all the technicals and I really loved the screenplay. I just had an awesome time, and it was the first time where I felt that Tarantino really used what he learned from all those sleazy European post-war potboilers, Spaghetti Westerns, and semi-seedy pictures like THE NIGHT PORTER to good use rather than simply repeating what was already there. It's just a damn good time at the movies, and _that's_ what I liked the best about it.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
It's just a damn good time at the movies, and _that's_ what I liked the best about it.
We agree on that point.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Posts: 284
- Thank you received: 6
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.