Tarantino's Inglorious Basterds

[Chasseur]

I'm mildly curious, but I've seen little from him in the past 15 years or so that has not convinced me he's more than a one trick pony. I enjoyed "Reservoir Dogs," and "Pulp Fiction," though I don't think they were the "modern masterpieces" some make them out to be. But much like M. Night Shamalan he seems to have come out strong and then just re-hash his own stuff in weaker and weaker photo-copies. Just my two cents.

 

[BinkieBaumont]

"Hope to catch it this weekend at the "De-Lovely-De-Deco" Piccadilly Cinema here in the Swan River Colony"

 

[Edward]

i refuse to watch this film...its a joke.

I do believe that is the point.

The Grindhouse concept was a good idea. I think Death Proof suffered from too much chit-chat and not enough Kurt Russell and his auto.
Robert Rodriguez rocked his part of the double feautre with Planet Terror. It was campy and gory in that unbelievably bad but good way. PT also had a great cast.

I am hoping Machete with Danny Trejo is as good as the trailer.

I loved the 'talky' side of Death Proof, but then that's what I like about Tarrantino - the dialogue. Action I can take or leave. [huh]

Planet Terror was genius. I love that they didn't explain why they were all so impressed by 'El Ray'. lol

Machete will be fun - the one I really want to see, though, is Werewolf Women of the SS lol

Anyone else spot the glaring 'mistake' with that phone? (I think it's a mistake, anyhow).

 

[FinalVestige79]

I'm looking at the amount of medals hes got on his Tunic...

 

[matrioshka]

Edward,

There is no phone line.

He's also sporting more bling than a Marshal of the Soviet Union...

M

 

[FinalVestige79]

Yup yup...there is a derogatory term for how many medals Russians carry on their tunics.

 

[J. M. Stovall]

Anyone else spot the glaring 'mistake' with that phone? (I think it's a mistake, anyhow).

Are you talking about the coiled cord? Maybe the Germans invented it .

 

[thunderw21]

Are you talking about the coiled cord? Maybe the Germans invented it .

Yep, the coiled cord. They didn't come around until after the war. I'll let it slide, anyways it's a spoof!

SPR had the same mistake. No biggy, though.

 

[J. M. Stovall]

Right! Picking apart this movie would be just like over analyzing Hogan's Heroes.

 

[Doctor Strange]

I suppose I will see it eventually, but Tarantino's work typically leaves me cold. I just don't see his alleged brilliance. Raiding crappy old genres with a lot of winking postmodern attitude simply doesn't do it for me. It's not that I don't understand his intent, but it's not a ride that I enjoy.

Maybe it's because his target audience is 20 years younger than me: I predate the rise of irony as the only way to view... everything.

 

[Fletch]

Not a QT fan, but I think a lot about the way he uses violence in his work.

It's not cartoonish, as some call it. The Black Knight sequence from Monty Python & the Holy Grail is cartoonish. QT violence is meant to show real people feeling real pain and bleeding real blood, only you're not supposed to care.

Maybe this is the point: shoving gore in you face, making you see it as some kind of dry gag, and making sure you feel somewhat degraded because you've bought in.

I don't disapprove of all movie violence, but it has to mean something outside of just hip attitude or commercial pandering. If the QT flavor of gore means anything, it is more as a viewing experience than as part of a story.

One other point occurs to me. QT is very much about film history and in-jokes. He asks the question, "have you watched the right films and were you paying the right kind of attention?" Maybe filling his work with violence was a way to get it taken seriously, in a way it would not have been if it was centered on comedy or sex or whatever, so he could pay tributes and drop references, but no one would call him sophomoric or dilettantish. Culturally aware people tend to respect a dark view more than a lighter one - it's part of being mature and cosmopolitan in the postmodern age.

 

[Solid Citizen]

TERRIFIC Fictional Flic

Saw QT's 152 min. film this AM. GREAT wide angle (Sergio Leone Style) shots & lots of WELL acted extended dialogue scenes. Brad Pitt is good & far better than Mr. Cruise. But, its the performance of Christoph Waltz :eusa_clap above that really steals the show as the SS Officer. Solid Citizen

PS If you hate :eusa_doh: NAZIS :rage: your going to LOVE this film

 

[Lefty]

[
Saw QT's 152 min. film this AM. GREAT wide angle (Sergio Leone Style) shots & lots of WELL acted extended dialogue scenes. Brad Pitt is good & far better than Mr. Cruise. But, its the performance of Christoph Waltz :eusa_clap above that really steals the show as the SS Officer. Solid Citizen

PS If you hate :eusa_doh: NAZIS :rage: your going to LOVE this film

+1 on the whole shebang. Waltz is just fantastic and the comedic parts are really funny.

 

[thunderw21]

Oh boy oh boy! Can't wait to see this!

 

[Viola]

Need to see this immediately.

 

[p51]

Saw it today. It was good, I'll give QT that, but I guess I expected more like "Pulp Fiction in the 40s" which this really wasn't. The ending made me wishing things HAD gone like they did. I can't help but think some kid someday will use it as the basis for his last-minute history report on what happened in 44...
I guess I'm kinda unsure whether I really liked it or not. I was not blown away like I was when I first saw Pulp Fiction back in the day, though.

 

[Lone_Ranger]

It all looks a little too "over-the-top," for me to waste $10. Reminds me of Val Kilmer, in Top Secret, with gratuitous violence.

 

[Viola]

Not a QT fan, but I think a lot about the way he uses violence in his work.

It's not cartoonish, as some call it. The Black Knight sequence from Monty Python & the Holy Grail is cartoonish. QT violence is meant to show real people feeling real pain and bleeding real blood, only you're not supposed to care.

It's interesting to me that I agree with this, but I see it as a rather more intriguing and appealing than you apparently do. (And if I misinterpreted your stance, I apologize contritely!)

I agree it's a look at a sociopathic, or nearly so, view. That is who the characters are, and in a way that is what it asks the viewers to be, for a while. It is like noir to me, in a way; a short time in a world full of rats and bastards and you end up seeing the dignity in the bastards who are slightly better in some ways than the other bastards but there is no not-monster in the story only the dignity of "honest thugs" and seeing the dark, twisted virtue in hard men.

Scorsese tapped the same view in some things, I think. Casino was what I was thinking of.

Or maybe I'm talking out of my tuchus, what do you think, Fletch? I really did like your point its not truly cartoonish. I've often thought that but not worded it nearly so well.

 

[Feraud]

It all looks a little too "over-the-top," for me to waste $10. Reminds me of Val Kilmer, in Top Secret, with gratuitous violence.

haha, that is a funny reference! lol

 

[reetpleat]

I saw it this weekend. I liked it a lot. Not always a Quentin fan. Sometimes seems to just throw in silly childhood references and such just to make us like it. But he istalented and Pulp Fiction was a real landmark.

I thought it needed about fifteen minutes cut out, but it moved along nicely overall. Well moving story, interesting plot. Definitely not a spoof. It is a serious spy war thriller.

Some bits for comic effect that mostly work, and occasionally fall flat.

Very suspenseful in the end and interesting choice for an ending. I was expectiing it to be a little more conventional ending, but they gave it a certain twist. Beyond that, i will not say so as not to spoil it.

I give it aB+