Ain't It Cool News (

Harry contemplates INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS - Spoiler Heavy. You Have Been Really Warned!

I’ve had a lot of problems with this review. More than I’ve had with any film in a very long time. Why? Well, it is very complicated and I’ve been struggling with how to phrase it. I love every moment of INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS. Every shot, every scene, every performance, every bit of music. I love it. BUT… This isn’t the World War II film I really wanted from Tarantino. And the reason has more to do with me, than with Quentin. I love the WWII genre and its infinite permutations. I love the universe of WWII. A global conflict, perilous intrigue, unforgivable inhumanity, toweringly charismatic leadership, trench heroism, the toughness of being a survivor… the design, imagery, scope… it’s all just so damn awesome. I grew up worshiping GUNS OF NAVARONE and WHERE EAGLES DARE. Later, I fell desperately in love with THE BIG RED ONE. Then there were all those WWII black and white films that I devoured. I wanted Quentin to craft one of those. A men on a mission flick that was rip-roaring, brutal and personal. And that isn’t this film. This is the fictionalized history of how WWII came to a close in the European arena, courtesy of Quentin Tarantino’s fevered brain. And it is something unto itself. It is structured less like a film and more like a novel. Divided up into chapters that you’re not entirely sure how they relate until they begin to build into their explosive conclusion. The film is also crackling with energy in a way that I found unexpected. I didn’t imagine this film from Quentin’s various bite-sized tidbits that he would give us. When he’d speak about the film, it was always about Men On A Mission, and then you read the script and there’s this Shosanna character – and she was beautifully written and even more beautifully portrayed by Melanie Laurent, and she’s integral to the “mission” happening, even though nobody outside that theater would probably ever know that. History would probably canonize Sgt Donny Donowitz, Pfc. Omar Ulmer and Col Hans Landa, but I doubt seriously the world would ever know of Shosanna Dreyfus and her lover Marcel. But Quentin wanted to underline their part in this unlikely, but fun, “true” history of the end of the war. Why is that? Well, a lot of it probably has to do with the fact that Quentin doesn’t seem to pre-structure his films before writing them. It seems he’s the sort of writer that writes a title and then surprises himself as he writes the story under that title. He let’s the story go where it wants to go – and as a result, we get a WWII film that isn’t quite like any other. The basic elements are still here for a MEN ON A MISSION flick. We have the initial formation of the group. We see them in the field a bit. We see the mission they’re built into begin to crumble and we see the plan fall apart, we see them improvise – and with a bit of dumb luck, chance and help from people they don’t even know… it’ll all work out. But the structure keeps us off balance. Keeps us away from the familiar testosterone fueled sweaty man mess of a film, and instead… we get a uniquely Quentin WWII flick. One where a Jew named Donnie Donowitz machine guns Hitler’s face into marinara. And it is thrilling. One where the big bad guy for the film, sees his chance at redemption and seizes it. A film where the Bastards mark survivors so the world will know post-war, that this man was a Nazi – and that fucking rules. At Two and a Half hours, the film feels too brief. I wanted more with these characters. I want to see them being fit for Tuxedos. I want to hear what they say as they gear up for a mission to END THE WAR. At the CINEMAPOCALYPSE Q&A – Quentin said that he had written at 12 part – Mini-series – and wanted to create that. And when he told Luc Besson, Luc was bummed because he wants to see Quentin on the big screen, not on a television. And while I get that… I also can feel that this is the smallest version of something larger. Quentin’s film is incredibly satisfying while also being a bit aggravating. Aggravating because I wanted those Basterds roaming the French countryside creating havoc non-stop. Because Shosanna’s story – I want a whole other film exploring her life from the moment her family was killed, her love with Marcel, till the moment she dies. Because I want a film that’s focused exclusively upon Col Hans Landa. I want to see what happened from the moment he sat down with that French farmer and relished his nickname, to the moment where he despised it. What made the change? I get that it isn’t important for this story, but I want it. I can’t help, but not to want more. This is the stunning blessing and curse of INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS… his characters are so strong, that I can’t help but want more of them. I can’t help it, I’m greedy. And any talk about a sequel/prequel. As Quentin stated himself, he’s promised one for every film he ever made, and has never made one. So we’re likely not to get more. And that’s aggravating. More than at any other point in Quentin’s career, I left the film wanting MUCH MORE. I want to spend many more hours in his WWII universe. And I’m relatively certain I won’t ever see more. Quentin will most likely move on to another genre altogether and we’ll be happier for it. I love watching him play with genres. Like Park Chan Wook told Capone… he infects the genres he plays in. Makes them infected with Tarantino. And thank God, they’re infectious as all hell. And I’m among the inflicted. This is absolutely a Tarantino WWII film – and it is a glimpse at that universe. I dare say, we’re not likely to see a better drawn “villain/hero” as Hans Landa. Christoph’s performance is brilliant. Just amazing to watch and not how you think. He’s extremely complicated and brought to life by an absolutely riveting performance. But then, every performance is riveting. Take Brad Pitt – his performance can’t help, but make me want more. The scar on his neck, his very fun accent, the way he moves and analyzes situations. The thing is, in this one film, Quentin planted the seeds of larger stories. We only glimpse these characters as they drive the story forward. The entire first chapter is to create Shosanna’s motivation for later. The second chapter is to establish the Basterds and how they’ve begun to change things in the war. The third – is to set up a relationship that leads to everything that happens later. The fourth is to establish the intended operation that the Basterds went on – and the last is what actually went down. Every scene is necessary. Every piece memorable. Forget any expectations or beliefs of what you’re getting out of INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, it isn’t the movie you think it is. Not the one in trailers, not really even the script. It has a unique life unto itself. I really liked the film on first viewing, on second – those feelings intensified. There’s just something so delightful about the film. It isn’t stuffy, which is a problem that most modern WWII films have going against them. In this, you know that anything can happen. And that’s very refreshing. Watch it and you’ll see. It truly is its own thing and it kicks ass.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:09 a.m. CST


    by theplant

    told ya

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:09 a.m. CST

    Good review

    by BurnedNotice_Dude

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:10 a.m. CST

    Tarantino aura will go sour with this one

    by theplant

    Tarantino is a director of the past

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:11 a.m. CST

    harry delivers!

    by awepittance

    i was actually waiting for your review wondering if it would ever be posted. :)

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:12 a.m. CST

    Harry best films of 09, how does this compare?

    by Miyamoto_Musashi

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:13 a.m. CST

    Less anxious to see it now...

    by JonJonB

    ..that Harry's spoiled it something rotten.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:18 a.m. CST

    Can't wait for this one

    by Miyamoto_Musashi

    Pulp Fiction, Reservior Dogs, Kill Bill 1 and 2, my kind of movies and would all make my top 30 movies of all time. Jackie Brown, whilst not a stand out for me also a great and underappreciated film. Grindhouse was lots of fun.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:19 a.m. CST

    thanks for the spoiler there harrold...

    by iwasredempted

    not that it was much of a spoiler but the hitler thing i would have liked to experience as i watched the movie.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:21 a.m. CST

    Resevoir Dogs is good

    by Cagliostro

    Pulp Fiction hasn't aged well. Kill Bill 1 & 2 were mostly lame.This still smells of turd. Jakie Brown is probably the most solid thing he's done.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:22 a.m. CST


    by rivvorz

    I agree with pretty much everything Harry said there. This is not the film of the trailers - it's something far, far better. I want more.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:23 a.m. CST

    Well, gee, thanks Harry...

    by Denty420

    Good review but did you have to completely spoil it by revealing the fate of A.H?

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:23 a.m. CST



    Listen - there's a SPOILER tag on the review. That means, if you don't want spoilers - don't read the thing with the SPOILER tag on it. You clicked. You read the spoiler tag and you chose to ignore it. I have no sympathy for you.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:26 a.m. CST

    best films of 09


    It is easily at the top of the list on multiple fronts. Performances, script, cinematography, entertainment, etc... But my favorite film of the year so far is still DISTRICT 9 - it's fucking great.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:27 a.m. CST


    by kwisatzhaderach

    1) Reservoir Dogs <p> 2) Jackie Brown <p> 3) Pulp Fiction <p> 4) Kill Bill Vol 2 <p> 5) Kill Bill Vol 1 <p> 6) Death Proof

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:28 a.m. CST

    Holy shit THAT'S what that is?

    by JonJonB

    Those spoiler tags are nowhere near loud enough for what they represent.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:33 a.m. CST


    by Donkee

    I agree while i have already seen the film so nothing was spoiled i think there should be a mention at the start of the review about the spoilers cause ive been visiting this site for years and thats the first time ive ever noticed the tag.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:41 a.m. CST

    IB is great

    by reni

    The performances all round were exceptional especially Bruhl, Waltz & Melanie Laurent. Loved it. Even Eli was good! Bravura film-making.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:41 a.m. CST


    by Bobman46

    I agree Harry- I STILL want to see the guys on a mission film from him but this is a really stunning film - . The HUGE opening scene that feel like it goes on forever - God the Jew Hunter is just an amazing character and what a performance to the little moments where Tarantino breaks his tension for a moment with a laugh. Pretty much amazing. Also, more than half the film is subtitled. It's a good read too! Still thinking about tit all. Lots to digest.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:43 a.m. CST

    whats the point

    by Herman_Blume

    Whats the point making up a bullshit story set during WW2, there are so many true life incrediable events that could have been adapted, instead we get this crap. its like a broken pencil...pointless.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:47 a.m. CST

    Not even like script?

    by zed261

    Harry you mean by that there are lot of changes in final movie or it's just somehow different in atmosphere..? And is Maggie Cheung in final cut? I've read somewhere that she was cut off in Cannes version.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:53 a.m. CST

    But Harry, did you get AVATAR DAY tickets?

    by VMS

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:55 a.m. CST

    I stopped reading this review when...

    by gingerella

    I read the line 'I love the WW2 Universe.' Show some respect.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:56 a.m. CST


    by Kobaal

    That's about right, give or take.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:58 a.m. CST


    by GetEveryone

    You blew the ending!?

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6 a.m. CST

    The script sucked

    by Laserhead that can't be a bad thing.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:09 a.m. CST



    Yup - that's why there were Spoiler Warnings

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:21 a.m. CST

    That's really disappointing.

    by VicenzoV

    See Harry, I really enjoy reading your reviews. I'm obviously not going to read this one. <p> You do realize you primarily write to those who haven't seen it yet? Thanks for the spoiler warning anyway, that's something I guess, but I would prefer a regular review with a spoiler section printed in red. <p> In that way everyone can read it.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:24 a.m. CST

    I've already seen the film.

    by GetEveryone

    But knowing full-well that most of the TBers would read your review, despite not having seen it, you could have tapered it a little.<P>Generally, a spoiler tag doesn't dictate that the film's climax will be given away in a sentence, though I appreciate its there.<P>Still, the off-hand remark about having no sympathy is a little douchy.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:25 a.m. CST

    Thanks Harry

    by v1c_vega

    You have encapsulated quite perfectly my thoughts on Basterds. The way Basterds has gestated for over a decade has lead to a lot of ones own wants and expectations about what Basterds would be , could be....should be and now it's here it's a completely different unique experience. I will be seeing it many times again to put the right perspective on the film for me. This feels to me a tiny part of the basterd universe and although i'm happy QT has made one film the subject matter just has a whole lot more to offer and i feel like a Basterd that only got one scalp out of hundreds of scalps and I WANT MY SCALPS.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:31 a.m. CST

    Going in with zero expectation helps massively.

    by GetEveryone

    With no pre-formed judgements, I loved the fuck out of it.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:32 a.m. CST

    Script was shit, but..

    by subfreq

    Agree Laserhead. I was totally put off by the script except for the first scene I found it really stayed and lacked the scope I wanted to see. The reviews though tell a different story. QT's big strengths are directing fantastically cinematic scenes. Real movie scenes. He also always offers characters that are so well formed you want to know more about them. He really understands that as an audience you create the real movie in your own imagination and by being dialogue heavy you have to create your own history and world for the characters because the plot is pretty simple and has big jumps between events. The strength of his dialogue also gets fantastic performances. One thing you have to hand QT is that he is a linguistics genius. Another thing. I really, really, really hated the ending when I read it off the page. Now it seems like almost the only way to make an original WWII movie is to play it totally fictionally with alternative events so you totally free up audience expectations. It lets you fuck with them. His greatest legacy inthe fullness of time might be that he brought subtitles and foreign language to mainstream American audiences and made them acceptable. If he achieves that it would be some legacy. It would change the way people tell stories in a massive way. Still not sure about the film but much more interested to go and see it when it hits Ireland.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:33 a.m. CST

    Not great

    by Colonel Creedon

    Saw it Saturday. Very disappointed. Like Harry I expected something like Dirty Dozen meets Reservior Dogs. There are two seperate movies here: The Basterds and Shosanna. But together are like Chocolate and Pickles. Shosanna's tale is far more intriguing - but the Basterds' is violent and humourous. Characters are good expecially Schweiger's and Roth's. Col. Landa starts out as a personification of sublime evil and finishes as a hammy bond-villain. Mike Meyers does Austin Powers [again]. Rod Taylor says one line and on screen for 10 seconds. Wanted this to be directed by the Tarantino who made Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill but got the director of Death Proof instead. 4/10

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:51 a.m. CST


    by one_guy_from_andromeda_

    During no moment did i feel what was happening on the screen had any relevance. Least of all to anyone involved in this movie.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:53 a.m. CST

    The shortness was also exaggerated by the long scenes.

    by lutz

    With the very long burn on individual scenes it made the movie seem like there were only four or five scenes before it was over. It would have made a much better TV series with more time to spend with everyone.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:03 a.m. CST

    Would have liked to see this review...

    by board shitlez

    if Harry wasn't being so careful not to offend his friend. Can't help but thinking it would be different. IE you managed to make a WWII film and not focus on a team of Nazi hunters kicking ass.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:11 a.m. CST

    The "universe" of WW2?

    by floggy bottom

    World War II happened in the REAL world. To REAL people, many (but fewer each year) who are still with us. It's not a fucking "universe" like a goddamned comic book or Whedon show. Jesus.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:17 a.m. CST

    So they kill Hitler and all the leading nazis?

    by Mentok

    What's next? A 9/11 movie where the passengers overpower the hijackers and then turn the planes around and fly them into Bin Laden's hideout?

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:27 a.m. CST

    where was the heroism in WWII?

    by Windowlicker74

    just read 'gruesome harvest:

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:54 a.m. CST

    if HARRY is slightly disappointed ...

    by madCanada

    ... oh, man, then QT & his movie have real problems. I'll still try to watch without prejudice, tho.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:57 a.m. CST


    by I am_NOTREAL

    You people bitching about the spoilers in this review are like kids sticking a finger in an electrical socket and complaining about getting shocked. Yes, Harry artlessly gave away much too much for even a spoiler-heavy review--there are ways to discuss certain aspects of a story without plainly giving them away--but it's still clearly spelled out that there are heavy spoilers. No one to blame but yourselves. Me, I couldn't care any less as I'm wholly uninterested in this flick, only in the back-and-forth of the talkbacks. I'm sure they're more entertaining than the self-serving movie would be. And truth be told, Harry actually did me a bit of a favor, because while I probably would only have ever slightly wondered how this movie ends, now I know -- two and a half hours saved.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:59 a.m. CST

    Not a bad review Harold

    by benlinus

    I know I like to bash you Harry because I question your dedication to your craft, but this is an overall good review. My only issue is that this is QT, not John Ford, WHAT WERE YOU EXPECTING?? They Were Expendable? We have the same taste in WWII films Harry, we truly do, but this is QT, you should know that your never going to get a "serious" war film from him. Just about everything he does has tongue firmly planted in cheek....still, well written my robust ginger friend....

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:14 a.m. CST

    If you wear the tears of a Gypsy in a vial around your...

    by FlickaPoo

    ...neck you can like this movie and it won't turn you Jewish.'re fucked goy.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:15 a.m. CST

    harry you sad bastErd!

    by TheManWhoCan

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:22 a.m. CST

    "I fell desperately in love with THE BIG RED ONE"...

    by FlickaPoo, that one is going to make your therapist's day...

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:24 a.m. CST

    harry you sad bastErd!

    by TheManWhoCan

    only a saddo would watch the same film twice (or 3 times in the case of D-9)in close succession, Surely you could be doing something a bit more constructive with those 2 1/2 hours. Exercise maybe? re-learning to walk would motivate me to at least try and get off my ass instead of killing myself scoffing junk food and watching the same movie i had only just seen the day before!Your going to die if you keep this up you know!

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:24 a.m. CST


    by theplant


  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:27 a.m. CST

    dammit harrold...

    by iwasredempted

    i swear i don't remember the spoiler warning. but i generally skim through things so i must have missed it. i remember harry contemplates inglourious basterds but not the spoiler thing. anywho, drugs and alcohol will do that to a man.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:35 a.m. CST

    You hit the nail on the head, Harry

    by ED2D2

    You're torn between wanting more from these characters and loving every bit of them that you already saw. As far as the alternate/revisionist history bit, I think it's more like an American propaganda film, a lot like NATION's PRIDE in the film. It was a little eerie, but the crowd I saw the film with in Dublin went just as nuts in the final scene when the Nazis were being mowed down as when the Nazis were during Zoller's gunning down Allied G.I.s in NATION's PRIDE. It's kinda like this film was made during WWII to pump up our own soldiers. Similar to the comics of the time that showed the superheroes fighting Hitler and winning the war in a single issue.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:39 a.m. CST

    If Marvel launch Cap America..

    by subfreq

    they way they should. It will be the best fictional WWII film of all time. With the symbolism of Cap and The Red Skull you could really go to some very cool places and explore decent themes on a proper epic scale.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:13 a.m. CST

    I am_NOTREAL

    by JonJonB

    It's only NOW "clearly spelled out" that the review is spoiler heavy BECAUSE we bitched about the spoilers. I take some of the blame now because, yes, it did have that spoiler-tag thing - but I've been visiting AICN for years and years and have never noticed/realised that's what the red outline is for. Apparently I'm not the only one, either. Props to Harry though for putting in a more noticeable warning even though he wasn't at fault as I first thought.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:14 a.m. CST

    Bruce Willis is Expendable.

    by Left_Nut

    Sorry for going OT, but where's the Talkback for Bruce Willis confirming that he will be in "The Expendables"?<P>Sort it out Harry!

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:16 a.m. CST

    Harry just say you didn't like it....

    by Harrigan

    We get that you can't outright say you didn't like the film. I wish you didn't have to be such a sell-out and could give us your real thoughts without the spin.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:19 a.m. CST



  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:19 a.m. CST

    hitler didn't die in berlin: hes on the moon!

    by ironic_name

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:25 a.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    Harry a spoiler is one thing but giving away the fucking ending something different entirely, you really need to use your head. Some of us actually read your reviews to see if a movie is any good, not so you can just blow the whole fucking ending out your ass and sit there with a smile because you saw it before most of us. Capone was able to pull it off. What kind of tool are you?

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:27 a.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    meant to say Spoilers.. im just really pissed

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:33 a.m. CST

    bruce willis is a ghost in the sixth sense...

    by iwasredempted

    darth vader is lukes dad.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:39 a.m. CST

    The dude in District 9 turns into an alien

    by topfivevideo

    Steve Zahn and Milla Jovovich are the killers in A Perfect Getaway

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:40 a.m. CST

    Why is so hard to write a review without spoilers?

    by Bastard_In_A_Blanket

    I know you put spoiler tags up, Harry, I'm not moaning about that, but I've been waiting for this review for ages.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:47 a.m. CST

    Laura Palmer was killed by her demon-possessed father

    by SpyGuy

    Oh, and Number One turns out to be Number Six...maybe.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:52 a.m. CST

    damn good coffee...

    by iwasredempted

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:04 a.m. CST

    Just face it...

    by topfivevideo

    Harry can't do anything on this site without his typical arrogance and just sheer inability to communicate anything without sounding pompous or "douchey". According to him he knows everybody in "Hollywood" he gets all this "insider" information and yet he can't be humble about it nor can he act with any discretion. If the man could physically climb to the highest mountian he would scream it for the world to hear, how much of an "insider" he is. To just blatantly give away an ending to a movie the TB'ers have been waiting for is just the biggest asshole move of the year Harry and it truly speaks to your mentality as a person. You think your better than everyone and you think because you have this information that your privileged in some way. Next time shut your fucking mouth and just review the fucking movie. 99.9% of reviewers are going to to their job without revealing that Eli Roth facefucks Hitler with a machine gun... why can't you. The fact isn't that the review said spoilers... even though there are varying degrees on what constitutes a spoiler.. the fact is that you could'nt shut your fat fucking mouth about it.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:05 a.m. CST

    who is number one?

    by illegaltouching

    you are number 6.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:11 a.m. CST

    I am not real.

    by GetEveryone

    The heavy spoilers tag is new.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:13 a.m. CST


    by GetEveryone

    ............<P>District 9 isn't out for a month here. This place is a fucking hole.<P>With exception to my two favourite TBs.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:14 a.m. CST

    And that's how to write a review...

    by metaluna

    ...of a film you hate that your friend made but you can't tell them it's shite! Way to go around the houses, Harry. In five years, This film will be forgotten and with any luck Tarantino will be a drunk, sad film maker who couldn't get arrested, boring people on late night TV unless someone has the balls to give the guy a slap and a wake up call.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:19 a.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    ooopss.. you my friend are an innocent bystander of Knowles Rage... unlike Harry I will apologize

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:20 a.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    I am sorry that I said what I said about District 9 and that it may or may not have spoiled the movie for you.. oh and Harry... you still fucking suck

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:29 a.m. CST

    No worries, pal.

    by GetEveryone

    If rage was aimed at the fat ginger one, I can understand. It was a subversive, wholly-successful tirade against the malevolent benefactor of this site.<P>Plus the trailer already gave it away. Fuck me for watching trailers...

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:29 a.m. CST

    Best opening scene in a long time...

    by jackson healy

    And QT's best film since Pulp Fiction, IMO. Loved it. Melanie Laurent is ethereal.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:31 a.m. CST


    by VicenzoV

    You'd expect your friends to be as honest to you as possible. If you fuck up, and a friend tells you loud and clear how you fucked up, where you fucked up and when you fucked up that's very valuable because it could actually prevent you from fucking up in the future.<p>So if Quentin fucked up Inglorious Basterds, you'd be the first to tell him that, right?

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:33 a.m. CST

    See Harry...

    by topfivevideo

    When you act like a total cock-bag.. you apologize.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:55 a.m. CST

    The Universe of WW2...

    by savagedave

    What, ours?

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 11:13 a.m. CST

    I loved very frame of it

    by MrDexter

    going to see it again late night Thursday

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 11:31 a.m. CST

    These Words...

    by KosherWookie

    "I love the universe of WWII... the design, imagery, scope... it’s all just so damn awesome," Mark you as a completely culturally-and-historically illiterate dumb-ass.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 11:40 a.m. CST

    Just Like The Ill Iterate Koke Hed...

    by KosherWookie

    Whose dick you can't seem to spit out. Seriously, have you ever had one of those "I wish I could quit you" moments, or are you not that bright?

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 11:42 a.m. CST

    But While You're Seething...

    by KosherWookie

    Serious props for a Yoko-free month! She is to writing what Uwe Boll is to directing...

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Now that I know the ending more or less ...

    by DennisMM

    I want to see the film just as much as I didn't before! Somehow killing Hitler on film, in a fictional way, is far more offensive to me than positing an obvious alternate universe in print. Don't know why. Maybe it's because QT wants to feel authentic before he pulls this bullshit.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 12:08 p.m. CST

    Sounds like typical

    by Series7

    End of summer stuff.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 12:10 p.m. CST

    This review smacks of serious internal conflict

    by toadkillerdog

    One the one hand Harry does not want to offend his friend and say he did not like the movie, so he goes out of his way to praise it's parts, and even uses the dreaded 'refreshing' to describe it.<p> On the other hand, Harry is letting his great disappointment in the film bleed through in this review, a certain honesty -albeit obscured in typical Harry fashion, which everyone has been clamoring for from him - regardless his friendship with the director.<p> Final verdict: GDT is a closer friend than QT, so see at your own risk. Which is what we should all do anyway.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 12:12 p.m. CST


    by Series7

    So Tom Cruise does kill Hitler at the end of this?

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 12:14 p.m. CST


    by Series7

    Ever heard of Roger Avery?

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 12:15 p.m. CST

    I love THE BIG RED ONE too Harry

    by Tacom

    Lee Marvin leading Luke Skywalker, Lewis from "Revenge of the Nerds" all over North Africa and Europe fighting Nazis throughout the war. Epic. Funny enough I prefer the original shorter cut than the three hour long director's cut the released a few years ago. Althought the longer cut has a cool battle in an Roman colliseum with Arab horseman.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 12:17 p.m. CST


    by Series7

    Am I really the only person in the geekverse that thinks Brad Pitt's I want scalps speech sounds like something from the opening of a Jackass episode? The more and more I see it, the more and more I expect him to turn around and say welcome to Jackass. Also with a line up of Eli Routh and that short nerdy kid and the Office guy, they look about as stupid as a line up of Jackass guys pretending to be bad ass military guys. Fuck Party Boy is more bad ass looking then all of them.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 12:44 p.m. CST


    by theplant


  • Aug. 18, 2009, 1:12 p.m. CST

    I love it when...

    by jelac07

    other jackasses spoil the endings to other movies...whilst protesting the spoilers of another...Thanks topfivevideo for spoiling the film I was going to see this week-end..

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 1:36 p.m. CST

    Why do British people worship Tarantino?

    by Samuel Fulmer

    I never quite got it. Sort of like the French and Jerry Lewis.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 1:41 p.m. CST

    NEWS FLASH: Harry carrying Tarantino's children!

    by lalalandlovechild

    The man hasn't made a good film since Pulp Fiction. Could AICN please stop fawning over this guy like he's the second coming? It gets REALLY old.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 1:48 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    Ok I apologized to GetEveryone because the movie hasn't opened yet where he/she lives. I however; will not apologize to you because you should've went to see it opening weekend if you were so anxious to see it. Also, what I did was to make a point to fatass that spoiling endings to movies people haven't seen yet is cruel and fucking arrogant. Not my finest moment I will admit. I, however; will stand by it. Dumbshit should've known better.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 1:54 p.m. CST


    by JonJonB

    At least Harry had a spoiler warning, however insufficient it might have been to begin with. You're just a fucking dickwad of the highest order, and the only point you've made to anyone is that you should be banned from life for being such a prick.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:03 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    When your finished sniffing Harry's ass for an air of greatness. I want you to realize something a spoiler is one thing but to completely divulge an ending to a movie almost no normal citizen has seen is fucked up beyond belief. District 9 has been out for a week this Friday and A Perfect Getaway has been out for, I dunno, two weeks. People are going to talk about them because... People have fucking seen them. Whether its on a bus, in an office, or in the backroom of a porn shop (ya know, the one where you try and pick up chicks). The fact is that I didn't divulge anything that isn't already made available to people. If you didn't know what happened in those two movies then its only because you haven't gone to see them yet. What Harry did is fucked up plain and simple. Stop whining about your movie District 9, don't worry, there are plenty more suprises in that one that I haven't said.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:22 p.m. CST

    "Sniffing Harry's ass"?

    by JonJonB

    As far as I know, I was the first one on this talkback to call him out on the spoilers, I only took back some of what I said because it was partly down to my own ignorance that I read them. And, yeah, people are obviously going to talk about recently released movies -- but only complete fuckheads (like you, sir) are going to deliberately spoil the endings for people in some ass-backwards attempt at "making a point" (read: trying to look all edgy and cool). And the reason I haven't gone to see District 9 is because it isn't even out here yet. You continue to display personal attributes that show you up to be nothing more than some kind of tumor-ridden penis with typing capabilities.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:26 p.m. CST

    Inglourious Basturds.........

    by Yoda's Ball Sack

    I guess the toilet bowl is half full on this movie.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:30 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    JonJonB's breath smells like Dr. Pepper and Cheetos... what the hell kinda diet you on anyway??? Ok so D9 isn't out where you are, be that as it may, it is a movie that is out, has been seen by a large number of people, and has been talked about. If you can't wrap your geeky little brain around the fact that people talk about shit that others have seen then it is not my issue. I have already given my apology of the day to GetEveryone. Besides, what I "spoiled" was actually in one of the previews. Besides its only one of like ten suprises in the movie.. get the fuck over it.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:33 p.m. CST



    i have to agree with the others, your a fucking idiot. I mean i would have been madder if I hadn't seen district 9 but I was mildly interested in seeing a perfect

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:35 p.m. CST


    by I am_NOTREAL

    All I know is when I clicked on the review, it was fairly plastered with spoiler warnings. Whatever went on before that, I can't say. So if that same review ran without a prominent spoiler warning, that seems pretty shitty to me, but since I didn't see it, I can only say c'est la vie. I still say this movie is nothing more than a bunch of rich people jerking off. I suppose a considerable case could be made that ALL movies--at least the mainstream Hollywood studio ones--are nothing more than that, too, but I don't feel like arguing that point today. Cheers!

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:42 p.m. CST

    As soon as Harry said, "but"...

    by GodMars

    You knew it sucked, but he is too much of a kiss ass to say it.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:48 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    Are you f'n kidding me?? Seriously? Harry spoils the ending to a highly anticipated film of the summer and your going to call me out on talking about two movies that have been out for over a week? Go cry into a pillow or somethings. Jesus Christ on a Rubber Crutch! Seriously, people need to stop whinning about those two movies. D9 told you in the previews what happens and anyone with half a brain knows whats going to happen in Getaway about 20 mins in. The fact of the matter is that I didn't divulge anything that nobody knew, you people who live in areas where these movies arent out, my sincerest apologies. Deeply and sincerely I apologize. For those of you who just haven't seen them yet.. stop crying like little school girls who got stood up at prom. People talk, end of discussion.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:51 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    Kevin Spacey is Keiser Sose

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:52 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    ET makes it home

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:52 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    Old Yeller dies... this one still gets me.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 2:57 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    In Titanic the boat still sinks, Michael had Fredo killed, Freddy doesn't kill Jason, Ash loses a hand, Bruce Willis kills everyone except Demi and an Asteroid

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 3:01 p.m. CST

    Re-writing history works for comicbooks like Capt. America

    by ZombieHeathLedger

    But for movies? I don't know unless it's on purpose like a TWILIGHT ZONE fantasy type movie. I don't get that vibe here. It's almost like QT was like, "I don't like the way WWII went, it wasn't cool enough all that sacrifice and heroics and lives lost, I can re-imagine it cooler!" I'll see it but I feel guilty giving it any money. I'll be downloading this one.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 3:22 p.m. CST

    The calls are coming from inside the house!

    by MrMysteryGuest

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 3:23 p.m. CST

    That British lady's got a dick!

    by MrMysteryGuest

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 3:23 p.m. CST

    Everybody dies in the end!

    by MrMysteryGuest

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 3:39 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    Oh thats sooo cute.. you can tell jokes... oh your mom must be so proud. Did she frame your GED for you to show all her friends at the bar or is it on her fridge being held up by the Budweiser and You Might Be a Redneck magnets. You see, to you, I may be an asshat.. but to everyone you ever met, your just that guy. Ya know, that guy who stares at all the girls in the workplace, or that guy who smells like week old dirty laundry. You look at me and see an ass hat I look at you and see clown shoes.. a punch line, an object to be pointed at and mocked to an excessive end.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 3:40 p.m. CST

    its people!

    by ironic_name

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 3:56 p.m. CST

    Sounds like an assfuck

    by BoRock_A_Boomer

    For the shithead generation that doesn't even know what WWII was, this is the assfuck they deserve from a creator who is borderline retarded.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 3:58 p.m. CST


    by JonJonB

    Absolutely no-one is backing you get that, right? Because what you did was so fucking pathetic it's totally indefensible. And trying to put down people who disagree with you by using material that Carlos Mencia would balk at isn't really helping your case.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 4:03 p.m. CST

    This has never been a "MEN ON A MISSION flick"

    by TopHat

    Its just been what Tarantino has always been creating: A "See how much I know about generes" movie. This time its propaganda movies. The Shosanna character is in it to represent the victims of the oppressor and the "Inglorious Basterds" are the valiant crusaders of justice. He's twisted the propaganda movies of the Nazis and everyone else (including U.S. ones of the Japanese); Jews hunting down the Nazis. The poor village folk (Shosanna) getting even. The Nazis portrayed as sterotypical (Hitler, especially) or as cunning smart monsters who need to be stopped (Landa). The point of Shosanna's storyline is to hit home how much this movie is about propoganda; The "film" she creates and shows before setting the theater on fire. Tarantino's just a one-trick pony. He watches films and studies film-makers and twists genres and themes and creates cinematic mix-tapes. That's why film-fans and critics love him. He's that guy who tells you you're cool for being able to "get" his stuff. Just read critics' reviews of his work to see how much they defend him (especially Ebert's). Its almost hilarious the lengths they go to to warrant him basically copying all the good parts in other movies and stitching them together, calling the final "film" his own. I wonder what his next "opus" will be ...the Spy film genre? School scare films? Newsreels? Cartoon shorts?? Oh, the genius is working!

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 4:07 p.m. CST

    topfivevideo, fuck you

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    fuck you asshole. go kill yourself you worthless cunt

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 4:09 p.m. CST

    topfivevideo = TROLL

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    i hate you, you bitch

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 4:11 p.m. CST


    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    i can get over what a worthless tool you are. are you some 11 year old dumb fuck hanging out on your mama's computer when you should be at school learning your abc's? get a fucking life you douche-bag

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 4:33 p.m. CST

    Now why didn't Harry comment on....

    by Kizeesh

    the 25 minute largly pointless chit-chat bar scene?<p> I'd like to hear what he thought of that.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 4:57 p.m. CST


    by Sal_Bando

    And we go--Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:07 p.m. CST


    by ZodNotGod

    Wouldn't it be funny if audiences hated this fucking thing- it flops and Harry and his brood of ass-licks look like the false-idol worshiping tools we know them to be.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:13 p.m. CST


    by ZodNotGod

    And why isn't this a Mission film in the "Dirty Dozen" vein. Tough guys doing tough things with tons of killing and 'splosions all over. Why fuckers? Instead we get a historical parody; Mel Brooks with cussing and violence. Tarantino has officially gone insane; fallen in love with his own words; a narcissistic x 10 Peter Bogdonovich. A foreign, art house goon lover disguised as a populist Director. Complete with long, pointless dialogue scenes and little to no action. He needs to be stopped.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:17 p.m. CST


    by ZodNotGod

    And don't compare this to GUNS OF NAVARONE and WHERE EAGLES DARE. Those are MEN on MISSION flicks; this is pretentiousness at it worst. Killing Hitler? Come the fuck on!

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:22 p.m. CST

    Oh no...

    by topfivevideo

    The Geek Wagons are circling lol Im in so much trouble now lmao. Its hysterical to me how defensive you guys get when someone challenges your perspective on things. You will only understand what your minds will let you. Anything beyond that is obscene to you because you can't understand it. Of course what I did, to you, is indefensible.. because you don't understand it or just don't agree with it so you must attack it which is fine and dandy. Couldn't care less. The fact still remains that what Harry did is the same thing that I did only worse, yet you have singled me out. Why? Because unlike Harry I choose to acknowledge what I did and in certain cases defend it. I am as pissed at Harry as some of you are at me so I get your point of view and I understand it, its juvenile, but I understand it. You see Nerd, you don't have any rational argument to what I said, just blatant obscenities which is ok, it shows your mentality. I am not Harry, I don't have a website or "Hollywood" insider buddies whose egos I can milk with a tap of the keyboard. I am a talkbacker, one with an opinion and in the country I live in I have the right to voice it whether its popular or not. You choose to cry and whine over my opinions then feel free to do so. I choose to take the higher ground and keep myself above mere shitflinging through a talkback. I point still stands that Harry is totally in the wrong with this review. He chose to reveal a huge plot detail just because he felt he could. Occasionally he can bang out a decent review but its reviews like these that piss me off because he speaks with an air of entitlement. Just because he can he feels he should. The detail didn't make his review better. Its not like the review hinged on what he chose to reveal. Its just something he threw out there because he felt he should. Like him I felt like I had the right to reveal what I did. We were both wrong. However, like I said, unlike him I have apologized. End of discussion.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:26 p.m. CST

    Wow angry much

    by Lovecraftfan

    Its amazing how any talk of Tarantino can turn Talkbackers into whiny jaded people that talk like they're 12 years old.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:45 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    Talkbackers are generally whiny jaded people, its just that QT tends to turn them on themselves.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:49 p.m. CST

    QT cant make the movie you wanted to see Harry...

    by JimmyJoe RedSky

    this was his attempt - he set out to make "that" movie - but we got a winky, talky, sarcastic, ironic, cute, self conscious QT movie instead - the usual

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Killing Hitler isn't pretentious...

    by VicenzoV

    It's absurd and darkly comic. Remember how Saddam Hussein gets killed in Hot Shots 2? Same thing here.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:52 p.m. CST

    topfivevideo aka troll

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    "challenges your perspective on things" what? how does giving the end of movies away challenge my perspective on things? you are a loser troll who just tries to stir shit up. you are a sad loser. i love how you try to rationalize your idiocy. fuck off. you suck

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:53 p.m. CST

    Lovecraftfan by topfivevideo

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    we're not turning on ourselves. we are turning on you.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:53 p.m. CST

    QT doesn't see the rules

    by topfivevideo

    He just what he wants which usually isn't a bad thing. The more I read about this movie the more it sounds like he sat down at the computer and said "ok now this is what should've happened". Its WWII according to QT which, like I said, isn't a bad thing it's just that you have to consider this when going to see the movie.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 5:55 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    What your not understanding and what I tried explaining to you is that i am you, I am a version of you you don't like. Plain and simple.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6 p.m. CST

    topfivevideo, wrong

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    i never do what you did on this thread. you are very wrong in your assessment. you can't rationalize what you did on this thread. and i'm not the only one hating on you right now. just because harry acts like a douche does not mean that you have a free pass to do the same thing. harry gets to act like an ass because this is his web site.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:02 p.m. CST

    And again...

    by topfivevideo

    What I mean by perspective is that to you and probably some others is that I am some "sad troll", in reality I am just one of thousands of talkbackers with an opinion. You can't look at it like that and leave it be because your mind wont let you. So you settle on the "sad troll" bit. Thats what I mean about perspective and if your only beef is that I spoiled two movies that are already out and have been seen by hundreds of thousands of people then so be it, just realize that its juvenile. Was it an asshole thing to do, quite possibly and I have apologized for it. But you keep going on about this "sad troll". Makes no sense.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:07 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    Granted this is Harry's site, not disputing that fact. But with owning a site comes some integrity. You put out there an ending to a movie that hasn't come out yet theres a problem with that. D9 and PG are out, people have seen them and will talk about them. However Harry has to understand that with a movie most people haven't seen, and really want to see requires some kid gloves. You can't give away an ending to a film almost no one has seen. Its needless, like i've said, his review did not hinge on the fact he released. But he chose to put it out there, which of course is his right. Are you going to tell me you have never said anything in a talkback that was stupid??? Talkbackers are people with opinions, the sheer idea that there is a talkbacker out there who has never said anything that wasn't stupid to someone else is ubsurd.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:24 p.m. CST

    topfivevideo, you don't get it

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    how does intentionally giving the ending on district 9 qualify as an "opinion". district 9 has been out for a couple of days. some of us don't go rushing to the theatre on opening night. what you did was lame as fuck and has nothing to do with opinions or perspectives. harry put a spoiler warning on this article so you argument is pointless and wrong. you can not justify your behavior. you can claim that i "can't wrap my head around it", but i do. what you said wasn't stupid. you were trying to be an asshole and you succeeded spectacularly.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:28 p.m. CST



    The bar scene isn't pointless. It's vital. The scene is important as hell because it is where the Basterds learn what is truly at stake. Where the plans go awry. But it is also what clues Hans Landa to what is happening and puts him on the scent, while also dwindling the Basterds' numbers. Very important scene.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:30 p.m. CST


    by JonJonB

    What exactly is the big point you're trying to make amidst all your fucknuttery? "Harry spoiled a film, omg what an asshole -- I'll do some spoiling of my own, that'll teach those talkbackers who weren't in any way responsible for anything Harry posted!" Way to go in making the most pointless point in the history of points you fucking gigantic troll. You haven't "challenged" anyone's "perspective", you just acted like a dick and spoiled some films for no good reason other than to be (as I said) a dick. With all your pathetic attempts to justify what you did, you seem to have forgotten that HARRY USED A SPOILER TAG, THUS RENDERING YOUR POINTLESS POINT ALL THE MORE STUPID, MOOT AND POINTLESS. You used nothing but your own penis-featured face to type out some trolling garbage. Oh, and tell your mother she still owes me ten dollars. spoiler btw.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:32 p.m. CST

    JonJonB - YES!!!

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    Thank you. exactly right! i'm surprised that topfivevideo has not invoked his right to free speech!

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:35 p.m. CST

    what surprises me is...

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    that harry banned someone for giving away the end of disrtict 9 in the talkback for his review of the film. i wish topfivevideo would be banned for the same thing... harry?

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:35 p.m. CST



    No. I labeled my posting as containing SPOILERS. From the beginning. When you click on a story, labeled as containing SPOILERS - you will get SPOILERS. I didn't do it just because I could, I did it to discuss the film. The very nature of this film is about changing history and becoming speculative history. Now - had I posted that spoiler as the HEADLINE of the story - I'd be in the same boat as you.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:51 p.m. CST

    You'll thank Harry for the spoiler

    by The Ref

    I saw a screening and the unexpected ending left me head-scratching. I think I'd have enjoyed it more had I known in advance the film would stray so far from historical fact.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 6:56 p.m. CST

    Stop it! Stop it! Stop it!

    by kirttrik

    You guys are always FIGHTING! It's tearing me APART!

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:04 p.m. CST


    by CarlThorMark1978

    Really, how much of a fucking warning do you need you brainless, imbecilic, goddamn fucking retarded motherfuckers. TopFiveVideo, SHUT. YOUR. FUCKING. MOUTH. YOU. STUPID.ASSWIPE!!! I’m not in the habit of defending Knowles but he PUT A FUCKING SPOILER TAG ON THE FUCKING THREAD!!! Do you not know what the word “SPOILER” means you inbred fuckstick? This is the dumbest fucking thing I have ever seen anyone bitch about on this site…EVER!!! You don’t want to know the details of a movie then YOU AVOID READING ANYTHING THAT SAYS “SPOILERS” DO. YOU. FUCKING. UNDERSTAND. NOW. ASSHOLE??? Seriously, morons like you are the reason why we have to have labels saying “Warning, this bag contains nuts” on a bag of fucking peanuts. You’re one of those idiotic cocksuckers who, while driving, spills your McDonalnds coffee on your lap, gets into an accident then has the nerve to sue Micky D’s because of your own incompetence. You’re just as bad as those fat fucks who sue fast food chains because you won’t stop stuffing your fucking face. Take some responsibility for your own ignorance and slack jawed stupidity. FFFUUUUUUUCCCCCKKKKKK YYYYYYOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUU!!!

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:10 p.m. CST

    kirttrik, for you, i will stop.

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    CarlThorMark1978, you have exceeded even my Nerd Rage. thank you.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:18 p.m. CST


    by topfivevideo

    I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that one. And as far as my spoiling goes, I apologize consider the issue dropped. I just don't feel like giving the "back and forth" more fuel than its worth.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:33 p.m. CST


    by Dude_Abides

    I think the point Harry and everyone else is trying to make is that Harry plastered spoiler all over the place, you just blurted yours out. Big difference bud

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:44 p.m. CST

    Spoilers and re-writing history...

    by andrew coleman

    It's like watching children debate Power Rangers on here. A spoiler is a spoiler and if you clicked on it well sorry but Harry has no fault there. About re-writing history we're not talking about books you find in the history section these are movies. Look at Transformers 2 that movie had the Pyramids in Lebanon for fucks sake but no one cares because it's a silly movie. Inglorious Basterds is a silly movie. Look at the commercials. This is not Saving Private Ryan or any serious war film. Flicks like this can take liberties. I mean fuck all war movies make shit up look at Pearl Harbor, barely any Americans got into the air to shoot down Zero's but in that flick Ben Affleck did. IB is just telling a story a fun, crazy, over the top story. If you're that stupid and can't tell the difference between reality and history from fiction, then stay the fuck away from movies. Like this one retard I saw outside the theater when 300 came out and he asked someone who was with him: "Did they actually have monsters back then"... HOLY SHIT I almost killed him to help the gene pool but I didn't. If you're that stupid don't go to the movies, they will confuse you.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:47 p.m. CST


    by Sal_Bando<p> the Original is a CLASSIC!!!!!

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:50 p.m. CST

    Hey Tarantino when are u gonna do somethin w/ JOHN WOO

    by GibsonUSA Returns

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 7:51 p.m. CST


    by Dude_Abides

    reminds me of the douche-bags that went to the titanic memorial looking for the names jack and rose dawson.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:02 p.m. CST

    Harry can you ban topfivevideo .....

    by Miyamoto_Musashi

    or at least remove his posts. <p> The Sixth sense and star wars ones, could be funny, the District 9 one is cause for a lynching.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:16 p.m. CST


    by Dude_Abides

    What we ban people now? lol I know in Beaks thread the ban hammers been dropping pretty hard.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 8:41 p.m. CST

    Revisionist History.

    by #1 Zero

    A few months ago, Vanity Fair did a little article on this movie with the first ten pages of the script. Even in that article, it claimed that the movie took place in a parallel universe and that the movie is set in 1946 which if I remember my history is a year or two after teh end of the war. While it was mentioned in Vanity Fair, the recent articles I've read on this movie don't address that so much. My guess is that since we all know the real outcome of the war, having the basterds trying to kill hitler really isn't that suspenseful because we know that's not how he died. Kind of like the problem with the movie "Valkyrie". We knew Cruise would fail so what was the point of watching it. So I guess Tarantino just said I'm going make my own history for the sake of my movie and suspense. Also, for a more intellectual take on this film, pick up this week's "Newsweek" where the review is by a Jewish scholar who thinks that making the basterds as ruthless as they are in the movie makes you sympathize with the nazi's and that movies like this and "The Reader" which are about the moral fog that germans were in when killing jewish people is taking away from real history and distorting just how evil Nazi Germany was. Granted, "Basterds" looks like the ultimate revenge fantasy where Jews go on a nazi killing spree but in that critic's eyes it almost makes them look as bad as the nazi's. Haven't seen the film, and the newsweek critic wrote a book about the holocuast so he has his own way of looking at things but ultimately he thinks "The Reader" and "Basterds" at the very least exploits the holocaust. Just something to think about.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:33 p.m. CST

    i agree harry you should remove the district 9 post...

    by iwasredempted

    immediately.. it fucked me over too. i was trying to be funny with my posts using very old movies. but maybe u should remove mine also.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:35 p.m. CST

    This guy peaked in 95

    by MrFacety

    Why won't you admit it? We've seen countless writers shine where he could have. Cohens still got it, eg "No country for old men" Foreign films still got it eg Old Boy, Sympathy for Lady Vengeance, and 13 Game of Death.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:35 p.m. CST

    This guy peaked in 95

    by MrFacety

    Why won't you admit it? We've seen countless writers shine where he could have. Cohens still got it, eg "No country for old men" Foreign films still got it eg Old Boy, Sympathy for Lady Vengeance, and 13 Game of Death.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 9:39 p.m. CST

    No more Excuses

    by MrFacety

    He does not have another Pulp, Reservoir Dogs, or True Romance in him. He is rich and coked out (not that there is anything wrong with that).

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:09 p.m. CST

    Harry, Please Read This

    by ThusSpakeSpymunk

    I usually dog you for grammar, spelling and having your message roam all over the place in your reviews. Despite my shared-with-some-others dislike of your description of "loving" the World War II universe (yay, gas chambers!) I get what you were trying to say there so I'll even let that slide as long as you promise to read up on what happened in the camps and promise to think through thinking things like that in the future - much less saying them. All that aside, this was your best review in years. It was short, to the point and despite your talk of spoilers was spoiler-free in the sense that you talk about events happening but not HOW. I usually grit my teeth in frustration when I read your reviews, and this one kept my interest. Seriously, great job on the writing here - write more like this, and less about the CFPJ.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:18 p.m. CST

    You don't go to a WWII movie with the movie you want...

    by Ted Striker

    You don't go to a WWII movie with the movie you want... You go to a WWII movie with the movie you have. Based on Harry's review, this sounds like a movie that stands out as a very different, but very good (not great) movie. I'll be there!

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:35 p.m. CST

    I agree with Harry re: the Bar Scene - it's pivotal

    by jackson healy

    Pivotal moment in the film, when the stakes are infinitely raised. I mean, somebody from the Bar Scene is wounded in the leg, and that same somebody has to then walk without a hitch into the movie screening the next night, without it being suspect. Also, as Harry said, the aftermath of the Bar Scene is what puts Hans Landa onto the scent of a traitor. Very important scene, and beautifully executed as well. My only regret... MINOR SPOILER HERE... is that the lovely Mathilda sucks hot lead in it. What a shame! btw, anyone who thinks INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS was a horrible script -- and I know a lot of you do -- knows NOTHING about screenwriting. Absolutely nothing. It's a brilliant piece of writing and all you bitches who think otherwise are too busy sucking your own cocks to notice. Once again, Melanie Laurent is a goddess in the film. An absolute angel from Hell. The climax of IB is QT's bloody homage to the finale of CINEMA PARADISO. Even though I still think Brad Pitt's been miscast, IB is a great fucking movie because it's mainly Melanie Laurent's character's (Shosanna) story.

  • Aug. 18, 2009, 10:57 p.m. CST

    I read the last paragraph. --I sum it up without spoilers.

    by JDanielP

    Thanks for the warning, Harry. <P>But it wouldn't hurt to post a non-spoiler review without a talkback, too,...spoiler free as it would be. That one I WOULD read.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:13 a.m. CST


    by smatt584

    Why post a spoiler filled review before the movie has even come out?

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:22 a.m. CST

    Tarantino, can you ask John Woo to do more badass gun movies?

    by GibsonUSA Returns

    Please? Ol buddy ol pal?<BR> He's been over there doing those Chinese war epics.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:29 a.m. CST

    Tarantino, do you agree that BIG LOB's the greatest GIJoe of all

    by GibsonUSA Returns

    If so, could you make a statement saying such? <BR><BR> Thank you.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:30 a.m. CST


    by GibsonUSA Returns

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 1:05 a.m. CST

    Biggest problem with harry's reviews

    by madoo14

    It's all about him. How soon till Massawyrm's is up?

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 1:11 a.m. CST

    Absolutely NO pity for those whining about spoilers in this revi

    by ol' painless

    How much clearer did it have to be when clicking on the link to go to this review?

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 1:39 a.m. CST

    ol' painless

    by JonJonB

    Maybe you haven't read all the talkback, but to begin with it was a hell of a lot less clear than it is now. It was still spoiler-marked though, to be fair.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 1:45 a.m. CST

    for those complaining about spoilers, a few questions:

    by BadMrWonka

    a spoiler is a piece of information about a film that gives away a key plot point. we agree on this, yeah? <p> the red box, with the word "SPOILER" on it, around an AICN review/talkback link, indicated it contains spoilers. we can agree on this, yeah?<p> so really, you're not arguing about impropriety, you're arguing that Harry did not write the review that you wanted him to write. he could have written a review without spoiler, but he chose not to. your argument is not that there were any shenanigans with spoilers and/or warning, but rather that Harry wrote a review that was not spoiler free.<p>and that's fine. speak out, brothers and sisters! but let's be clear what we're talking about. the spoiler tag has been around on AICN almost as long as I have, and it's meaning and purpose are not in dispute.<p>topfivevideo being a complete douchenozzle...also not in dispute...

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 2:16 a.m. CST

    Let me get this straight....

    by GibsonUSA Returns

    People clicked on a link entitled <BR><BR> "Harry contemplates INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS - Spoiler Heavy. You Have Been Really Warned!"<BR><BR> that is also circled in burgundy with text saying "SPOILERS"...and then complain that there are spoilers in the review???? <BR>WTF????<BR><BR> Do they open up math books and complain that there are numbers inside?

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 2:20 a.m. CST

    heavy spoilers in talkbacks

    by GivenToFly

    topfivevideo, I hate assholes like you. Someone did the EXACT same thing for THE DARK KNIGHT a few days before it opened. Gave away the major deaths and surprises of that film in only a few words, so before it even registered to look away I knew how the characters fates would play out. This was also done in a non-Dark Knight talkback, just done to spoil the shit out of that movie for everyone who glanced at the post. topfivevideo, you are the Biggest Douche in the Universe. And Harry, that little Spoiler tag in no way prepared anyone here for you to so blantantly fuck-over the people that read your site. I don't remember you ever doing this to this extent before. Well, I was probably not going to see this anyway but now I'm definately not goin to.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 4:24 a.m. CST

    IB was really disappointing

    by masteryoda007

    Man at 2 and a half hours this flick feels more like 4 and a half hours. I was expecting more. Apart from Pitt and Roth the rest of the Basterds look like a bunch of puny wimps.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 4:51 a.m. CST

    Harry, you need to ban TopFiveVideo

    by jackson healy

    Seriously. You put up spoiler tags, and colored the box spoiler hued, on top of saying there were spoilers ahead, you are really warned. Then TopFive just decided to be a Colombine-like cunt and take down everybody. Somebody, take this fuckhole down now.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 5:09 a.m. CST


    by ihatetalkbacks

    You castigate Harry for revealing a spoiler even though he warns of it but you reveal a spoiler and seem to justify it. How? When does it become reasonable to reveal a spoiler - you said the film had been out 7 days, is it okay after 6 or 2 or 3 hours or seven minutes? Also this site is international ad many have not seem the films you mention - you seem unable to emote or recognise why people may be annoyed. You consistently fall into the faults you criticise others for. The people here may be fanboys and always moan about the same things -you how ever were petty and vindictive

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 5:16 a.m. CST

    re: headgeek

    by Kizeesh

    Alright I'll concede that the scene isn't pointless, (I did say largely pointless not completely)<p> But it's without any shadow of a doubt excessive. Especially considering it could have been handled equally well in less than half of that time.<p> I just know that it'll be 'that moment' in the movie when I'll either fast forwards through it or get bored and switch off.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 5:26 a.m. CST

    Fair enough, jonjon

    by ol' painless

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 5:30 a.m. CST

    Er, sorry Harry

    by Denty420

    ... Just saw your reply to my comment yesterday about spoilers. When I initially wrote in this TB, the spoiler tag had NOT been applied - it was done afterwards. You may not have any sympathy for me as a long, and that's fine, but in the future I think we'd all appreciate it if you marked your articles with spoilers from the start, and not insert them after people have read them. Thank you.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 5:32 a.m. CST

    'as a long'

    by Denty420

    ... was meant to say 'as a long-time visitor'.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 5:32 a.m. CST

    more . . .

    by ol' painless

    I did get here late, and the TB has been revealing, to say the least. Oh yeah, nice takedown of topfivevideo. That fuck-knuckle may consider the issue dropped, but on reading all of the TB, I can categorically state that he is a turd-burgler and a monkey-fondler of the most special kind.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 6:17 a.m. CST


    by Dude_Abides

    Its 7 am-ish over here on the east coast, you guys have been going on and on about this for almost 24 hours now you know that right? Ok so the dude broke out about District 9 and that other movie, total dick movie, but seriously, you guys must have better things to do. BTW District 9... total waste of like 10 ten bucks

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 7:02 a.m. CST

    there was a spoiler tag on it...

    by iwasredempted

    but honestly i don't remember it ever saying you have been warned. that is an alteration. also i'm use to the writers saying spoiler then going into the paragraph that contains the spoiler. so to be fair to the ones complaining it wasn't that clear in regards to the spoiler. but hey i'm a douche no arguements there.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 7:44 a.m. CST

    On Tarantino..

    by I am_NOTREAL

    Mr. Tarantino, you said on Howard Stern the other day that you have been making movies for 19 years now. Where is your growth as an artist? Most artists exhibit some sort of growth curve over the course of their productive years. Picasso. Dylan. The Beatles. Even Spielberg, among many, many others. Where is your curve? If it's there, it's all but imperceptible. You're making the same kind of movies that you were 19 years ago. I'd never dare to suggest that "Pulp Fiction" was anything other than great. It's one of my favorite films. But it's also fourteen years old. And you're the same guy now as you were then, the same director, apparently. I guess that's OK for some people. Personally, I can't think of much that could be more boring. I'd rather watch "Pulp" again than any of your new output, because there's no way you'd ever top that, and there's bound to be more energy in almost any given scene of that movie than the entirety of your latest cinematic jerkoff session. Peace & Love.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 8 a.m. CST

    DavidCarradinesAuto *SPOILER ALERT*

    by thomasjarvis

    Quote: "the chick lead always survives in a tarantino movie!" & "taranatina always kills the cool male lead"...huh. You've obviously never read the script for the film that this particular talkback happens to be concerned with...Congratulations, you've just nullified your own post(s).

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 8:05 a.m. CST

    I am_NOTREAL

    by Dude_Abides

    "he's like that grape in a bunch that never quite got to be a grape"

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 8:26 a.m. CST

    Harry did NOT have the spoiler alert in his title...

    by LoneGun

    ...when the review was initially posted. Only after Talkbackers began to express their upset about the ending of the movie being revealed was the warning "Spoiler Heavy. You Have Been Really Warned!" added to the title. However, there was the standard spoiler tag around the headline.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 8:55 a.m. CST

    Guardian Review - Its a doozy!

    by masteryoda007

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 11:20 a.m. CST

    thank you lonegun...i thought i was going crazy...

    by iwasredempted

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 11:21 a.m. CST

    no more cocaine. i swear.

    by iwasredempted

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 11:23 a.m. CST

    What is it about QT...

    by Dude_Abides

    That gets everybody so riled up in here lol, you should check out Beaks thread about Eli Roth.. insane!!

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 11:29 a.m. CST


    by SilkySm00th

    I came in here because i could care less about spoilers for Basterds.... and then catch what i'm guessing is a pretty intense spoiler for D9 ... which i was in complete media blackout for ... I could give a shit less what your reasoning is Video. Fuck you.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 11:31 a.m. CST


    by SilkySm00th

    Fuck your apologies. You don't get to "sorry guys" and then we shrug.. "oh its cool.." .. die in a fire.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 11:40 a.m. CST

    ..... SPOILER!!!!

    by topfivevideo

    Can we get a support group going for these people who are just too emotionally traumatized about a spoiler that happens about ten mins into a 2 hour movie??? Seriously, whiny little geeklings.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:06 p.m. CST


    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    first you were an asshole. then you tried to redeem yourself by pretending to be rational. now you are back to being an asshole. we are "whiny little geeklings"? you were at D9 opening night. what does that make you? and the spoiler you revealed did not happen in the first 10 minutes. stop making excuses. no one is buying your bullshit.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:10 p.m. CST


    by Dude_Abides

    Nerd is right ya know, it was at least 15 or 20, give or take. You should just really walk away from this dude, theres no winning for you in this room.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:24 p.m. CST

    Is this an american thing?

    by AsimovLives

    First you guys put quentin Tarantino high up on a pedestal and proclaimed him the King Of Geek Cool Cinema. Nowdays, you geeks can't wait to be the next guy to shit on him.<br><br>I don't fuckign get this? Is thisan american thing? Is this some particular quirk in american culture? I mean, since when Tarantino became a bad director? Why is it i never got that memo about his suddent disapearing talent? Fuck's sake, he's still the talebnted bastard that made Reservoir dogs and Puklp Fictioon, for fuck's sake! Get a fucking grip, people. You do not get to be in the cool if you piss on truly good filmmakers, while you praise mediocrre shits, you know? Get your heads strait about Quentin Tarantino. And if you think he's an hack and untalented, he's too good for you. I'm happy there is a Quentin Tarantino in this world making movies. And if you aren't, you deserve the shit blockbusters that are being made every year more and more often. Get a fucking grip, people! Fucking ingrates!

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:43 p.m. CST


    by Denty420

    Americans, in my experience, have a VERY short attention span and even shorter memories. They're not exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer either - Miss Teen Montana proved that, and also the fact that they put that idiot Bush in the White House not once, but twice.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:43 p.m. CST

    AsimovLives, actually yeah, it is

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    it is an American thing. we love to build people up. and then there is nothing we love more than to tear them back down again.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:44 p.m. CST


    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    yeah, because Margaret Thatcher was such a peach!

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:46 p.m. CST


    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    yep, although we don't know the final outcome of the spoiler that topfive revealed until the very end of the movie. like the last 5 minutes.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:48 p.m. CST

    actually that Thatcher comment was @ themagicalhornofguntata

    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:50 p.m. CST


    by Dude_Abides

    Still, its something that happens fairly soon in the film which is resolved in the last 5 minutes. Either way, silence is golden.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 12:54 p.m. CST


    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength


  • Aug. 19, 2009, 1:57 p.m. CST


    by Series7

    See the internet wasn't a daily thing when Pulp Fiction came out. If it was there would have been no building up, just staright bitching.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 2:56 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    You got me confused, i'm not british.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 2:57 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    For some reason, i found your post very funny and also a slice of truth.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 3:53 p.m. CST

    Rothpe kills Hitlerdore.

    by vanchimera

    That is all.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Maybe It's A Geek American Thang

    by Buzz Maverik

    I've observed that hard core geeks either love or hate. They base all their decisions on whichever set of tattooed knuckles the little Robert Mitchum in their brains holds up.<p>When we learn that someone, let's call him Quentin, isn't perfect, we hate him. Yeah, he probably should have called ResDAWGS a remake, he probably should have given Roger Avary more credit (although to be fair to QT, QT on his own rates better than RA on his own in my own questionable opinion because his work on his own is not as great as their work together)but the man is a great director, a talented screenwriter and a better actor than he's given credit for being.<p>Looking forward to INGLORIOUS BASTERDS.<p>Note to you EXPENDABLE guys: you know, you do get to see more than one movie in your lifetime. You can actually see INGLORIOUS BASTERDS and THE EXPENDABLES. It's not being unfaithful and since there's not really a club or bylaws or anything, you can get away with it. The theater will be happy to sell you tickets to both movies.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 6:32 p.m. CST

    I just realised where I've seen Zoller Before

    by Kizeesh

    He was the German trench commander in the 1000 times better than Inglourious Basterds WWI movie Joyeux Noel.<p> Shame on you if you haven't seen it.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 8:41 p.m. CST


    by kjmad25

    Imagine there was a mythical film nerd who was also actually retarded? Like down syndrome retarded? I wouldn't wanna run into him in a dark alley.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 8:45 p.m. CST

    Is Harry dating the same Yoko...

    by kjmad25

    ... that destroyed the Beatles? WTF Harry!

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 9:51 p.m. CST

    topfivevideo is an oxygen thief.

    by bbbbeeeennnn

    Good review Harry. Saw the movie this morning. It wasn't what I expected either but was still a very good film that leaves you wanting more.

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 10:21 p.m. CST

    Not everyone is lovin' on IG . . .

    by ReportAbuse

    "Having seen it once in Cannes earlier this year, and again for its UK release I was struck afresh by how exasperatingly awful and transcendentally disappointing it is: a colossal, complacent, long-winded dud, a gigantic two-and-a-half-hour anti-climax, like a Quentin Tarantino film in form and mannerism but with the crucial element of genius mysteriously amputated." co. uk/film/2009/aug/19/inglourious-basterds-review-brad-pitt-quentin-tarantino

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 10:29 p.m. CST

    Also, never done a sequel?

    by bbbbeeeennnn

    Kill Bill Vol 2 maybe?

  • Aug. 19, 2009, 10:34 p.m. CST

    wow, Tarantino, a remake....

    by darthwaz1


  • Aug. 20, 2009, 2:24 a.m. CST


    by spooky2k

    Good-ish review. I loved this film too (saw it twice yesterday) but I can not understand why you think the cinematography is great! The acting and directing are second to none. The cinematography and editing are clumsy as hell. Kind of stuff I'd expect from a first year film student.

  • Aug. 20, 2009, 2:35 a.m. CST


    by edslostepisode

    Thanks for your recent apology for spoiling those movies. I don't think you should be banned from this site, but you hopefully learned a little something about how this is a movie community and we treasure all things movies. You seem to have forgotten that is why you came here to begin with was to talk with others about all things movies. You see what kind of damage you can do to others with your powerful reveals and they're not pissed at you for that but for taking away from them the right to come on here and share their thoughts on movies as well. I know that because of your special power to destroy movie moments that I will no longer be coming back to the talkbacks. Thanks for that. Please enjoy the rest of your life doing whatever it is you do.

  • Aug. 20, 2009, 6:31 a.m. CST

    fuck topfivevideo

    by slappy jones

    ban this cunt. fuck him. I was seeing perfect getaway this weekend because guess what THERE IS THIS PLACE CALLED THE FUCKING REST OF THE WORLD CUNT.

  • Aug. 20, 2009, 6:32 a.m. CST

    Oh and fuck the guy who wrote that review in the guardian

    by slappy jones

    IB really is a genuine masterpiece.

  • Aug. 20, 2009, 7:33 a.m. CST

    Tell'em slappy!!

    by Oprah_Duke

    Fuck that guy!

  • Aug. 20, 2009, 8:27 a.m. CST

    Put me to sleep.

    by Fresno Rob

    Ouch, what happened to Tarantino? Dogs then Fiction then Jackie Brown then... horrible films. I get that he loves writing dialogue, but he sets ups scenes with 10-15min of talking heads, really dull scenes with about 10-20 sec of action. For most of the movie! Really, really poor pacing in the movie, perhaps good for a novel but not for a film. this would have been a good movie if it was played as a straight up dark comedy with only the basterds... Some of whom got killed really quickly with no character development... Ending was terrible (WTF was with the bad guy? Even though the actor playing him carried the entire film.), action terrible, dialogue scenes boring, couple chuckles, that's it.

  • Aug. 20, 2009, 10:53 a.m. CST


    by Dude_Abides

    Just want to start off by saying that I am in know way a tfv sympothizer, trust me he's a douche. However, I will say this, I have seen both movies in question and trust me he just saved you like 10 bucks. I mean the guy did spoil a couple of movies but District 9; you find out what he told you fairly early in the flick and in Getaway, anyone who watches FoX "dramra" programming will figure it out fairly quick. Still, dude needs to keep his yapper shut cuz even dumb movies need to be seen unspoiled.

  • Aug. 20, 2009, 11:47 a.m. CST

    Lousy Language, Guys

    by PennyB

    Some of the posters here are pathetically uncreative in their use of language. Other than the juvenile four letter insults, what DO you have to say? And yeah---something marked "Spoiler" generally DOES have spoilers in it. Get over it.

  • Aug. 20, 2009, 1:43 p.m. CST

    This quote sums up Tarantino for me PERFECTLY.

    by Traumnovelle

    From Christy Lemire of the AP.. <P> "If only Quentin Tarantino the director weren't so completely in love with Quentin Tarantino the writer, Inglourious Basterds might have been a great movie rather than just a good movie with moments of greatness." <P> Hit it on the nose.

  • Aug. 20, 2009, 3:32 p.m. CST

    Harry this is how you ruin the ending

    by Series7

    Without ruining the ending. If you had to blow your wad so bad about the ending take a que from Ebert: <P> "For starters (and at this late stage after the premiere in May at Cannes, I don’t believe I’m spoiling anything), he provides World War II with a much-needed alternative ending. For once the basterds get what’s coming to them."

  • Aug. 20, 2009, 4:55 p.m. CST

    Re:Jackson Healy

    by Kizeesh

    Bar scene eh? Funny how neither you nor Harry actually addressed my complaint about it.<p> It is pointlessly overlong. It's QT wank-writing himself into stupidity. Same thing that made Deathproof a dull as shit pile of vomit. 80% of a 2 and a half hour movie should not be 'snappy dialogue' it just becomes tedious,<p> Which is prcisely what happens in the Bar scene, Fucking King Kong my ass.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 1:54 a.m. CST


    by Man of Stool

    Oops, wrong talkback. Ah, the old days of me being banned for not liking Eli Roth...

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 3:21 a.m. CST


    by Obscura

    wether you know it or not, everything in that scene,and the movie was considered and important. right down to the position of glasses on the table. thats how tarintino works, and this movie, and that scene especially is a great example. he knows how to build up tension with nothing but words and angles.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 3:25 a.m. CST

    Just saw it...

    by dutchsouthern

    ...and loved it. I really don't get all that hate for Tarantino here. I really don't. And the basement tavern scene was tense as hell. I don't see how he could have cut a single frame. It was great.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 4:08 a.m. CST

    The Ref

    by readyoufool

    Were you actually scratching your head? Did your hand actually move to the top of your head and scratch? Did it? What thoughts were going through your head at that moment? Something profound like, "Well now that's not right." How do you go along on a ride for 2hrs and 20 minutes and in the last 10 minutes decide, "none of this makes sense"? Why weren't you scratching your head when hitler decided to show up at at the theater?

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 4:17 a.m. CST

    What the fuck kind of people . . .

    by readyoufool

    . . . are coming to this site now Harry? Jesus. Maybe you should start charging for content to keep some of the riff raff away. Between the "spoiler" idiots and the fucking trolls and the morons who don't understand brilliant fun film making when they see it I really am starting to go along with Roger Ebert's "Dark Age" Theory. It's like a bunch of illiterate people are showing up now. Maybe they're having someone else read the site to them and then dictating a response back and somewhere there the small spark of intelligence that IS there gets lost in the translation. You fucking people . . . if i had to consciously be in some of your shoes I'd have killed myself a long time ago. You serve no purpose. Your idiotic posts are like bit red swastika scars carved into your foreheads. Hopefully you're this dumb everywhere you go so people know to avoid you.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 4:29 a.m. CST


    by readyoufool

    Where do you get off questioning someone who is doing what he loves? Take your own advice. Stop going to see his movies and stop coming here to bitch about movies you're determined to hate. The pure joy and fun that quentin feels as a filmmaker comes through in every frame of his movies. Stop expecting him to top Pulp Fiction. Stop living in the past. We're lucky enough to get a gem this summer from him. It's the only movie i've seen this summer and thought, "fuck, i wish it would have been 4 hours." Where is his growth? What the fuck are you even talking about? Woody Allen makes Woody Allen movies. PTA makes PTA movies. Wes Anderson makes Wes Anderson movies. Just because it feels like a Tarantino movie doesn't mean it's a rehash of old ideas. It means the director has a strong style that comes across in whatever type of movie he makes. He could make a Meg :Ryan Hugh Grant Rom Com and it would still feel like Tarantino. He could make a documentary on corn farming and it would still feel like Tarantino. Shut up with your stupid "open letter" format bullshit.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 5:50 a.m. CST

    Re: Obscura

    by Kizeesh

    Not a bit of it!<p> Get QT's cock out of your mouth and actually look at the film critically.<p> That scene is TOO GODDAMN LONG, for no reason other than he gets off wriitng dialogue.<p> As to tension, there was none until over halfway through when the SS officer appeared. And even then the dragging dialogue made it just awkward and dull until the Mexican standoff, which I happily admit was well done but after half an hour of dragging plodding chit-chat that served NO PLOT PURPOSE WHATSOEVER, it was too little too late.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 11:54 a.m. CST

    An absolute Must See!!!

    by therealjackburton

    Tarantino delivers the goods once again. Being an avid fan of the director myself, I'm not quite sure if this film will win over any film goers who are currently on the fence regarding Tarantino, but if this man's films are already your kind of bag, you should enjoy the hell out of Inglourious Basterds. I only have two issues with the film, and those two issues being the casting choice of Eli Roth, and Mike Myers. Concerning Roth, he did okay with the role, but when watching him do his thing, you just know a more capable actor could have done a far better job with the Donowitz The Bear Jew. Myers just simply takes me out of the movie during his scene, because I can not help but picture Austin Powers. It truly makes no sense why Tarantino would cast such a well known comic actor in a serious role as a British man, knowing full well that Myers has had three huge film hits as Austin Powers. I was on the brink of laughter everytime the man spoke. Oh well. Other than those two misteps, Tarantino knocked it out of the park. Now, where do I rank this up against his other films? Let's see... 1. Pulp Fiction 2. Jackie Brown 3. Ingloruious Basterds 4. Resevoir Dogs 5. Kill Bill 6. Death Proof Go see it today!!

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 12:08 p.m. CST

    awesome film, loved it.

    by billyhitchcock

    when i found out that IB was not going to be the full on nazi killing exploitation romp that QT had implied at i was a little worried. had he tried to over egg what seemed to be a purposely simple premise? the answer is no. instead of phoning in a kill bill/death proof-esque homage-fest, which while fun are not as complex as his early work, he has pulled his 4th masterpiece out of the bag. while not quite reaching the height of RD or PF i would have to say it is certainly on a par with Jackie Brown. after a few more viewings it may even be better. as it turns out the nazi killing is perfectly executed, enough to excite but not overdone at all, and it serves the larger story in way that turns the film in to a perfect mix of tension and relief. 1)RD 2)PF 3)IB 4)JB 5)KB1 6)KB2 7)DP

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 12:50 p.m. CST


    by Azby

    The Mike Myers scene wasn't supposed to be serious. You were meant to laugh when he spoke.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 1 p.m. CST

    QT at the Box Office

    by therealjackburton

    Reservoir Dogs (1992) Budget $1,200,000 (estimated) Opening Weekend $147,839 (USA) (25 October 1992) (19 Screens) Gross $2,687,008 (USA) (7 March 1993) Pulp Fiction (1994) Budget $8,000,000 (estimated) Opening Weekend $9,311,882 (USA) (14 October 1994) Gross $107,928,762 (USA) $213,928,762 (Worldwide) Jackie Brown (1997) Budget $12,000,000 (estimated) Opening Weekend $9,292,248 (USA) (28 December 1997) (1,370 Screens) Gross $39,647,595 (USA) (22 March 1998) Kill Bill Vol. 1 (2003) Budget $55,000,000 (estimated) Opening Weekend $22,089,322 (USA) (12 October 2003) (3,102 Screens) Gross $70,098,138 (USA) (23 May 2004) $178,398,138 (Worldwide) (5 June 2004) Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (2004) Budget $30,000,000 (estimated) Opening Weekend $25,104,949 (USA) (18 April 2004) (2,971 Screens) Gross $66,207,920 (USA) (22 August 2004) $149,591,303 (Worldwide) (2 August 2004) Grindhouse (2007) Budget $53,000,000 (estimated) Gross $25,031,037 (USA) (17 June 2007)

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 1:02 p.m. CST

    The best movies leave you wanting or imagining more

    by SoylentMean

    This is most definitely one of those movies. I would love to see a straight up prequel with all the Basterds doing what it is that got them their name. That is a movie I would pay to see. I love this movie a lot. Hell, even Eli Roth is good in it. I fully expected to like this movie, but to outright love it? An amazing fun time at the movies.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 1:47 p.m. CST

    God I love this film...

    by Cruel_Kingdom

    I admit that I loathed Death Proof. I wondered if QT still had it, and here he proves that he does. It feels damned good to be in love with a Tarantino film again.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 1:58 p.m. CST


    by uberman

    Man, if I EVER need a reason to run out and see a movie, nothing gets me rushin out to the theater faster than, "Larry King sez its the movie of the year!" Good Lord. When did Larry King become the go-to guy for movie quotes? If a movie is endorsed by, say, Time, Newsweek, RollingStone, etc, then thats ussually a pretty ggod sign. But Larry King? Give me a break.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 2:03 p.m. CST


    by uberman

    Reservoir Dogs: Pass Pulp Fiction: Pass Jackie Brown: Pass-Best QT movie. Kill Bill I: Fail Kill Bill II: Pass Death Proof: Fail Inglorious Basterds: ? Have yet to see it...

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 2:26 p.m. CST

    holy god was this fun

    by maitlanr

    harry's want more of these people...and that isn't a bad thing.<p> packed regal 14th st NYC theater--got mad laughs and applause from audience. i had fun. great female performances. i'm gonna see it again.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 2:44 p.m. CST

    Third Best Film This Summer

    by jpdanzig

    I have found Harry to be a reliable contra-indicator. If he LOVES a movie, it will probably suck, like the new Star Wars films. If he's iffy about a film, it will probably be EXCELLENT. I saw "Basterds" this morning, and it rocked from start to finish. This film will make Brad Pitt a superstar, not just Mr. Angelina Jolie.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 3:26 p.m. CST

    Tarantino's far

    by Book_Of_The_Dead

    If you enjoyed his earlier films, you'll most likely want to avoid 'Basterds'. On the other hand, if you were entertained by 'Death Proof' and 'Kill Bill: Vol 1 + 2', well, you'll pretty much sit through anything, won't you?

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 4:51 p.m. CST

    my review

    by MillaJovovichsArmpitSmell

    i was really looking forward to this. i agree with harry, it was not what i expected at all. i thought it was going to have lots of scenes with the basterds, lots of action, and more violence than any QT flick before. instead, it had little action and violence, and instead a lot of long conversational scenes. however, it was still great. i loved the two men in the first scene, and the tension. i also wanted to see more of all the characters. i actually had an idea that QT would end up letting the mission succeed, and i was right. still, i think this movie would've been better to leave out the cinema girls scenes, and only focus on the basterds and their story. also, i seem to notice the scene with the guy running with the gun and ammo strand featured in the trailer wasn't in the movie. too bad that looked cool. QT still remains one of my all time favs, i cant think of hardly anyone who's written AND directed SIX movies i want to watch multiplie times, and not only that, he's only made SIX movies. a perfect track record, IMO, one of the best. cheers.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 4:51 p.m. CST

    brad pitt not a superstar?

    by MillaJovovichsArmpitSmell

    i would say where do u live, but im pretty sure he's one of the biggest stars in the whole world already.

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 7:03 p.m. CST


    by Nerd_Rage_Retard_Strength

    thats me! i am the aicn super hero. i have the rage of an unsatisfied nerd with the strength of an angry retard!

  • Aug. 21, 2009, 9:05 p.m. CST

    is it too late to call topfive a cunt?

    by 35MinutesAgo

    NOPE!<p> fucking cunt.

  • Aug. 22, 2009, 1:56 a.m. CST

    by SebastianHaff

    1. Inglourious Basterds <br> 2. Reservoir Dogs <br> 3. Kill Bill <br> 4. Jackie Brown <br> 5. Death Proof <br> 6. Pulp Fiction <br> There. I said it. Basterds rules.

  • Aug. 22, 2009, 11:24 a.m. CST

    great flick...and as Harry

    by johnthefilmaddict

    said, it's not what you expect. I only went in knowing that b/c I read the first part of some reviews here on AICN. Thanks guys! I appreciated this film. It's a real story with real chapters. Harry states everything that I feel about this film. 1. Pulp Fiction - my number 2 movie of all time behind the Star Wars Trilogy (4-6) 2. Reservoir Dogs 3. Kill Bill 4. Inglourious Basterds 5. Death Proof 6. Jackie Brown

  • Aug. 22, 2009, 4:11 p.m. CST

    Two rather humerous things on this talkback...

    by maxwell's hammer

    1) I guess QT backlash was inevitible. The majority of people on this site (not everyone, mind you) are just so desperate to shit on everything they can get their asses on. If you really like QT, and aren't just a poser whose opinion is formed by your impression of what will make you seem the most hip, Inglorious Basterds is a very fun film.<BR> <BR> 2. Are there seriously that many people who are pissed off that they read a review clearly marked 'spoiler', and then were exposed to something that spoiled the ending of the movie? Harry is a jerk because YOU couldn't stop yourself from clicking on the link, which, once again, is clearly marked 'SPOILER'?! What a bunch of douche-nozzels.

  • Aug. 22, 2009, 8:23 p.m. CST

    topfivevideo - dig up stupid!!

    by Womb2dooM

    Seriously some bad PR work right there.

  • Aug. 22, 2009, 8:42 p.m. CST

    Harry, why do you assume Shoshanna and Marcel are lovers?

    by JGer

    I read your review and that caught me for a loop. I got the impression that Marcel was gay based on his comment about filming the guitarist when he is asked about the recording equipment but I can see where you got that vibe as well. I think it was purposely left ambiguious but you seem very certain in your review that they were a couple. Wondering if I missed something

  • Aug. 22, 2009, 8:50 p.m. CST

    JGer - they make out for about 30secs

    by Womb2dooM

    No ambiguity there, unless QT just can't write gay...

  • Aug. 22, 2009, 8:53 p.m. CST

    I wouldnt call that a make out

    by JGer

    They kissed but it didnt seem they were lovers to me again I guess I missed it I was waiting on that kiss to answer the question and it didnt seem like a lovers kiss to me I am probably way overthinking it

  • Aug. 22, 2009, 9:02 p.m. CST

    Pretty intense kiss....

    by Womb2dooM

    The audience could allow QT the liberty of killing Hitler or playing Bowie's Putting Out Fire (AWESOME scene!!) but interracial PDAs in 1940's german occupied france may have been a stretch.<P>But yes, you're right - it's a tad open to interpretation.

  • Aug. 22, 2009, 9:41 p.m. CST

    Looking forward to seeing it again

    by JGer

    For MANY reasons, I loved the film beyond belief, but especially for that relationship and the cues I think I have made a bigger deal of in my own head. The actress who played Soshanna was unbelievable, couldnt take my eyes off her and her exhale after the restaurant confrontation was priceless. There were gasps when he ordered her milk with her strudle

  • Aug. 22, 2009, 10:28 p.m. CST

    So many great moments!

    by Womb2dooM

    The aforementioned exhale, the mad laughter projected on the smoke of the cinema blaze, the subtitle repeats of "oui" and "merci", Aldo's "A river derchy", Goebble's hand shake......... So damned fun!

  • Aug. 23, 2009, 12:37 a.m. CST

    Pulp Fiction...

    by FilmFan311

    is My Favorite Film of All Time. INGLOURIOUS is TARANTINO IN TOP FORM. BASTERDS is now My Favorite Film of 2009. Tension filled, FUCKING KICK ASS CINEMATOGRAPHY, Great characters and lots of fun. Quentin, Thanks Man. I'm on the mountain top about to light one up for you! MAKE ANOTHER MOVIE SOON!! This waiting forever shit between films is for the birds. Peace.

  • Aug. 23, 2009, 3:13 a.m. CST

    Am I wrong?

    by JustSomeDude899

    I think I liked most of Tarantino's other movies a lot more. Only movies I'd place this above is Jackie Brown (which I liked) and Death Proof (which I didn't really like).

  • Aug. 23, 2009, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Tarantino's Self-Critique

    by sanzaru

    I have to wonder if Tarantino was speaking through Landa to some degree- many of you seem to have *branded* him based on his earlier successes, assigning him nicknames that don't ring quite as nicely nowadays as they did in his hyper filmic youth. Clever as he is, it's extremely hard for him to escape his 'glourious' past...? (This would also suggest Hollywood is a pack of Nazis, I guess.)

  • Aug. 23, 2009, 6:09 p.m. CST

    Are you sure Landa hated his nickname at the end?

    by SilentP

    I assumed he just said that because he was trying to get on the Basterds' good side.

  • Aug. 23, 2009, 8:59 p.m. CST

    Sorry but for once Harry's right.

    by djscott95

    This film is freakin brilliant. The only thing better than the first 20 minutes are the last 30. QT's second best film, easily. I personally don't think it's better than "Pulp Fiction", but I would totally understand if someone said it was, and I wouldn't feel the need to punch them in the sack.

  • Aug. 24, 2009, 9:55 a.m. CST

    great review - great movie!

    by the__natural74

    Harry is 100% right in this review. Everything he says is accurate. I've never said that before or even addressed Harry specifically in all my years on these boards.<br><br> I have been a HUGE QT fan since he came on the scene. Every film he makes seems to be better than the last. "Reservoir Dogs" is still my favourite QT movie, but I see an improvement or continued growth as he explores different genres in each new film.<br><br> However, while I really liked the Basterds...I do rank it the lowest of his movies in my book. It's not to say it's bad (far from it!), but it didn't have the same level of fun or enjoyment. Maybe I took the VERY serious history of the holocaust and WW2 to heart. Don't get me wrong, I laughed plenty and there were tons of classic moments. But, it wasn't the same "feel-good" experience as ANY of his other films.<br><br> Incredible acting all around, some QT signatures and styles to be sure, but Basterds is a different film than he has EVER done before. And I applaud and cheer Quentin for doing something so unexpected. This is a movie so rare in Hollywood, and so beautifully distinct from most of the big budget garbage produced in 2009. However, let me echo Harry in saying I wanted MORE of everything!

  • Aug. 24, 2009, 12:39 p.m. CST

    Let's be honest, Harry - this was a weak effort.


    I'm not a huge QT fan..he's done solid films and he's done weaker ones. But this is clearly among his weakest to date; with trite characterization and a loose plot that doesn't truly ever fit neatly into a narrative. And that's not clever...that's meandering and a lack of focus (I can easily discern when something lacks focus due to a meandering and plodding lack of vision and when it is done to support a broader narrative. This is the former). It just isn't that great a film. And I wish more folks would be honest about that without resorting to the consummate QT bashing just to look 'contrarian'. We can be honest about the film's problems without it being a reflection on the opinions of its director.

  • Aug. 24, 2009, 12:54 p.m. CST


    by Mr_Brown

    This is one time I will get Harrys back and say that it clearly read Heavy Spoilers in the headline. Stop whining about it.

  • Aug. 24, 2009, 1:41 p.m. CST

    The truth is this movie is already spoiled for you

    by karmakitten13

    .... if you've seen any of Tarantino's other movies. This was cookie cutter Tarantino and as a loyal follower of his, I was left underwhelmed. Don't get me wrong -- its not horrible by ANY stretch, and I will not bash it for being shit. The cast was great (aside from the unnecessary mugging of Eli Roth, and ridiculous Mike Meyers presence). Parts made me chuckle, parts satisfied my blood lust, and overall it was pretty good. But on the same token it didn't feel like anything new. From the same type font in the opening credits, to separating everything into chapters, to the music being a prevalent character in its own right. You really could expect how everything was going to turn out just based on how his other movies have flowed. This was just the same QT movie template filled with a different story. I feel like Tarantino has stopped evolving and at the end of the day I was left hoping for more from this.

  • Aug. 24, 2009, 4:05 p.m. CST

    spot on harry

    by logicalnoise01

    I struggled with my own review and stated that having all this time with the characters was nice but that it felt slavishly oppressive at times with the tension he built in each scene. But your right I went in expecting a different WW2 movie and in reality he gave me one I didn't ask for but one that is better than what I expected.

  • Aug. 25, 2009, 2:13 a.m. CST


    by 35MinutesAgo

    yeah, you definitely missed something. they were definitely together... besides the obvious make-out scene, there was all kinds of evidence to suggest they were lovers.<p> also, he wasn't talking about filming the guitarist... shoshanna asked if the audio recording equipment was available and working, and that's when he mentioned the guitarist, implying that he'd recorded guitar audio, not video of the actual guitarist.

  • Aug. 25, 2009, 8:52 a.m. CST

    LOVED it

    by nametaken


  • Aug. 25, 2009, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Harry's AICN reviews - Does it live up to the hype?

    by gun_will_travel

    It's never really about whether the movie is a quality film. It's always about whether the movie is the film Harry thinks it should be. Every now and then I'd like to see a film evaluated on its merits,instead of whether it has lived up to Harry's pre-release expectations

  • Aug. 25, 2009, 12:17 p.m. CST


    by LoneGun

    As has been noted more than once in the Talkback above, there was no spoiler alert within the title of this review when it was first posted. The warning "Spoiler Heavy" was added only after readers expressed their surprise and hurt about the ending of the film being blurted out.

  • Aug. 25, 2009, 1 p.m. CST

    It sucked...

    by LouisWu

    ..Just say that instead of making excuses for a poorly executed experiment in foreign film making by a domestic director. This movie is falsely advertised as an "action" film and the expectations I had for it led to a really miserable movie experience.

  • Aug. 25, 2009, 4:24 p.m. CST

    Wrong about something

    by SlightlyOverweightRichieCunningham

    Here is the one thing Harry is wrong on I think....Hans Landa is in no way a hero. He uses the Basterds to secure his own fate, no heroship there. He attempts to avoid the risk of Germany losing the war, and being held accountable for his own actions. All villain no hero. just saying....

  • Aug. 26, 2009, 5:31 p.m. CST

    Inglourious Basterds not the Jewish revenge fantasy I'd hoped fo

    by UnfitTimes

    Check out a slightly different take at

  • Aug. 27, 2009, 1:09 a.m. CST

    Just saw it -- no way was this a QT masterpiece

    by corplhicks

    This movie felt like Nazi-Snuff-Porn. Who doesn't wanna see a bunch of American soldiers, not to mention Jewish American soldiers killing Nazis? There is just so much wrong with this movie. Many of the build up scenes were just too long. Landa was 10% comical at times, and just nuts, but not nuts in the utterly terrifying way that Ralph Fiennes played Goeth in Schindler nuts but eccentric. At it was just not funny watching that. And it seems that too many Germans were closet Sherlock Holmes' style detectives-- Ah you zee, ze cadence of your step left keep prints in the mud too far apart for you to have been walking, therefore...YOU ARE A BRITISH SPY. BLAM BLAM BLAM !!!!!! I did not like the fact that we see the Nazi bodies mutilated-- not because I am squeamish but because I do not think it shows anyone in the world any good representation of the American beliefs. We NEVER condone mutilation and those who do are not praised but prosecuted. Rare exceptions may occur. Certainly, having an "Apache" style resistance going around killing Nazis by the bushel would have sufficed, especially if they left a note like "You're next !". Having basically the entire "bridge crew" of nazi germany in ONE enclosed room at one time would never happen- we can't even get our Pres and VP in the same room one day after the election ends every fourth november. Also, killing those few people would NOT have stopped the war as those four were not holding onto power by the skin of their teeth, but by the Democratic will of the German people (they were mostly voted in) and hundreds if not thousands in government who supported them. This movie also diminishes the heroic efforts of millions of American soldiers and soldiers the world over who died, were wounded, or not, but who fought to end that savage dictatorship. That a tiny band of soldiers and a revenge happy theater owner could do what was shown is ridiculous and yes it is a movie, but given the subject material, I think it is absurd. if somehow the efforts of those in the movie were weaved into a truthful, larger plot of the actual events of WW2, somehow showing how their efforts permitted, say, D-day to go that much smoother, etc.. then fine. Landa's surrender and that insufferable list of demands he rattles into the phone was downright dumb. His absurd outrage at the death of his radio operator??? like he would really care ! And that basement scene went on FOREVER and EVER and then ended with everyone basically dying????!!!!!! how absurd. And the immediately preceeding scene where the operation to "end the war" is hatched with those ridiculously comic book, pompous British accents... horrible !! And who can forget Mike Myers !!!! Sorry, but there were 2 or 3 times during his scenes where you had a subtle HINT that he was grinning like Austin or just had "that look"-- he simply should NEVER EVER be on camera dong anything with an English accent again that is not tied to Austin. He was amazing in 54 by the way. by the way, being shot in the upper back (chest) 3 times and ending up motionless on the ground face down for a minute or two goes along with being DEAD or nearly dead-- and no you do not have the strength to remove your Walther and get ready to shoot the woman who just shot you when she turned you over to check on you when you whimper. soshana dying like that was an insult. What would have been better is the following: she LIVED and somehow the plot carried her and Landa to the same woods and their plot lines criss cross and as he spared HER IN the meadow, she shoots him in the back as he is going to the Americans, perhaps seconds after he smiles at her and turns away, just learning who she really is. THAT would have been much better. having two parallel plot of two sets of characters that want to kill everyone in, and blow up, the theater was interesting, but having them intersect at the last moment would have been even better. Having TWO people guard Hitler's box is absurd. Lincoln had better security and we know what happened there. Overall, this was nazi-snuff-porn, little more. QT, you disappointed me.

  • Aug. 27, 2009, 1:14 a.m. CST

    How I rank his films

    by corplhicks

    1) Pulp Fiction 2) Reservor Dogs 3) Kill Bill 1 4) Jackie Brown 5) Kill Bill2 6) Inglorious Basterds 7) Death Proof

  • Aug. 27, 2009, 1:16 a.m. CST


    by christpunchers2007

    I respect you for what you do, for having this site up and running, but you are really selling out and dumbing down yourself if you find District 9 to be amazing enough to watch 3 times yet still have to contemplate Inglorious Basterds which is filled with great dialog, AMAZING actors (partly due to the germans being foreign and unknown to most in the West), and avoided most stupid pitfalls the entire way through. Just saw some lame GI Joe ad on TV the other day and there was a random blurb about you saying how the movie was "so cool!", give me a break man, that's not you, don't sell out.

  • Aug. 27, 2009, 1:47 a.m. CST

    As a major QT fan: I'll wait for DVD on this one

    by Flip63Hole

    Sounds like a mess. If there were or weren't spoilers I'm not sure what Harry was spoiling. Didn't really care. After Death Proof QT isn't getting my ass in a cinema seat so easily...

  • Aug. 27, 2009, 7:20 a.m. CST

    actually a better ending

    by corplhicks

    Soshana was somehow in communique with Americans and British and they agreed to have her try to blow up the theater. they also supported Aldo's unit-- basicaly Amerians and OSS felt two plots are better than one and at end, they all converge in forest, or an area like the farm from which she ran at beginning. Thinking she was successful, she is shocked to find landa receiving a pardon. last scene is a prolonged one of her pointing a gun at Landa's back for a long time then firing once at his back, then aiming down and firing on ground. then +/- some funny or clever line from Aldo. The End. Basically you have your woman revenge story again, like Kill bill.

  • Aug. 27, 2009, 1:35 p.m. CST

    The relationship being "open to interpretation"?!!

    by white_vader

    Erm, the first thing she says when they're introduced is to address him as "lover"! Then the smooch. It's really not that impenetrable!

  • Aug. 27, 2009, 1:43 p.m. CST

    I feel very sad for all the empty hating fanboys here

    by white_vader

    ... that can't appreciate the deft handling and setup of tone and balance of plot elements and pace. <p> And more than anything else roughly half a dozen textbook examples of how to build tension in a scene. Fuck me, for nerds who supposedly love film I swear you are some sorry-arse bitches. The bar scene too long? Christ on a bike people are stupid. And that folks is MY fanboy bitch. Go see it again without the pent-up hate and agenda. Grazie (said in terrible American accent, natch)!

  • Aug. 27, 2009, 2:28 p.m. CST


    by white_vader

    I agree Death Proof was a bizarre mess and not much more than an excuse for QT to indulge both his foot fetish (at least in KB there was a plot point to it) and his Super Stuntgirl Zoe Bell fetish, while getting paid for it. The whole 2 bunches of girls thing was like some chemically-altered take on a Mullholland Drive/Vanishing Point double bill! <p> Bit IB is the real deal man.

  • Aug. 28, 2009, 9:57 p.m. CST

    Excellent review Harry

    by Genre_Baby

    I'm not nearly as keen on Shoshanna as you were, but I would very much like to see a lot more with many of the characters in this film. Pleasantly surprised and glad I decided to actually see the film in the theater. For someone who never was a real fan of QT's it was nice to see his European influences mix and mingle so well here. I'll be picking this one up on dvd eventually. And I can only hope we get to see more of them Basterds.

  • Aug. 30, 2009, 11:28 a.m. CST

    Basterds: Good, but not Glorious

    by blue meanie

    Finally checked out QT's latest today with a buddy who's also a big Tarantino fan. We both agreed that, although the movie was entertaining, it simply wasn't great, much on the same level as Deathproof. For once, Harry's review was pretty spot on. Although most of the talkative scenes were intense and suspenseful, the lack of dynamic, visceral action scenes really hurt this film, as I think most fans were hoping this would be a WWII Sam Peckinpah-fueled commando epic. This movie needed less talk and more walk. We never really see the Basterds going to work on the Nazis, showing us why they are the most feared commando group in Europe. Instead, all we got was one scene in the aftermath of a Basterd raid, with only the Bear Jew showing his "talent", and then the final scene at the conclusion of the film. In other words, we were hoping for the "Wild Bunch", but ended up with Hogans Heroes. By far, both Christopher Waltz (Landa) and Melanie Laurent (shoshanna) were the stars of the film, as both of their characters were fully fleshed out. On the other hand, Brad and the other Basterds seemed like cardboard cartoon characters, that provide occasional humorous breaks amongst the long winded, tension-filled conversational scenes. Entertaining, but not a very satisfying movie. I, for once, wish that QT would do away with the "chapter" method of movie making (in all of his movies) and do a straight on movie with a continuous narrative. What used to be unique and clever method of creating a movie is now becoming very gimmicky.

  • Aug. 31, 2009, 4:05 a.m. CST

    Blue Meanie

    by white_vader

    I get what you're saying, but please don't criticise the movie for not being "great" because it's not what YOU expected. I'm quite sure you're right that most fans DID expect Peckinpah. But that's THEIR problem/expectation, and is disconnected from the actual film itself. I'm only making a point of it because everyone seems to be making the same mistake. Never mind that they'd be even more upset and moaning about him being an old hack who didn't do anything surprising if he did give them exactly what they wanted (which is usually "more of the same" if we're talking TBers) - ya can't win really. It's not his fault if fans expect by-the-numbers and wrongheadedly continue their preconceived and unforgiving expectations into criticism of the film itself. Like the film was the problem rather than them & the baggage they brought to it. You can't really blame the trailer for the film either. <p> It's like saying someone told you Lolita was going to be about tragic love - like Romeo and Juliet!, rather than a story about a filthy pedophile we're supposed to sympathise for. Doesn't mean Lolita ISN'T about tragic love, and it also doesn't mean Lolita isn't also a great book and film. It's just not what your theoretical friends led you to believe. Going back through your comments you even admit it succeeded in its various aspects, but cannot separate judging on it's own merits from judging it on what you wanted those bits to do. <p> As for "unique and clever methods" you're obviously too intelligent not to have ever read either a regular book or a comic book, both of which have been playing with segmented and/or non-linear techniques (especially comics) forever. Even though your average joe might have been knocked out by it's use in QT's films, it's neither unique nor clever. At all. And it couldn't be more obvious that QT USES them in a way that references these other media. As for the breaks that HELP CREATE the contrast & therefore tension, I would have thought that the treatment of type and Leone music, and name treatments and so on would have made the intention and tone patently obvious. So I agree to disagree there. Same with Deathproof - that didn't even do the 'standard QT' things properly. IMO. ;) <p> Anyway I hope I'm being articulate enough (if not concise, ha) to say all this without it sounding like I'm just ragging on you. I just really disagree with your specifics, and the overall confusion/criticism of what you thought you were in for as opposed to what you got. I guess for myself in retrospect I'm GLAD I didn't get exactly what I thought... I just wish Roger Ebert of all people hadn't spoiled the end for me (at least Harry had a spoiler warning)! <p> Cheers mate.

  • Aug. 31, 2009, 8:51 a.m. CST

    Thankyou for the spoiler warnings

    by Squilookle

    Even though I've already seen it, thankyou Harry for putting the spoiler warnings there. I certainly appreciate the integrity this shows you have. Unlike Capone, who wrecked Public Enemies...

  • Aug. 31, 2009, 2:45 p.m. CST

    Good stuff

    by richievanderlow

    Really, really enjoyed this movie. Can't say that I loved it. It certainly was not what I expected, and I have to fault the marketing of it. I too was expecting to see the Basterds in action much more, and really missed that. Tarantino made me forget Brad Pitt was Brad Pitt (not easy), and I too wanted so much more of this character. His witty and expansive dialogue was perfectly executed in foreign language, but I felt I was missing out on the imagery as I was too busy reading the text. Very good film. A very good Tarentino movie.

  • Sept. 1, 2009, 6:10 p.m. CST

    Fictional Patton Movie would've been far better

    by jonsnow

    If your going to rewrite history, at least base it on what would have happened if George S. Patton disobeyed orders early in the war or was fully supported by the US president and given Eisenhower's command. The biggest war scene on film ever would be Patton cuting off the massive German army(used at the battle of the bulge) at the biggest battle in world history at the Falaise gap then went to Berlin and hanged Hitler personaly. Or even show a true history of world war two based on the book target Patton, the truth is sometimes far more interesting than fiction.

  • Sept. 2, 2009, 8:45 p.m. CST

    Best Movie of the Year

    by Holy Hell

    Fucking genius.

  • Sept. 2, 2009, 8:46 p.m. CST

    WAAAAAY better

    by Holy Hell

    than District 9, and that movie was pretty cool.

  • Sept. 3, 2009, 8:12 p.m. CST

    I hope Top Five Video was banned.

    by Walterego

    What a total douche. I wonder how many people besides myself that guy's comment ruined (and continues to ruin since it hasn't been taken down) District 9 for. I was able to enjoy D9 overall despite the spoiled end, only because it was a great movie. I probably would have enjoyed it even more if it hadn't been spoiled. The guy's obnoxious defense that people like me who take a few weeks to see a film didn't "really" want to see it, is bullshit. There are plenty of good reasons not to see amovie opening weekend, such as because opening weekends are crowded and 7 pm shows sell out fast, or because one might want to wait to see a film with a particular person, or maybe because one has to first hear that the movie is excellent from people whose opinion one respects, or simply being busy. There is never an appropriate time to blurt out a spoiler like the ending, even if the movie came out a few years ago, certainly not if it is still in theatres or only just came out on DVD. His heavily defensive, conditional "apology" doesn't cut it because at the same time he rationalizes why he's justified in spoiling a film that came out a week or two before when he made the comment.

  • Sept. 5, 2009, 4:32 a.m. CST

    Didnt like it

    by hiperaktiv

    I mean it was ok, average, but not really a decent movie. The soundtrack music was really terrible and ill fitting imo.

  • Sept. 5, 2009, 10:30 a.m. CST

    I liked it

    by Potatino

    I saw it a few hours ago and I liked it. It wasn't the best thing since sliced bread but it was a nice fun cheesy film. I wouldn't watch it again, I wouldn't buy the DVD but I did leave the cinema with the biggest smile on my face thanks to the cheesy Brad pit line that ended the movie. Worth watching once in my opinion. I can see Harry's point of liking it enough to want more and more but for me it was just enough. I also agree about the soundtrack being crap though.

  • Sept. 6, 2009, 4:51 a.m. CST

    It was complete and utter shit

    by football

    Was this a black comedy set in an alternative universe? Besides Clint already covered this ground with Kelly's Heroes, a much better movie without the wordy bollocks about squirrels vs rats and cow's milk!! This has got to be the year's most over-rated movie. It's junk for the eyes and ears for the dumb generation. The end line: "This is my masterpiece" is laughable masturbation in plain public view. Don't believe the hype... it stinks!!

  • Sept. 7, 2009, 11:20 p.m. CST

    For another great kill Hitler flick check out

    by theJackalope

    "Hitler Dead or Alive" starring the great Ward Bond from 1942. Fuckin' great flick. It's Hitler even has a Joisey accent. Tremendous!!!!

  • Sept. 10, 2009, 2:23 p.m. CST

    Overhyped indeed!

    by Moonrocks

    I'm sorry but I have to agree with football. This film is derivative Tarantino at best and uneven self-gloss at worst. Though there are parts that are good and there are characters that are better, the film was an incomplete mesh of pieces with tired 70's Tarantino references. The Basterds, who were set up to be ass-kickers, got their asses kicked before they ever did anything. And Brad Pitt was a characature. The real bottom line, though, is that Quentie made this movie about five times already. You love the 70's grindhouse, we get it. Now move the fuck on....Sorry Harry, we didn't get more from Tarantino, but quite frankly, we don't need any more. Take off the rose-colored glasses for a sec and maybe you'll see.

  • Sept. 12, 2009, 8:14 p.m. CST

    Here's my review of Inglorious Basterds...


    It's a boring piece of shit. <p> Don't sell me a 'Men On A Mission' flick and then give me 2 and a half hours of pointless dialogue and scenes that just go on FOREVER when you can get your point across in a fraction of that time. <p> I know QT is a big believer in the idea that dialogue shouldn't always have to advance the plot, just look at Pulp Fiction and the scene where they're driving along chatting about the differences between the U.S and Europe. I'll admit, that was a great scene but you want to know why? <p> BECAUSE IT DIDN'T GO ON FOR 30 FUCKING MINUTES YOU RETARD!!!

  • Sept. 12, 2009, 8:58 p.m. CST

    Wow! This pretty much summed up my thoughts

    by Charlie_Allnut

    Great flick, but I'd still love to see Quentin's version of a guys on a mission movie like Wings of Eagles! Really curious to see where he goes next!

  • Sept. 13, 2009, 11:09 a.m. CST

    You know what might have worked?


    Maybe QT should have made it two movies. Now, I'm not talking two as in what he came up with for Kill Bill but rather have one movie that focuses solely on the Basterds and the other solely about Shosanna. <p> That way he could have given us a balls to the wall, dirty dozen style movie as well as a dialogue heavy, lesuirely paced film. Both would have told different stories while ultimately leading up to the same ending only you would see it from different angles. <p> If QT had done this then I'm sure he would have pleased everyone.

  • Sept. 14, 2009, 12:55 p.m. CST

    One of the most boring movies I've ever seen

    by Jubal_Early

    This movie was marketed totally wrong. I stood up for Death Proof because I thought it was unique in its way, but I cannot defend this fim. I went with five friends of mine, all of us with VERY different tastes in film, and all of us squirmed in our seats, I wanted to walk out during the lengthy dialogue moments I was so frustrated with it. Mind you, no matter how bad a film has ever been before, I had NEVER thought about walking out. Well, I almost did this time. What's more, I don't think marketing it CORRECTLY would have made it any more digestable. It's boring, and that's the worst thing a movie can be, no matter how "clever" certain parts may be. The basement/bar scene goes on WAY TOO LONG no matter how good the dialogue is (Tarantino needs to learn a tip from William Faulkner, who famously said, "Kill your darlings," by that he meant to remove all the excess, no matter how much you might love it, if it interrupts the story's integrity and flow). IG is a wreck. I am a film buff, and I have never been more disappointed in a film in my entire life. This IS NOT the crack-team action thriller the commercials and the campaigns promised us. But, life goes on. We're all just floating.

  • Sept. 15, 2009, 2:10 a.m. CST

    Walked out an hour and a half into it.

    by Flip63Hole

    Officially off the Tarantino bandwagon. Honestly have zero interest in seeing the rest of this film... I imagine the movie they were talking about was shown and Nazis were killed...

  • Sept. 16, 2009, 1:52 a.m. CST

    It's good, not great

    by Spazatronik2000

    Certainly not Tarantino's masterpiece. I can't say I liked it more than Kill Bill 1 for that matter. It's similar to Kill Bill 2 in that much of the movie is great, but a few of the long, drawn out dialogue scenes fall flat and fail to pay off. The first scene was great but... couldn't he trim a few lines? The restaraunt scene when they ask the woman about showing the film at her theater is excruciatingly dull. Until the Jew Hunter finally shows up. I actually don't mind most of Tarantino's excessive dialogue scenes, I quite enjoyed Death Proof, but there was just something missing with Basterds. Death Proof capped those scenes with breathtaking action scenes, while the end of Basterds fealt just slightly anti-climatic. While the plot and story of Pulp Fiction was weaved together in a brilliant and interesting manner, I felt the plot and story of Inglorious Basterds was a bit lacking. Nit-picking aside it was a very good film, but being a big Tarantino fan and seeing all the very positive buzz, I came away slightly disapointed.

  • Sept. 19, 2009, 10:14 p.m. CST

    Easily his worst film...

    by quantize

    fact...I'll share a story with you. When in line for tickets to see District 9, this douchebag buying tickets next to me overhears me ask for 2xD9 tickets..he says to me 'Don't do it mate!, terrible film' a give a flying fuck what some asshole stranger with his douchebag gelled up hair thinks. We go in, loved the of the best of the year. Fucking awesome. <p> Week later, we're going into Inglorious Basterds, the usher taking our tickets says to me (for some reason assholes wanna give me their opinion!) 'Great film'. We go in, leave stunned at what a fucking incoherent mess the film is...and we're rabid Tarantino fans.. <p> The opening scene is really well done, from there on its a wobbly rollercoaster ride all downhill...all the usual tricks at play but every scene seems to wheeze to a predictable and prolonged climax, the ending is telegraphed feel nothing for the characters, the humor is weak at best.Taraninto fails to commit to ANY of the ideas many of the scenes go to.. <p> Asimov Lives liked it...his comments on this thread show what an utter moron he is..he gives intelligent Liberals like myself a bad name with his wacked out self important drivel. To me thats the nail in the coffin of this film. Wankers like it.

  • Sept. 22, 2009, 1:26 p.m. CST

    Best Film of the Year for me

    by kwisatzhaderach

    1) Inglourious Basterds <p> 2) District 9 <p> 3) The Hurt Locker <p> 4) Public Enemies <p> and how it fit into Tarantino's catalogue: 1) Reservoir Dogs <p> 2) Pulp Fiction <p> 3) Inglourious Basterds <p> 4) Jackie Brown <p> 5) Kill Bill Vol. 2 <p> 6) Kill Bill Vol. 1 <p> 7) Death Proof

  • Sept. 24, 2009, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Angry Hitler Rips Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds

    by Jacopo


  • Sept. 24, 2009, 10:51 a.m. CST

    Angry Hitler

    by Jacopo

    [html= =pdVRYPfr0yg]SPOILERS![/html]

  • Oct. 4, 2009, 10:37 a.m. CST

    'I love the universe of WWII.'

    by Sepulchrave

    That has got to be the most ridiculously glib and immature thing I have heard this year. You are a child, a silly little child in a man's outsize body.

  • Dec. 5, 2009, 4:26 p.m. CST

    DVD For Christmas

    by Megaminis

    Managed to miss Bastards in the cinema. Hinting heavily for the run up to Christmas heh

  • Feb. 15, 2010, 2:09 a.m. CST


    by TmvEqK

    JuECnL <a href=" ">TWttUHjW</a>

  • Feb. 15, 2010, 2:10 a.m. CST


    by TmvEqK

    MDJRxaUk <a href=" ">uPnSkWLd</a>

  • Feb. 22, 2010, 1:38 p.m. CST


    by MattmanReturns

    While I disagree with your take on Basterds (which is okay, as this will only support my point), I hate fuckers that try to warn you against seeing a film. I've had that happen a few times. Film is so subjective, does some random idiot honestly think he knows what you're going to like? Like anything could have stopped me from seeing District 9!

  • Feb. 22, 2010, 2:24 p.m. CST

    Yeah, what he said

    by orcus

  • March 1, 2010, 3:06 p.m. CST

    It was pretty good.

    by BilboRing

    Not great but I liked it well enough.

  • March 1, 2010, 3:32 p.m. CST

    Yeah, what he said

    by orcus

  • Jan. 1, 2012, 11:26 a.m. CST

    My biggest problem with this film...

    by obi12kenobi that Tarantino spends too much energy forcing other directors styles into his films. This film is way too Sergio Leone when it doesn't need to be. The script and Tarantino is strong enough to create their own identity. Take the scene where the Bear Jew is revealed. He draws out the reveal in a deliberate Leone/spaghetti western fashion. In the end we see him emerge from the tunnel and it's just Eli Roth with a baseball bat. The same Eli Roth we saw a few scenes earlier. It just feels forced. I loved a lot of this film but as a whole it could of been a classic if he'd given the film it's own style. (I realise I'm a little late to this party but only recently watched the film for a second time and I just had to vent).

  • Jan. 1, 2012, 11:28 a.m. CST


    by obi12kenobi

    ...not sure if you get notifications for these messages but I'd love to hear your 2 cents on my perspective.