Talkback for INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS... Beware of Spoilers!

YOU BESTERDS!!!

It was kind of like a WWII Spaghetti Western. Had a Leone flair to it, but had alot of Quentin's flair as well. Excellent film.

Sam Jacksons voice seemed so out of place and almost ruined the whole movie for me at one stage.

I really do, but I just can't trust the judgment of anyone who "loved" Death Proof. They are just not being objective.

For that new Avatar movie. Wasn't that awesome?

I loved it, Eli Roth was the best to watch, I wanna go see it again as soon as possible. I agree on the disappointment of SLJ voicing

When The Tree Of Life will be playing patty cake with your cornhole in 2009!

AVATAR LOOKS LIKE MOOSESHIT!

in the posters and the trailer, I won't care about it. And if he thinks the trailers for this film are good...then I don't want to see it.

I am still seeing this movie because of Brad Pitt. I am getting kind of tired of Tarantino and his fucking wannabe cool dialogue in his movies. Cocksucker!

This film works wonderfully, as it is all about the falseness of reality, and pretending to be what we are not. So much of the film is watching these people talk, not knowing how much they know, and what they're getting away with, all while pretending to be what they're not. The shootout at the tavern is BEAUTIFUL because while this is all culminating, everyone is wearing cards saying they are someone else, WHILE they are pretending to be Germans. The very fact that Hammersmark, a key player in all of this, is an ACTRESS, someone whose career is just pretending to be something we're not, is just the icing on the cake. Additionally, you get other beautiful pieces, like the actor getting shot, but his death being muted over his character in the movie's own gunfire. Laura Mulvey would have loved this shit. It also works great as an anti-propaganda film that is a propaganda film, but made from the opposing side. I guarantee you, had Jews been able to make propaganda films in the '40s, they absolutely would have had a close up of HITLER'S FACE BEING SHOT TO RUBBLE. I need to see this again, to fully grasp it all. But when you take what I mentioned, add the theme of the expendability of man, Shosannah and Landa's GREAT performances, and the phenomenal use of Bowie's Cat People, you have a pretty fucking wonderful movie.

There I said it.

What? Oh still no mention of it.

...his foot fetish.

I'll admit that SLJ's voice, and the "pussy wagon" font being used for Stigglitz, and other things like that DID seem out of place. But to me, it was more about Tarantino just playing with tricks that he used in the past and enjoys using. The reveal of the dynamite with the iris is the same sort of thing. It's just the new tools he's moved onto. If this movie was made ten years ago, I'm sure there would have been one of his infamous "trunk shots", and there isn't, because he's moved onto new flairs now. I did however ENJOY Kietel's voice over the phone at the end.

folks- i dont care if anybody sees it like that but- i think IB has a special meaning for german (and of course austrian) audience. cause i´ve seen what i´ve been dreaming a long time: see all those extraordinary german actors in an international blockbuster production. cause we have a creepy little movie-industry here, that is ruled by tv-production-firms, so a good movie pops out just once in a while. but instead we see all those fantastic actors wasted in dull tv-productions. in case of the fantastic (austrian) actor Christoph Waltz nearly anybody who has seen him in tv and some (maybe good productions) wanted to see him on the big screen. The same is for some other faces, that had been involved in IB, just think of August Diehl. QT has given us this dream - and that´s what i am greatful of. all the acting in ib was fantastic (maybe diane kruger could have been castedwith another girl, but, in the end she has done a good job as well...) i am a believer again!

He's great, but he's hardly the "star" and not featured nearly as much as the trailers would make you think. And you'll probably hate wading through the film's roughly 75 percent of dialogue being subtitled.

I believe this movie to be an instant classic. It is so deliberate and immersive. Not since the Dark Knight have I felt that I truly got more than my money's worth and experienced something that became much more than just another WWII movie.

Once again, QT does that thing he does where he has characters talk about the most irrelevant things and expects us to be equally as fascinated. This only worked in Pulp Fiction and somewhat in Kill Bill. The convos there shed light on the characters, but here their just so damn long and pointless. I actually started texting a chick just to get myself thru a scene. Still, if you wait long enough all the chapters end with a great, brutal killing so it's about patience. But not QT's best.

This film dragged like a fat man's ass. And the Basterds were such a small component of the film. It is not horrible, but really? I just could not love this film. I couldn't even really like it.

This is QT's masterpiece. I was very dubious on him (did not like Kill Bill and thought Death Proof was watchable, but minor) but this movie seemed intriguing, even mysterious going in. It's so fascinating and bizarre and strange and wonderful. A pure film - it's QT's European Art Cinema homage (especially Godard) and it works perfectly. Forget Avatar speculation - go see this masterpiece right away.

totally what i was hoping for. 2.5 hours never went so fast. prolly the most humorous QT film i've seen. the looks Hugo was throwing down in the bar scene were priceless...only complaint i had was the lame ass David Bowie song. that was more jarring than the SLJ voiceovers in my opinion

So disappointed. Worst film besides Death Proof.

BRAD PITT, AND JEW HUNTER WILL FIGHT FOR THE OSCAR........the comedic material in this film is strong!

This IS August, right? Holy fucking shit, thank you, sir. This wasn't the film I thought I was going to be watching this morning but I am so happy that it is what it is. Quentin... you the man. This motherfucker can't come out quick enough on BluRay and I really look forward to midnight revival screenings of it in the many years to come.

I don't know if her dialogue in the film suited her delivery....her tarantinoisms stood out the most

The first two chapters definitely scream spaghetti western (not a bad thing), but it really becomes it's own thing after that. Yes the middle of the film is a little heavy on dialogue, but it all builds up to an extremely rewarding finale. There were some of QTs indulgences there, like the use of same fonts from his past films, as well as musical cues, and a slightly unnecessary Sam Jackson narration, but he definitely doesn't overdo it.

Ugh. It was NECESSARY. You had to see these people squirming, because almost EVERYONE is in the middle of a lie and they don't know if they're caught. It's suspenseful, people. Landa ordering milk for Shoasannah at the restaurant coincidentally, is a perfect example. And yeah, the comedic moment in this film, really do work.

It's not like this film is peppered with pop culture references like his other films are. The ONLY scene I can think of with "pointless" dialogue is Shosannah and Fredrick's first meeting, discussing cinema. And even that, while not necesssary to the plot, I'd argue contributes to the film's theme of masking reality. What are you talking about? It's not like there was a scene with Also and Donnie discuss the best type of bat to bash in a Nazi's head with, and then riff on the World Series

I had some problems with the film at times. I knew about the talkiness going in and fully expected it, but STILL felt like sections could've been pared back a bit.

But that ending. That amazingly beautiful ending. That made up for any shortcomings. One of the most satisfying endings I've ever seen in a film. And I'm not talking about the epilogue in the forest, I'm talking about what happened in the theatre, when the final "film" appears onscreen and all hell breaks loose.

Call me a pussy, call me whatever you want, but I was so overwhelmed by that moment when it happened that my eyes filled up with tears, not so much for the emotional aspect of the moment in the story being portrayed (which WAS incredibly powerful), but for the sheer beauty of the art form and how amazingly Tarantino carried that ending out to sheer, unadulterated perfection.

Absolute incredible ending.

I predict a big opening weekend and then a sheer drop off the cliff as the dullard masses realize it's not an action packed load of mayhem. But I freakin' LOVED, LOVED, LOVED this thing.

This is Tarantino's most reserved work to date. I can't think of a single wasted moment. And the suspense aspects of it I would place up against the best moments of any film. The whole time you're just waiting for the shoe to drop on someone. And with all of the players in their masked roles throughout, you never know who's shoe is going to drop on who. Fantastic work.

Upon leaving the theatre this afternoon, I heard a tween on her phone telling someone about it. She couldn't even remember the name of the fucking movie she had just watched and had to ask her friend what it was called again. I was ready to call her a fucking moron and ask her kindly not to breed when she told the person on the other end of the phone that it was one of the best movies she had ever seen and that she wanted "them all" to get together tonight to go see it. One of the few times after watching a great flick where I didn't have to "accidentally" trip some moron talking shit on the way out.

Immensely satisfying ending. That burning face on the screen, melting with the smoke and the chaos. The very fact that two parallel plots to blow up the theatre are occurring, and they don't even learn of each other is great. But yeah, it hit me like a ton of bricks too.

That Hitler was a real Softie!

Was one of the most beautiful cinematic images I have ever seen. If Tarantino riffed that one from another flick, I'd love someone to hip me to it.

I dare say, this movie was not made for you, and you didn't get what it was trying to do. That's not that unbelievable in this case though, where the trailers don't give any indication of subtitles, and barely any indication of Shosannah's HUGE story. This film is not about going around and killing Nazis though. It's about the expendability of man, and the falseness of reality. If this film were ABOUT the Basterds, we'd probably have gotten a chapter all about how Aldo gets his scar, but we don't even get a mention of it, because it's not important to this story. Aldo and his men are just agents carrying out a much larger mission.

Since the creator is borderline retarded, he knows how to speak to the generation in question

I don't think it was directly taken from anything else. But Lynch has definitely done extremely similar things. Marcel setting the film on fire beforehand, with the music and cinematography seemed like an obvious nod to De Palma though, which Tarantino has done before.

Whoops, hit "Return" too soon. Anyway, glad to see that others were as affected by the ending as me. I was trying to convey my reaction to someone who hadn't seen the film and they looked at me like I was nuts. Then they wanted me to tell them what happened. There was absolutely no point in trying. The ending is so meaningful because of the journey leading up to it, and those amazing images of Shoshanna as the screen burns cannot be put into words.

Fredrick shooting Shoshanna at the end in slow motion. It looks like fucking roses are flying out of her body.

And it was such a devastating moment to think that she had been doomed to die with her family unavenged. But when her face appeared at the end, I was not expecting that at all. It went from absolute devastation to complete and utter triumph that was more than worth dying for.

One thing I was confused about, though. Did Shoshanna and her boyfriend have a suicide pact going on? Were they planning to burn WITH the theatre? Did he in fact burn to death behind the screen? That was unclear to me.

Also, if I had one criticism leading up to that finale, it was the German war hero suddenly becoming abusive to Shoshanna. I thought that was a bit of the easy road, making us suddenly feel that this guy had it coming. Up to that point, we could hate him for being a Nazi, but he also seemed the most human, and he had been respectful to her and also seemed to understand the gravity of killing a man. I thoughtit would have been more powerful to have her shoot him without his fit of angry rage. It would have been more emotionally disorienting for the audience. But that's a minor quibble.

Just can't get those final images out of my head, they were so amazing. And Hitler being obliterated with bullets? Magical. :-)

...was fucking amazing. Reminded me why Nolan is one of my favorite filmmakers. TDK was great, of course, but I love his "in-between" films more (THE PRESTIGE). This is now my most anticipated film of 2010. Oh, and INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS was great...

Fredrick's rage towards Shoshanna works, I thought, because beforehand, he is somewhat repentful. We see him cringing and feeling bad as he watches himself on screen killing Jews; doing his job; doing what he got medals for; yet now, for once, he is ashamed. It humanizes him. But to have what follows, him being abuse, it takes this away, and you remember "Oh yeah, he is just a bad Nazi." Also, I figured that both Shoshanna and Marcel were planning to die in the theater. The doors to get out were locked. And they were also killing Hitler, Goebbels, et al. The end definitely justified the means in their case.

anyone who doesnt like death proof is really dumb....Basterds was amazing

It's 'strictly', not 'strickley'. Could it be you who is the illiterate shithead? Hmm?

That if you look at it as a Russ Meyer film, it is absolutely PERFECT.

It was about 20 mins worth of awesome and the rest sucked. I like QT, but can't we just be honest about that? The long dialogue scenes in Basterds are defendable, Death Proof not so much.

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.

It is about women and femininity. I'm not going to go around defending Death Proof, because I do think it's kind of long, and it's certainly not my favorite of Tarantino's work. But if you look at it through the conventions Russ Meyer dealt with (especially the ending), you have a film that works wonderfully, rather than being upset that the car action scenes are few and far between. They SHOULD be. It's about women overcoming a patriarchy.

Fair enough. They are what they are. You watch a Russ Meyer film, and you see an incredible eye for detail, framing, cinematography, and much more, it's just the only films he wanted to make were thinly plotted romps about naked women with big breasts, so that's what he made. He's got the eye, and the talent, just not the interest.

This is the actor to watch. What a great performance. What a great and yet crazy film! Too much talkie and reading for you ADD children? Good, get out of my theater and make room for real cinema lovers!

this is one of the greatest movies Ive ever seen, right up there with The Dark Knight, No Country for Old Men, & There will Be Blood as one of the greatest films of this generation. A masterpiece on all levels. Pulp Fiction will always be his most popular & loved film, but I truly think this is his biggest accomplishment.

already!

It's the first time I'm aware of that Tarantino RUSHED to get a movie done, due to his silly promise at Cannes last year. This was all shot, edited, post, etc. done within one year. He had to make music and casting sacrifices in order to get it moving on time. Had he taken his time with this, who knows how it could have been even better.

What I love so much about this is how deep the film is. Pulp Fiction is fun as hell, but it's not really about anything. It's just a good time. There are serious themes and allegory going on here.

my most anticipated movie of next year as well, though i still cant tell whats going on in it. i keep thinking about IB today. i bet QT really loves it because of all the cinema scenes. and the end with the face on the screen and shootout in projection booth and fire and jews killing nazis, that was so epic, and it was in a movie theatre. i can just see how it would be one of the coolest scenes quentin could imagine, so he did it. awesome. i love movie theatres, and that was definitely the best scene in a movie theatre i've seen in a movie theatre.

I know where you're coming from and I definitely get what QT was trying to do. But to me Kill Bill was his ultimate exploitation homage. Following it with DP was just a disappointment. I dunno, I think I would be far more accepting of it if it wasn't so goddamn unnecessarily long (or seemed long).

And you're not wrong. I think Death Proof works well at Tarantino wanting to make a Russ Meyer film, and in that regard, I consider it a success. That being said, it could have been a BETTER Russ Meyer film.

hope you don't mind if I go out speaking the King's....

Best line in this, awesome.

I always compare movies and sex to food somehow. Like District 9 was an exotic Tibetan curry dish using marinaded Yak you never had before, at first slightly disgusting in appearance, but absolutely incredible in your mouth drank with a Thai iced tea. Inglorious Bastards was a large fillet mignon covered in a Brazilian 'churrasco' spices, a large potato wrapped in sea salt, asparagus with Bearnaise sauce and a large glass of Cabernet. It's all followed by a 'Ziggy Piggy' banana split... with sprinkles and sauce: Hot fudge, caramel and strawberry and pinapple, whip cream and many cherries. This is all eaten slowly over a long period of time.

Death Proof was packaged in a film called "Grindhouse" with the intention of his entry being a homage to another type of film, so I think it's more forgiving. I don't believe he ever would have written and released Death Proof on its own, if he has and Rodriguez had never come up with the Grindhouse idea to begin with.

i dont know why it seemed to go under the radar, but it makes sense considering its like the old time cheap throwaway movies, yet actually good. i really liked death proof, more so than some of his others even. for me the girls turning on the killer and chasing him down, and the last scene where she crushes his skull, was more richeous that the stuff in IB. i mean, im not defending the nazis, but i was born in 85 and that was a struggle of generations ago. and im no trying to belittle any of it at all, just saying i can relate more to random girls in the present taking out a creep, then a war struggle from decades ago. i love girls kicking ass, death proof is classic. great car chase, maybe THE BEST car crash.

When Fredrick is getting shot, while his own shots play out on the movie screen, did anyone else think of the end of Blow Out, where the scream being used in the movie is a real scream? I know the scenes aren't really the same at all, other than a theoretical relation to the simulacrum, but for some reason, I thought back to Blow Out.

They must all be at the Avatar screening.

great, I just got back from work and I was gonna make some food for myself before I go see Basterds with the lady, but now after your post I'm salivating for a baseball cut top sirloin, I'm gonna have to go out for a steak...and I'm gonna have to take her with me and she's gonna order a $25 pasta dish that she'll have 2 bites of, then ask for a box to take it with her, then give it to a homeless man. I swear I have bought more pasta primavera for unshaven ne'er-do-wells in my time than I care to count.

thanks a lot, sir. thanks a lot.

I saw this at Comic-Con and have been forming my opinion ever since. It's a shapeless, extremely watchable mess. There are some really great moments but it never comes together as a whole. The acting across the board is fantastic but, man, there was a better more cohesive movie in here somewhere.

I thought it was great. It had me riveted throughout, along with the rest of the audience (mostly over 25) at the 11:30 Friday screening I saw it with at Discover Mills here in Gwinnett County, Georgia. I actually thought Brad Pitt gave the best performance of them all, over Christoph Waltz and the others, which was strange because in the previews I thought he sucked bad -- but then I thought Kill Bill looked terrible in the previews too (but I'm almost positive that that one part in KB where they say "trix are for kids" was redubbed, or an alternate take was used, in the final film). Sometimes it DID seem too talky, but I'm pretty sure that only helped made the action parts more spectacular. I mean, just when you were like "GET TO THE POINT!!!!" ... it would. Bam! Bam! Bam! As though it was reading my mind. Also thought the sound mix was good. The gun fire was unusually heavy-sounding which made it powerful, and the part where the film projector -- SPOILER ALERT -- is still projecting at the end and you see her face against the smoke, was brilliant. My only complaint is , like with District 9, I'm not sure I found it very plausible. For one thing, why wouldn't the Basterds have just hid out somewhere in the theater, or outside the theater, and then come in to kill everybody, throwing bombs into the seats and shooting at everybody. Or why would they have used bombs if they were going to try shooting a lot of them first? Or why did they burn the movie screen? Or why did the few bombs they did have manage to blow up the entire place? Also I didn't like that Brad Pitt's friend shot Christoph Waltz's friend at the end , killing him.

... and I take back all my previous bitchy remarks about QT ... INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS kicks ass. It's crazy, it's brave, it's weird. Quentin is trying new things, trying to expand his range. He re-writes history the way it should have gone. He dares to be slow, esoteric & talky between explosive scenes. QT as usual does whatever the hell he wants, but this time it feels worth doing. AND Christoph Waltz is the most mesmerizing villain since Bardem in "No Country." ... In sort, f*cking YEAH! madCanada is a Quentin fan again.

I'm gonna catch hell for this but I could have completely done without Shoshanna's story. Maybe I missed something but I think events would have played out the same without her. I would have stuck with the Basterds. That part didn't suck but I didn't need it.

(GINORMOUS SPOILERS OF DEATH) Stuff I loved. Stiglitz. Which makes me hate that Stiglitz didn't make it out of that basement. I was in love with that guy. How in thee hell do you kill a character like that so soon? He needs his own movie. That basement scene was great though. Kruger I had no problem with. I thought she did a great job of playing an actress from that era with the mannerisms and everything. Kinda felt bad for Max's dad though.

Bon Jorno. Pitt was great. I hope he gets recognition for how funny he is because Chad was some masterwork that got mostly overlooked. And in IB he really put in the kind of movie star performance he should have been doing for the last ten years. But having said all that this Christoph Waltz guy is all that and a bag of chips with a cherry on top. I better see him often during awards season or I'm going to be taking scalps. Never heard of him before but he's so wonderfully wicked in this.

Some visuals were uber fantastish. The aforementioned flaming screen reminded me of the Great and Powerful Oz in a good way, but my eyes enjoyed the shot of Eli Roth with the wall of flame behind him a little bit better. The shooting of Shoshanna. It was very Brian De Palma to me. Had a Blow Out vibe. Love that. So I guess once you had those scenes in mind you had to keep Shoshanna.

I'm sure there is other stuff I'm forgetting to mention but it's not like I won't post again. *chortle* And can I just say I wanna see 'Inception' yesterday. It should have been embarrassed to be seen with some of those other trailers.

Shoshanna's story would have made such an excellent movie on its own.

Things I loved:

The basement scene - perfect suspense and yet another amazing performance from Michael Fassbender.

Melanie Laurent and Christoph Waltz, neither of whom I've heard of, giving two of the best performances of the year.

The DePalma nods at the end.

HUGO STIGLITZ and his Sam L. Jackson narration.

They actually fucking killed Hitler. And shot his face right off at point blank range. Magnificent.

Things I didn't like:

Eli Roth's performance.

And that's all. QT's best since Pulp Fiction. I adored it, and was transported with glee during the final ten minutes.

... you are welcome.

It's interesting that you say that because I would have liked Deathproof a lot, but the casting was awful and I didn't end up rooting for the women. I was rooting for Stuntman Mike. As far as I was concerned they deserved to die for leaving their friend to get sodomized by that dude they borrowed the car from. So I felt like QT got the wrong end of the stick with that movie if he was trying to make those broads likable.

I'm glad he became a monster just before she shot him, because that made her movie-inspired forgiveness of him so much more pointed. He's an asshole, but she is so affected by movies that she momentarily forgets that he is evil, and so dooms herself. We needed to see him be evil for a moment to see the contrast between his worst moment and the propaganda trying to convince us that he is a hero.

"If you have something nice to say, don't!" -- Also I thought the Inception trailer was pretty spiffy, too, Finding Forrestal. Too bad though that DiCaprio looks exactly the same in it as he does in Shutterwhatever by Scorsese, people might mix them up.

I agree the middle Shoshanna segment seemed to drag a bit. That was the one segment that I thought could've been pared down, possibly. But to remove her completely? Insanity.

That ending is so immaculately beautiful that the film as a whole would've been an empty shell without it. The most moving sequence I've seen in a long, long time. Still can't get it out of my head, hours later. It's all I can think about. And that's the art of filmmaking at its highest possible potency. Stuff like that restores my faith in ... something...

I really liked the way that was used. And am I crazy or was there a reference to the video for "China Girl" just then? When the song is playing and Shoshanna puts on that rouge in a quick stroke I immediately thought that. But maybe that's just my brain overdoing it.

http://tinyurl.com/2w4apm

is it me, or is that more than a little ridiculous?

Yeah he put most of the cool stuff in Shoshanna's storyline, all the visuals and whatnot. But what I'm saying is (SPOILERINIs) she didn't even have to die. She could have just run off to America and lived a nice life. Her being the owner of that theater made no difference. The Basterds still would have been there and Eli still would have shot the hell out of Hitler's face. All the other bad Nazi dudes would have blow up from the explosives. So the end result would have been the same with or without her. Unless I'm missing something.

SPOILERS LAY AHEAD.... TREAD CAREFULLY... Loved how the mythology of cinema played a huge role in the film, thematically. That penultimate moment, just after Shosanna has shot Zoller twice in the back, when she turns to watch the unspooling movie, seeing a sad, torn Frederick Zoller playing himself, bearing the weight of all the lives he's taken from atop the tower he's perched upon. And she softens, for a moment, thinking that she's just had a glimpse into the tortured soul of the sincere young man who lays dying ten feet away, leading her walk up to the prone soldier, touching him.... only to have him lift his gun and shoot her three times. Brilliant. She was suckered in by the myth of the moving image. It's what Tarantino's been suckering us into for nearly two decades now. Can't wait to be suckered in by QT's mythology again.

Can you get much more inglorious? For a start, all of them are Bastards, they have no fathers. That anti Christian mentality is why we have so many wars today, and why we lose. These 'men' aren't just bastards but they are inglorious, they are basked with glory which we know comes from the lords light. This is not possible because our lord and saviour would not bask these fatherless ingrates with his light. If any of you believed in Jesus Christ our lord and saviour you would pray for peoples souls in this film and people who watched this film. Amen.

Just saying...

I liked the story, dialog and the "what if" fantasy. It was an engaging movie for all of it's 159 minutes.

I mean seriously. It's not right. I've been complaining on the thread in the zone. http://zone.aintitcool.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=70863 Noone has been listening to the word of the lord. Hell is coming!!!! I really wish more people would believe.

When Donnie and Omer are shooting up Hitler, the fucking theater is in BLAZES behind them, and they don't even care. They aren't even at all suspicious why this is happening, what is happening, and how this is going to impact them. Their goal is to kill Hitler, and that's what they're doing. Everything else, including themselves after that point, is expendable.

The movie feels more of a retread of Death Proof and these homages he's roped himself into lately. It seems like instead of offering an in depth, artistic vision of pulp cinema, he's just copying and pasting from a series of films which define the genre. It's now become, 'hey, look at all the films I'm referencing, isn't it truly great?' It doesn't seem like he's making a true breakthrough like he did with Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown. Parts of it were great, but that makes it even more depressing when they don't gel together as a whole.

What the fuck was Mike Myers doing in this?

I have this horrible taste in my mouth after watching this. This movie really couldn't decide if it was a man on a mission movie or a revenge flick. In reality you can't do both. I think SLJ ruined part of the movie for me. Once I heard his voice that was it. It's like he's the QT Morgan Freeman or something. The best acting by a mile was The Jew Hunter and Shoshanna. The moment just before Eli hit the Nazi with the bat I thought to myself "Is he going to kill him or suck him off" I know he was trying to pull of some sort of emotion in his eyes but it looked gay. And I mean gay as in, i like cock, gay.

...when comes to spelling. It's INGLOURIUS you twunts.

wtf....this is a horrid movie...i actually walked out of the theater...id rather spend 3 hours watching transformers 2 than a half hour of this..all it was was pointless conversation which may be stimulating for most folks...but i expected at least SOME nazi killin...and i liked kill bill..but this was the biggest waste of time oh yeah and Epic Fail on giving the french a shout out.."only the french know how to treat their directors..." yeah....they love crap like this

"So the end result would have been the same with or without her. Unless I'm missing something." You are. The war hero guy was trying to impress her with his movie and wanted her to see it. It was his idea to show it at that theater and all.

Yes, Shoshanna could have, and perhaps she should have, lived on... maybe she would have eluded capture. Then she will escape to America. She will move to New York City. Where she will be elected President of the United States...

Was the last good film Tarantino made. He needs collaboration otherwise it just goes down the toilet. Something needs to tell him "not every character needs to talk exactly the same way - like you" and then slap him and get him to edit his film down to the 100 minutes it should be.

Kermode said pretty much the exact same thing.

OW, my BCG scar!

http://bit.ly/ODqdV

The thought occurred to me while watching this that's he's actually my kind of actor. You know, back in the day, actors used to use makeup heavily from performance to performance to really get into or disappear in a role. And nowadays time and again I watch celebrated actors not change their appearance, mannerisms, or voice, effectively playing themselves role to role and getting heaps of praise for nothing more than showing up. At least Mike Myers tries, and I don't think he's so bad at it. I always thought he was good as Steve Rubell and I, unlike most people, thought he did a great job playing a version of Deepak Chopra in Love Guru. I've already campaigned for recognition of comedy performances in this talkback. So yeah, he belongs there.

Don't forget your shovel if you want to go to Zoning.

To be honest, and I'm not just saying this because he's some kind of authority on the subject of cinema, but I happen to agree with Kermode about Tarantino's recent batch. It's like, come on man, get out of this homage shit and adapt someone else's novel.....it seems like this writing every character as himself has hit its end point. Maybe this is the time to advance more of the director's aspect of his career.

Jackson voice over, western music and the Billy Idol song. They made it seem campy.

Okay then. But I'm not sure that the Basterds wouldn't have just gone to another theater if it was held somewhere else. But okay, that connects her to the rest of the plot.

Yeah, you are DEFINITELY missing something imo. To me, the epic beauty of the end wasn't the result of the mission being successful. It was Shoshanna's plan being carried out to perfection. Her face like an avenging angel on the screen. Her message to the Nazi scum that they were all about to die. Her laughter as they burned to death. Her revenge for the death of her family complete. THAT'S what made the whole movie right there. It was like a Howitzer blast to the lower haunches, it was so powerful. So yeah, I'd say you're missing something. At least from my perspective.

during the long dialog scenes in French and German (subtitled). It was a midnight showing. I only woke up when there were explosions or the theater crowd burst into laughter. Fortunately I did get to see that fantastic fire at the end. After the film this kid approached me in the bathroom and asked "What did you think?" I told him that I had fallen asleep for nearly half of it and he held out a rumpled, crumpled, grease stained paper lunch bag and said "...want some FOOD?" I said "no thank you..." and wondered why there wasn't that many foot scenes in this new QT joint...I'll have to catch a matinee soon and see what I missed.

I'm seeing other posts elsewhere online saying that the Basterds part was unnecessary. So I guess it's a matter of opinion and which part you liked best. Maybe it could have been two movies? I dunno. It's fine though. I didn't mean to complain that much. I mostly liked it.

I thought it was bad ass. That's it.

but just watched the beginning of Transformers 1 where the decepticon arrives on the army base and, man, I don't care what ANYONE says, Michael Bay films action like nobody else. Tarantino films action like past films (and it's good, great even, but less of a unique contribution than his other strengths). Just saw the behind the scenes of Kill Bill on DVD and Tarantino said -- or wait, maybe this was some other interview with him on YouTube -- but anyway, he said that he considers action directors the best of all, or that is people who can direct action well to be doing the hardest thing. Something like that. But I kind of figure like everyone else that he doesn't like Michael Bay's work much. The scene in Inglourious basterds where they all shoot each other at once in the underground bar was ridiculous -- it looked kind of cool, but nobody would have shot each other all at once like that. Most of them would have been too stunned, at least at first, to draw for their guns. I think. I don't know, maybe it was more the seriousness of the movie that made such violence off-putting, because I loved it in Kill Bill. How could you have shot your gun if you just got your balls blown off? Wouldn't you be reeling in misery and confusion? Even if your gun goes off as a reaction to the other person's shooting you, it would still only have been two gunshots. Also it seems like the police would have arrived.

are the same ones that thought Zodiac was boring. I'm glad to see so much love in here though. Even converting anti-Tarantino people back into fans.

The police DID arrive.

and then actually try to criticize something they didn't bother to finish... are scum.

Yeah i loved it..but QT just cant help jerking off all over his movies feet and stopping them just short of amazing. Loved all the things everyone did! That scene in the bar was fantastic. Hated Sam motherfuckin jacksons voicover..what the fuck was the point? Story wise SPOILERS..i really didn't like seeing Shosanna die..or Kruger for that matter(the ladies did not get an esy time in this movie) and fucking couldnt believe Stglitz bought the farm..off screen at that! Did anyone else notice we dont see his or Michael Fassbenders deaths?

...in the bar sequence. She was fucking hot! What a shame!

Well said.

http://zone.aintitcool.com/

Did you know that for just one post per week,YOU can help save the life of the Zone.

sat through an hour of this shit of which 55 minutes was in french. no action apart from some prick with a girls voic slugging a cheap baseball bat. want. total utter wank. save your money for Expendables.

Little. Yellow. Different.

Snaps!

It's better to serve in The Zone than reign in the TB's

Oh, yes, The Zone. I once knew a girl who lived on The Zone....a long time ago, when I was a young man. Not a day passes that I don't think of her, and the promise I made, which I will always keep. That one perfect day on The Zone.

I was 12 going on 13 the first time I posted in The Zone. It happened in the summer of 1959-a long time ago, but only if you measure in terms of years. I was living in a small town in Oregon called Castle Rock. There were only twelve hundred and eighty-one posts there. But to me, it was the whole world.

QT is still my boy and he shows no signs of stopping anytime soon. Hope we get another film fairly quickly.

i've just been rick rolled!!!

The way your dad looked at it, The Zone was your birthright. He'd be damned if any slopes gonna put their greasy yellow hands on his boy's birthright, so he hid it, in the one place he knew he could hide something: his ass. Five long years, he wore The Zone up his ass. Then when he died of dysentery, he gave me The Zone. I hid this uncomfortable piece of php up my ass for two years. Then, after seven years, I was sent home to my family. And now, little man, I give The Zone to you.

in that the only other World War II movie his audience has ever seen was Saving Private Ryan.

Proud ZONERS are the bloom of human evolution. Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?

It's more likely than you think.

What an excellent return to form after the shameful "Death Proof". I can't wait to see this thing again. I literally considered going back to the counter and buying another ticket as I walked out. I didn't do it, but I've never even thought about doing something like that before. Top notch.

And is not a movie that is only loved by those who can't put aside their admiration of Tarantino, but instead only hated by those looking for a reason to hate. Poor box office = they have an argument to make. An empty, boring one at that.

I enjoyed that the German officer who sets off the shitstorm in the bar was drinking from Das Boot. I hope German officers really do drink from Das Boots.

I love Tarantino, and my dislike for that movie has nothing to do with its box office. I didn't enjoy it. Simple as that.

i feel like more than 80 percent of the action in this movie was in the trailer. they presented it as a dark violent action movie, something its not at all. i think the movies good, but a lot of people will be let down i think, and rightfully so.

IS the only world. Well, it strikes me as a pretty poor one. And that's a funny thing, when you come to think of it. We're just babies making up a game, if you're right. But four babies playing a game can make a Zone which licks your real world hollow. That's why I'm going to stand by the Zone.

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!!

Even though the movie it's named after was non-stop action. You're not supposed to know that going in. The Weinsteins knew the frat crowd wouldn't show up for this thing if they got a whiff of what it really was, hence the campaign to dupe the audience into believing it's the Brian G. Hutton-alike he said he was going to make for years (also to dupe the audience into believing Brad Pitt's the main character.) What's going to happen when all the dupes stumble out of the theater night, dazed from another "Death Proof" experience of sitting, sitting, waiting for something to happen?

Best war movie in the past ten years hands down. I definitely see an Oscar nom for best picture (especially with the ten rule) even though this is the best movie of the year (so far). Also a best supporting nom as well. Aw, such a balls to the walls movie. It grabs you from the jugular at the beginning and just does not let go. I can't believe it took so long to get made.

I'm of course talking about The Hurt Locker. Fucking amazing film. Its unfuckingbelievable that this did not get a complete wide release. Its good to know that something Cameron created still has balls.

Dear AICN/Talkbackers, We accept the fact that we had to sacrifice a whole topic in The Zone for whatever it was we did wrong. But we think you're crazy to make us post an essay telling you who we think we are. You see us as you want to see us - in the simplest terms, in the most convenient definitions. But what we found out, is that each one of us is a cow, an androgynous founder, a 80's slasher icon, a king of nowhere, and a toupee-wearing acting demigod. Does that answer your question? Sincerely yours, The Zone. Happy 5k KON

Thanks

What's next for QT?

not one wasted word. Brad Pitt had the audience laughing consistently ("I'll probably get chewed out...I've been chewed out before.") The audience applauded when the credits rolled.

The whole men on a mission aspect of the movie was great too.

Once again, here's my defense of DEATH PROOF:

http://tinyurl.com/luh8nw

that "German Night in Paris" chapter was supposed to be filmed all in black and white French new wave style. I would have loved that.

And Death Proof is a spectacular stoner movie. This one....may be the most mainstream thing he's ever done.

Tarantino rocks my world. This is the WWII story we've all been waiting for, and what Valkyrie was wanting to be, in a way. So many great cinematic metaphors, and so many great characters. I wanted to sit in the theatre for another 2.5 hours (I had just walked over from District 9). My only WTF was Myers. I still haven't forgiven him enough yet for the schlock that he's put out lately to see him in a role that doesn't make me brace myself for something rediculously inane and aimed for 12 year-olds. Lando rocks, Shosanna rocks, Pitt rocks, Bear Jew rocks, Bowie rocks, Keitel rocks.

...so, no, not a bomb. In fact, critics are calling it a return to form for QT. Hah! Hah! Haters!!

Just like Pixar.

Both were set in alternate worlds, were overly long, had stories that were all over the place, but made up for it by having some pretty cool characters.

In fact, Basterds was more comic bookish than most comic book movies. If someone had told me that it was based on a graphic novel, I would never have any reason to doubt it.

Great fun. First time I've ever wished I was Jewish was watching that movie. Man, what it would have felt like to be a Jew, and watch Hitler's face dissolve into blood. DAMN!

That was Meyers until the last shot. But what the fuck was the point of having a dead on Churchill, even down to the voice and accent, if he was just going to sit in the corner and have about 2 sentences of dialog?

...and smart critics appreciate Tarantino. YOu can hate the man all you want (he gives you a lot to hate), but you can't hate his singular, kinetic vision. If you hate QT, you just don't get good writing. Period. Also, LOST sucks gorilla balls. It's a ponzi scheme, the tv drama equivalent to Bernie Madoff.

Uh, fuck no. The ass hasn't been relevant for a dozen years.

Questions.

Did you really start to blubber at the end? If so, did the people around you start to get nervous?

Did you cry when you watched Indiana Jones, too?

Are you Harry?

Inquiring minds want to know.

And KILL BILL was brilliant and relevant.

They don't start sentences with "And."

Haven't been here for a long time. What is The Zone you refer to?

It's on the menu bar atop this page. Fascinating stuff!

The link has been there since December of 2005.

But one wonders how DiCaprio would have done in the role, like originally planned.

....that angie stuck a finger in brad's ass when she was blowing him? otherwise, why would you leave jen?

seriously, why else would you pick angie over jen? unless you like dirty whores?

for real. jen = girl next door. angie = dirty whore. how do you fuck that up?

is it like a chat room? a forum?

Hold fast, Talkbackers. The Zoners are coming!

:)

Well, there's also a button labeled CHAT in the AICN header.

Use your amazing powers of deduction.

Two things didn't really work for me (nothing big) 1. Nobody seems to mind sacrificing themselves for Operation Kino, particularly Donowitz and Ulmer's suicide bombing of the cinema. 2. Landa lives.

hitler getting fucking eviscerated in the theater, leaving the audience asking "what the fuck?" and revealing the entire movie as an alternate version of how WW2 went down.

"and revealing the entire movie as an alternate version of how WW2 went down." Exactly right. You really have to wonder what the whole point of this movie was. I also had a problem with everyone sacrificing themselves when there was obviously no need for it, including the black dude if he didn't get out. On the other hand, I can't say I disliked Basterds, and when I left the theater I felt fulfilled somehow, even though I have no idea why. I doubt I will ever sit through it again though.

that is fun since i like all of them a lot. ok so.... 1. kill bill 2. pulp fiction 3 reservoir dogs 4 death proof 5 inglorious basterds 6 jackie brown dont get me wrong, i love IB and jackie brown, but what seperates me from a lot of filmgoers is that i never emphathize with characters, i just dont care about anyone, all i want is to see them do cool stuff. and IB and jackie have lots of character scenes, which are good, but im much more into action and craziness. i love all his movies though.

Funniest shit I have heard in a LONG time.

The casting of Roth and Mike Myers was Tarantino's worst casting to date and had me scratching my head. Apparently, Roth did some/all the second unit filming (if I'm wrong someone correct me). But that's the ultimate in nitpicking an otherwise awesome film. P.S. Death Proof isn't supposed to be good. Yes the dialog drags on forever... that's the point. It pays off at the end with some of the best live action stunt work in the last 20 years of film.

I guess you could compare the alternate reality to a protagonist's "what? it was all a dream?" moment (goddamn you Vanilla Sky). Except this alteration included one of history's most evil men being obliterated well before god intended him to, it serves no plot purpose. its just an awesome surprise.

Anybody see it on the big screen? Reactions?

but thats what makes it funny. the audience was so taken aback

Shut the fuck up. You're fucking annoying as all hell. Fuck the fuck off. Nobody gives a shit about The Zone. Deal with it.

I mentioned earlier that I didn't like that movie much. In fact, I think it sucked. However, it was also QT kind of fucking around with one of his buddies for the fun of it rather than a serious entry into his catalogue. Judging him harshly on its account would be like saying Michael Jordan sucks because he lost a backyard game of HORSE. Anyway, I'm not trying to equate QT's skill level with Jordan's, but you get what I'm saying.

I would say that it's not pointless but it is long-winded as far as getting to the point.

@slone13 A member list of of 41285 disagrees with you.

I totally hate the Zone now. I hope the dedicated talkbacks pee on it after they kill it.

My opinions are brilliant, golden gems of cinematic insight. Yours are the festering boils of a syphillitic whore.

Why?

Where Kubrick turned the costume drama on its head, so does Tarantino with the sacred cow of post Private Ryan/Greatest Generation WWII film. And like Lyndon, Basterds will be more appreciated with time.

Anyone who thought it was incohesive and all over the place is full on retarded and anyone who felt that there was just nonstop, unimportant talking and not enought action just comes off sounding like a complete and utter jackass.

I'm studying abroad right now in Mannheim, Germany. I was very interested in how my crowd would recieve this film. They absolutely loved it. Hung on every word of the Colonel, growned at once when the british OSS agent messed up ordering beer the German way, laughed in glee at every outragious German soldiers death,busted a gut during the can't speak Italian scene. They found Hitler and Goebbels to be hilarious. After the theater massacre there was an uncomfortable silence that was broken by more Christoph Walz antics.

So there!

with the Basterds for 2hrs while watching them rae hell across europe... alas that will be but a dream.

I was promised Nazi scalping Basterds... I want my fucking Nazi scalping Basterds! Where's that film!

I mean I dug what I saw BUT I want to see Brad Pitt and company. I want to get to know them and live on their shoes. Where the fuck did Brandon Novac come from in the end?

One flaw of the film was Landa switching sides. I did not buy that for one second. That was a total fucking left fielder. BUT I really dug his character. He should be nominated. He was fucking brilliant. I thought Brad Pitt worked perfectly in Tarantinoville too.

Hitler's face getting all shot up=Brilliant,

But I want to see a Basterds film like the "National Pride" Nazi fim. Heh. They even threw in a Wilhelm Scream sound effect.

he homages damn near everything he grew up with, but i'll be damned if he didn't see 2001, and realize that it was something special, more so than a swift kick and a device that rips your head from your body. come on quentin, show us the stars

Its something I really don't know if I need to see again... but I definitely enjoyed seeing it. Like Deathproof, once is quite good for me.

the only thing missing was having italian actors in all the minor parts...and really bad dubbing

truly brilliant movie

But not rewatchable like res dogs and kill bill... I really feel there were like 4-5 movies in this thing all smushed into 1.

Why am I the only person bothered by the fact...that if you would've taken the Basterds out the movie completely, Shossannas plan still would've went off and it would've had the same outcome? Matter of fact...it would've went down better probably. Doesn't that kind of...seem...I don't know...dumb?

anyone that does not like this movie does not like good movies, end of discussion

this is probably the first movie I'm going to see twice in theaters in years and years

I feel like I owe Tarantino my first born child for making me smile so hard. No one else could have perma-grinned me all day. Imagine if the world had more video stores and less churches. Then maybe a 2.0 could come along someday. I am not one for ass licking, but this should be required viewing in history classes. History is better told from Tarantino's adaptive hands. I am excited and lucky to have seen him for realzies while working the Sharkboy and Lava Girl premiere. People are just a little realer when you have seen them flesh-mode. If only the power of storytelling and tellers spread violently across the lands. By centralizing Hollywood as it is, it seems the system takes on a religious flavor that ends up being about cushy-izing the priests or producers instead of telling more tales that few wanna hear. Localized audiences shouldn't be feared, but treasured and respected. Factions stick around. Until we can become the character ourselves, there will always be those willing to go back in time and video quality. Go back and watch shit that looks a little dirtier on the eyeball; watch the shit that has actors dead and gone; watch for the sake of potentially ingesting a little nugget of wisdom to take with you. The ratio of nugget finding ain't the best. It all breaks down to words. Tarantino's words are reliable. Tarantino's words should not be considered superfluous. Instead, the redundancies and mundane realities of a character are where real acting takes place. To own the subtle perversion drinking milk alludes to or the doggedness it takes to unflinchingly drink your beer out of a glass boot... If you can't read subtitles, you should not be in a theater to begin with. The way he uses language barriers is inspired. Lost in Translation can eat its heart out. Shoshanna is unquestionably my favorite heroine of all time. It's as legitimately a holy an experience as you are likely to endure in your privileged existence. I hope Tarantino outlives me. I want a bitter enemy to hunt down now!!

Saw it with a crowd that was clapping and laughing... GREAT TIME. The earlier Avatar 3D stuff was lots of fun too!

Harry, Merrick, who the fuck ever's keeping an eye on this talkback, this is some shit that anyone going to see this flick needs to hear. i just saw IB in Columbus, GA. for those of you who don't know, this is the location of Carmike Cinemas' home office, and as such the theaters around here have been retrofitted to accommodate Digital screenings exclusively. because Inglorious(and it TS QT's masterpiece) is only being distributed on filmstock, it threw these fuckers for a loop. because of the dificulties of bringing in a projector, it is only being screened in one room of a 15 screen multiplex, and the clusterfuck of a screening that resulted was pathetic, but understandable. hear me on this, if your theater is predominantly digital, you need to buy tickets early, show up early, and expect to have a staff that has no fucking idea how to work a traditional projector. consider yourselves forewarned.

Wow. Really surprised by all the praise I'm hearing for this. I found this to be his worst effort by a good stretch, and I'm sure that this will not stand the test of time. In fact, I doubt this film's appeal survives much beyond this talkback. It's a shame. I was hoping for something that would redeem the the lackluster year we've suffered thus far.

i sat in a packed theater of people who weren't even sitting down until what was meant to be the start of the film, and they fucking ate up every scene. i missed a good bit of dialogue over the laughter of most of the lines, and i was in a room of people who started out pissed at the theater's incompetence. this movie will play well. i made the same dire predictions you did about District 9 last week, and it's finding an audience. have faith brother, because if there's one thing QT is good at, it's appealing to the masses.

Maybe the third best film he's made. Just all around enetertaining, better than the kill bills.

I honestly thought this flick was gonna bomb, and I showed up to a packed house, the audience fucking loved it, everyone in that room was on the same groovy wavelength the whole time. It's gotten the best ovation I've heard for a flick since, shit...TDK

When the credits included QT's pretentious "GUEST STARRING" credits. How the fuck can you "guest star" in a movie???? Get over yourself QT.

IB isn't a movie, it's a collection of 7 scenes stretched to interminable length. In the hands of a more capable filmmaker, tighter scenes would produce more suspense. The ending bullshit at the cinema had less tension then the bunker scene in Valkyrie, and the arguably best scene in the movie (the tavern scene) culminated in one of the most poorly directed shootouts in cinema history.

Seriously fucking amatuerish.

Like TDK has Ledger's Joker, Titanic had the boat sinking, Jurassic Park had the T-Rex. This movie has that "magic must see" thing that draws in the monster crowds. I'm talking, of course, about Hitler getting his fucking face OBLITERATED by a submachine gun. People will line up around the block to see that. Once word of mouth gets out this thing is going to OWN the box office.

Who will be the first man/woman to put the shot of Hitler's face getting blown apart on youtube and turn it into the next internet meme juggernaut? It could be the unofficial sequel to "Hitler gets mad at..."

You may be on to something.

Pretty much summed it up.

that its actually a good thing that those who are ragging on it are. You don;t deserve to have this fucking masterpiece. Its the best film of the year. fuck its the best film of the past 30 years. fuck you.

I've been down on QT for about a decade now -- thought the KILL BILLS were pretty poor (Vol. 2 was better than Vol. 1) and DEATH PROOF was embarrassing and almost unwatchable. as such, this was much better than I expected, and -- finally -- seemed like a movie made by the guy who gave us RESERVOIR, PULP, and JACKIE BROWN.

Yea, some of QT's bad habits are here, but only in the margins -- for example, the excessive homage (particularly the spaghetti western stuff early on), the foot fetishism (Landa and the Cinderella scene), the overwrought and distracting pop culture riffs (that King Kong riff took me right out of the movie.)

But, all in all, this is a surprising success. I was afraid going in, particularly with Eli Roth skulking around, that IB would be 2.5 hours of torture porn, made "ok" because the bad guys are Nazis. (And that the Nazis would basically just be generic standard-issue black hats, a la Raiders of the Lost Ark.) But the movie felt both more subtle and more profound than that. (And the Basterds felt more like WWII-era comic heroes like Cap America's Invaders or the Losers than refugees from Hostel.)

As several characters say, "the shoe is on the other foot" now. After the first scene, the usual cat and mouse dynamic of Nazi films is reversed, culminating in that really powerful ending. Violent, oh hell yeah, but also deeply satisfying in an almost primal way, with Shoshonna the avenging angel and Donnie the dispenser of long-thwarted Jewish justice. (Also note the carved swastikas are basically this universe's version of concentration ccamp tattos, the mark that will never go away.)

Anyway, I'm rambling, so I'll shut up now...and I'd like to think on it some more anyway, which is usually the sign of a good film. I did think the Landa-Shoshonna danish-and-cream scene ran a bit long, but otherwise was glad to see QT back in JACKIE BROWN territory -- long bouts of conversation, surprising staccato bursts of violence. I've been among the haters, but this would suggest QT is back.

If this film doesn't do it for you and I see its alot of the same names who didn't like D9 either. you deserve fucking gi joe 2-7 and transformers 18. I do noty believe you actually like films. I think for you film began at star wars and you haven't matured past that level of enjoyment. you will never be happy with fucking anything.

i have that effect

This is his best film by a long shot. Amazing. Original. I didn't know anything that was coming next. I loved it. And the way he made you actually almost like some of the nazis just made it all the more clear what fucking pieces of shit they were for what they did. They weren't crazy. They were people just like us... except they were bent on world domination and genocide. They chose to do what they did every fucking moment they did it. With clear minds. Bravo Quentin. Brilliant film.

Come on, now...'Masterpiece'?

it OWNS ALL OF YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!

I felt like Hitler at the end getting his head blown away except it was Quentin Tarantino shooting me with bullets made of awesome movie

anyone that does not like this movie is full of shit, end of discussion

Again...am I the only person that's bothered by the fact that Shossanas plan would've went off just fine without them?

The zone is where it's at. We can spot a stooge a mile away.

People keep mentioning that Shosanna's plan would have worked without the Basterds' involvement, but nobody seems to notice that the Basterds' plan would have worked without Shosanna's involvement too. They still got to blow the place up AND shoot Hitler in the face, so really it all evens out.

Especially king_of_nowhere. That shit is getting really goddamn annoying.

When i wasn't glued to the screen in complete suspense, i had a big grin stuck on my face. what sort of movie can sustain those emotions and alternate between them so seemlessly? QT is a master and i dont care if his films are considered homage or genre reinterpretations....they're amazing films that will stand the test of time. Inglorious Basterds is no exception. The final 15 minutes (as soon as the theatre started to burn and her face was on screen) was one of the most glorious scenes ever put to film. if the entire audience was hooked up to machines monitoring brain activity, the machines would have EXPLODED at that point. that's how effective it was. and when her face was projected in the smoke as she laughs on, it was truly HAUNTING as if we were watching a WWII legend about the Jew's-revenge. it's not the best it could have been, but it's an unforgettable piece of pop entertainment. and that's quentin's true genre

like his movies, qt is very self aware and cocky - not a modest guy - he is a very big fan of himself

Fuck you, you fucking retarded piece of shit. That is the absolutely dumbest thing I have ever heard. Go watch GI JOE you fucktard.

@jimmyjoe redksy i've seen him on charlie rose also, after he made kill bill 2. as i understand it he's made several appearances after different movies. i really enjoyed the interview and love hearing quentin speak. he's not cocky in the traditional sense, he's self confident. he knows he's great at making movies and movies are his passion. he's very honest and candid, and if he's proud of his own work then i'm happy for him. he deserves to be proud. if any of you are not fans of the charlie rose show yet, you should go to www.charlierose.com where you can watch all of his archived hour long interviews with some of the most fascinating people in the world. trust me, you want to check it out, even just to have an interview on in the background as you're doing other stuff online

i didn't know what to expect walking into this film. i knew i liked quentin, and i knew i liked war movies. that's about it. i made sure i didn't know anything about it. i refused to read any reviews, good or bad. and i worked the alamo midnight, and still made sure to only spend a minute or less in the theater to make sure i didn't know the story. all that said, this was an amazing film. amazing in the sense that this was one of those films that got you all fired up as a kid. you didn't know what you wanted or what to expect, but somehow it delivered on everything. you got your gore. you got your fun, campy, 70's style cinema. you got your story. but best of all, you got your characters. don't lie to yourself, you loved them all. sure we all wanted more of hugo, but wasn't he great in what he was in? shosanna was a tortured soul with nothing left but love and revenge. aldo was a raging, dishumanized psycho, but we loved him for it. but even though i name those characters, there are still countless in the movie that i want to know more of. i love every single one. even the ones that don't have dialogue. they're somehow all just so.... intriguing. the camera work is just brilliant here, too. i swear it makes you feel like the uncredited character in the film, which is what good camera work does. it's never intrusive, but it always makes you involved in the scene. anyway, it was two and a half hours and it felt like ninety minutes. i could've watched this all day. downright mesmerizing.

Flying through this TB, and the only criticism that I see that keeps popping up is that there is too much talking and not enough of the Basterds and other key characters.

As far as the too much dialogue argument, puh-leeze, the dialogue was mesmerizing and pure QT but all grown up. It didn't have the kerky shock value of the dialogue in Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, but instead went the route of being so rich and interesting it was all the more better for what it lacked. QT as matured and proved that Death Proof was just a little speed bump in the road. It was another Four Rooms; throwaway Quentin. Other criticisms? Not enough of all the key players? Well, that doesn't really sound like a criticism at all. I agree, I loved all the characters so fucking much I want them all to have their own three hour films, and give the Basterds all sequels to those films.

Bottom line is, if Billy Madison is what you want, stay away from this movie. There is a certain age group out there that has grown up with the attention span of a gnat. This movie is not for you, it's not high art, either. Just a great fucking movie that isn't dumbed down for an audience that wants to hear fuck 300 times and dick jokes all day.

KIll Bill is still my all time QT favorite, though.

Box office predictions anyone? I don't watch enough TV to know, but did this get heavily advertised and such that it would be appealing in a general way as "That killing Nazis movie with Brad Pitt"?

People seem to either think this film is brilliant or shit. For me its in the middle. Great peformances by the girl who plays Shosshana and Christopher Waltz carries the film and is outstanding as the Jew Hunter. and 1 or two scenes like the begining with the Farmer are fantastic but otherwise its pointless and meanders for no reason. Tarantio also lacks irony. You have all the Nazis showing goulish dread at Zollers film of him killing everyone then seconds later Tarantino is expecting you to do the same when Roth machine guns all the Nazis. Overall its not as bad as Death Proof but to say compare it too Pulp Fiction or Reseviour Dogs is stupid I give it 5/10

My God how simple have we become when we can't sit in a movie and pay attention and listen to absolutely amazing dialogue being delivered!!! This movie was brilliant, different, versatile, courageous and never, never boring!!! I'm honestly amazed that people obvious attention spans are so inexcusably short cause I never felt bored for a second and felt like the movie was over far to quickly. Here's hoping he has an extended cut released like the lord of the rings did!!!

I personally believe it is his masterpiece. I think it is his best film and I will be surprised to see if he could possibly ever top it. If you have ever noticed my comments here I am not one to throw around things like that willy nilly. I think the film is fucking amazing from top to bottom. I have seen it twice now and I will go again and again. I never have believed nor will I ever believe that all the truly great films are behind us. There will be future classics and for me this will be one of them.

is one of the best films I've seen in the cinema in a long time.

Are you fucking kidding me? The guy pretty much INVENTED "ironic" cinema. That juxtaposition of the Nazi audience/film and ourselves watching IG is hardly as reductive as you make it out to be.

The Stiglitz backstory was GREAT! And of course, so was Shoshannas, but... why did Lt. Raine have that throat scar? Did Natzees do it? Or some law busting his families' moonshine operation? Still, again, why does "The Bear Jew" prefer a baseball bat? 'Cause he's from Boston? The best player in his neighborhood who enlists specifically to kick Natzee ass?

As I watched I realized that this movie could go on for, like, 4 hours. I hope there is an extended cut that maybe fleshes these things out.

As far as promotion is concerned, I think the Weinsteins are shooting themselves in the foot promoting this is an action movie. Its really not an action movie. Theres violence and action, of course, but most of it is meticulously written and acted slow-burn tension, dark comedy, and dialog, not action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTOxwPUrAGg&feature=channel_page

I'd rather wipe my ass with sand paper then go see this glorified chatter box turd of a movie........i want a men on a mission movie. Can't wait for The Expendables.

Alright, bear with me, this is kinda long. It’s been fifteen years since “Pulp Fiction” hit screens and shattered every preconception of how a blockbuster hit was supposed to walk and talk. As both a catalyst to the indie revolution and a reluctant father to too many bastard sons to count, “Pulp Fiction” was also the film that catapulted its’ cinematically sagacious writer/director into the spotlight. Before long, Quentin Tarantino had carved himself a reputation as both a critical darling and a painfully hip raconteur. Then, after the 1997 release of his wildly-underrated Elmore Leonard adaptation “Jackie Brown,” something strange happened; Tarantino disappeared off the face of the map. When he re-emerged in 2003 with the feverish “Kill Bill” saga, something had changed. Gone were the French new wave trappings of his previous films, and in their place was a pastiche of seventies kung-fu and spaghetti western allusions. For some, the extra pulp was too hard to swallow. He only scooped further into the trash bin with his next effort, “Death Proof,” one half of the high-concept double feature “Grindhouse,” a lurid horror/suspense flick about a homicidal stunt man that recalls early eighties De Palma more than anything. While beautiful and super-stylized, one thing “Death Proof” sorely lacked was Tarantino’s trademark dialogue and witticisms. Slowly, it had become clearer and clearer that Tarantino wasn’t making films for critics anymore (and with a Best Original Screenplay Oscar on his shelf, why should he?) but for himself, as veritable mixtapes of all of his favourite films and themes. Then, at the 2008 Cannes film festival where Tarantino served on the jury, he announced that not only was he finally going to shoot endlessly-rumoured WWII epic over the next year, but that he planned to have it done in time to premiere at the very same festival by that very same time the next year. And he did. The production of “Inglourious Basterds” was heavily storied on a constellation of movie news sites across the web. Fans waited with baited breath for the announcement of Tarantino’s all-star cast (which had been rumoured to include the likes of John Travolta, Adam Sandler, Eddie Murphy, Sylvester Stallone and Michael Madsen over the years) and many were sorely disappointed when, with the exception of Brad Pitt, QT decided to go with a more authentic, international cast of mostly-unknowns. There were whispers of Tarantino rushing the film’s shoot in order to be finished in time for Cannes and when the trailers hit, they only served to re-affirm the doubters in a big way. The footage looked flat and uninspired, and Pitt seemed kind of dementedly awkward in the role of Lt. Aldo Raine. Finally, the flick premiered at Cannes to a cavalcade of mixed, and sometimes hostile, reviews. So, instilled with a realistic amount of trepidation, I braced myself for the possibility of disappointment and patiently waited for the day that I could see the flick and judge for myself. That was yesterday. Though it lacks many of the idiosyncrasies that have defined his previous work, “Inglourious Basterds” feels authentically Tarantino-esque. The structure of the film is super similar to that of “Pulp Fiction.” A few separate storylines are presented in chapters, and by the end, the threads are tied into a knot as the whole house of cards begins to tumble. One of the stories concerns Shoshanna Dreyfus, a young Jewish girl who is the sole survivor of a Nazi-attack on her family. She moves to Paris and starts a new life for herself as a theatre-owner until fate intervenes one day and she’s finally given a shot to indulge the vengeful spirit she’s harboured in the years since the event. Another story concerns the Basterds, a group of tough-as-nails Jewish-American soldiers led by Lt. Aldo Raine who are notorious among the Nazis for the heaps of reciprocal cruelty they bestow upon them anytime they’re unlucky enough to cross paths. The third primary colour in the painting is Colonel Hans Landa, also known as the Jew Hunter, a Mephistophelean son of a bitch whose presence lingers over both stories like a dark cloud that threatens to rain sadism and cruelty at any given time. In short, “Inglourious Basterds” is Tarantino’s richest and most dense work since “Jackie Brown,” and his most brazenly inventive since “Pulp Fiction.” By choosing to make a film set in the milieu of WWII, Tarantino has taken a deceptively audacious step: he’s limited himself. Devoid of almost any pop culture to actually reference (save a breathlessly genius “King Kong” call-out,) he’d been forced to funnel his focus into the mechanics of the dialogue and the iron-wrought structure of the script, easily his strongest since “Jackie Brown.” He’s also stripped himself of his boundless pop music catalogue in lieu of employing a more classically-scored soundtrack selection (most of the cues he’s chosen are by Ennio Morricone, who was actually set to score the film at one point) and, as a result, the film feels more timeless than anything he’s ever done up to this point. Tarantino does allow himself one indulgence, though, with David Bowie’s “Cat People (Putting Out The Fire)” which manages to serve both the film AND the song by elevating a fairly archetypal scene to something that absolutely sizzles with cool, and instilling Bowie’s song with more of a presence and weight than it ever had in the Schrader film. Structurally and stylistically, it’s all top drawer stuff. The acting in the film is also exceptional. By broadening his horizons and opting for an international cast, Tarantino has ensured that every character looks and feels the part, all the way from Pitt’s Aldo Raine (who shines with eccentricity once you allow yourself to play along to his beats) to the drunken Nazis playing some archaic configuration of Hedbanz in the film’s seminal “La Louisiane” scene. As most of you have heard already, though, it’s Christoph Waltz’s performance as Col. Hans Landa that steals the film. Absolutely, gleefully demonic, the air rises electric during every moment that Waltz is on screen. Almost every actor in the film gets a scene to shine in, and even better than the characters Tarantino has created here are the situations he’s concocted to transplant them into. Each chapter feels organic and singular, but also relevant and integral to the larger story at hand. Unlike “Kill Bill,” much of the story’s weight is carried in the threat and possibility of violence, rather than the violence itself, and when bloodshed does break out, it’s usually quick, rough and ugly. It isn’t until close to the end of the movie that Tarantino’s operatic panache for carnage comes into effect, but when it does, it brings with it a kind of ephemeral rush that can only be obtained by lining dominos for two hours beforehand. Tarantino has EARNED the moment. With all of that being said, however, the movie isn’t perfect. Because the cast is so large and eclectic, we can never develop as much of an emotional attachment to the characters as we might want to. It feels as if each one has a long and fascinating history, but we never receive much more than a few glances at them and it hinders the overall effect somewhat. Still, it’s a miniscule qualm in the greater scheme of things and with a scheme as great as Tarantino’s presented us with here, it’s not even close to being a deal-breaker. Though “Inglourious Basterds” bears many of the hallmarks of any number of WWII flicks, it feels like none of them. For the first time in a long time, Tarantino has made a film that feels less like a patchwork quilt of celluloid strips and more like a living, breathing beast of its own. “Basterds” should serve as Exhibit A for anyone questioning the strength of Tarantino’s writing. This isn’t a movie about other movies; instead, it’s an impressively individual piece of work that feels just as original and new as “Pulp Fiction” did 15 years ago. So original, in fact, that I wouldn’t be surprised to see a few more of QT’s ‘basterd’ sons emerge in the years to come.

I haven't bought the soundtrack album yet, but looking at the track listing, I noticed there's not one dialogue excerpt amongst the tracks. I wonder why. Pitt's opening monologue to the new recruits would have been great to have on CD.

everything else has suckethed greatly.

i loved it. i really have to stop reading his scripts before though. same as kill bill there were a couple things i was looking forward to seeing that they took out. anyone know if he filmed any thing that didn't make the theatrical but might make the directors cut? wow what a film though. this an district 9 in the same month. its been good.

Better than Jackie Brown (which is really saying something coming from seeing as I thought that was his best film before this -and I've never seen a Tarantino film I didn't like) Honestly, I think anyone who doesn't LOVE this film doesn't truly love movies.

But I would argue that IB IS about movies. Not in a post-modern meta way his previous movie have been. But about the alluring power of cinema.

Totally on point comparison to Barry Lyndon (my favorite Kubrick film).

At first I wasn't sure about how I felt with QT using that theme again (he also used the White Lightning theme in Kill Bill Vol. 1 briefly) but late I realized it was GENIUS this time because of Pitt's character and all his talk of moonshine. BRILLIANT AND EXCITING ENTERTAINMENT.

You're way off on that one, dude. Pulp = Influential/Original Jackie Brown = Masterpiece Reservoir Dogs = Brilliant debut and one of the best independent films ever made Inglorious Basterds = TRIUMPH!

Can't wait for Inception. Not sure the audience knew what to make of it but I thought it was INCREDIBLE. Nolan is on fire right now. And QT showed why he deserves to have an ego the size of Texas. He is that rare talent where he simply can't be underestimated.

Can't wait for Inception. Not sure the audience knew what to make of it but I thought it was INCREDIBLE. Nolan is on fire right now. And QT showed why he deserves to have an ego the size of Texas. He is that rare talent where he simply can't be underestimated.

I LOVED the way Tarantino used SLJ voice. It was AWESOME! I remember reading a quote years ago from Paul Thomas Anderson where he describe Robert Downey's Putney Swope as "punk rock" Inglorious Basterds felt PUNK ROCK. It felt like rock n'roll.

That's not filled with bile and crudity. This is where the true film fans are.

Tarantino mimics his own version of Goebbels and has the audience cheering the slaughter of Nazi soldiers just as the filmed audience of Nazis cheer on the unending pile of American bodies. The fact that everyone seems to leave the theater wishing there was more slaughter and less talking seems only to deepen the joke that seems to have been perpetrated here. Taking the time to sketch out German soldiers as living human beings and then gunning them down is a simple test of the audience - I think perhaps that Tarantino is hoping we won't cheer, but if my crowd was any indication: we do. Is it possible that people don't understand the definition of "Inglorious" anymore? Let me help you: it means "Shameful." But to frame the whole picture as some sort of Jewish revenge tale only serves to highten the historical irony: Britain and America chose to do very little to stem the bloodshed of the Holocaust. In large part the entire world (and even a good number of Germans themselves) remained ignorant of the Holocaust while it was occuring. Yet those that weren't (principally those in places of high authority with access to some scattered intelligence) chose to do almost nothing to stop the ceaseless murder. http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005182 The movie could just as easily have been a tale of how Americans and Cambodians banded together to elinimate Pol Pot and save millions of lives - or any other of a dozen things that weren't done. The whole movie... it made me very sad.

Not original at all. Just a conglomeration of things that make movies. Mix characters with dialogue, action, imagery and a story. Put in music, comedy and tragedy and you got a movie. Now put it all together so it appeals to the moviegoer and you get a hit. It didn't appeal to this moviegoer. Too much talk. Seconds of characterizations overshadowed by blah blah blah. Was QT bludgeoning movie fans in his head when he made this movie? It felt like i tto me.

Not original at all. Just a conglomeration of things that make movies. Mix characters with dialogue, action, imagery and a story. Put in music, comedy and tragedy and you got a movie. Now put it all together so it appeals to the moviegoer and you get a hit. It didn't appeal to this moviegoer. Too much talk. Seconds of characterizations overshadowed by blah blah blah. Was QT bludgeoning movie fans in his head when he made this movie? It felt like i tto me.

Yes, these are nitpicks, and overall I liked the movie (see above). That being said:

1. Wouldn't SS/Gestapo/Landa security get wise to a gimongous pile of nitrate film behind the screen like that? If Hitler was really in attendance, the place would've been in total lockdown, i.e. no walking behind the screen for a smoke. (see also VALKYRIE)

2. Why does Landa blow a gasket and strangle von Hammersmark, if he's planning to cut a deal himself? The lines he's given -- "she's got what she deserved," etc. -- coupled with the way he kills her suggests he can't abide a traitor. But that doesn't make sense, given what comes late -- both the deal he makes and his tolerance, even amusement, of Raine and the other surviving Basterd.

All due respect to Matt Goldberg over at Collider, but I can't help but disagree with his statement that, basically, the QT lovers will embrace Basterds, and the haters will abhor it. I've loved most of what QT has done -- Kill Bills (both Vols.) and Death Proof less so than his first three (Jackie Brown's my fav), but Basterds reeeeally didn't do it for me. Goldberg is prob right most of the time with that sort of generalization, but I gotta believe I'm not the only one in this boat. Here's my full review for a better idea of what I'm talking about -- http://tinyurl.com/lgomck

Landas knew already that the Jews were in that house. He could have just walked in and shot them, but no he has to sit down have some milk and yak for half an hour. Nobody can do anything in this film without first yakking about it. And fuck you if I'm now "uncool" for slating Tarantino, but he's lost what he had.

...except I disagree that he would strangle a traitor....the more I think about it, the more that scene doesn't make sense. We know he is already planning a "deal" out...but the brutal way he kills her...so out of character! And to what end???

Short stories that build tension and resolve themselves, frequently in explosive violence. Lather, rinse, repeat. It reminds me of my own love of horror comics when I was a kid, I knew the formula but it never seemed to get old. I really enjoyed the hell out of IB.

Loved that. I also loved the cutaway metaphor for his internal dilemma during the tavern scene.

VIOLENT as heck .. but I loved it .. prob the Tarantino film I like best (atleast of what I have re-watched within the last 5 years) - it was really fun at parts and sick in others ...

Let me get this straight -- you'd rather "wipe your ass with sandpaper than see this turd of a movie..." Meaning you HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN IT, yet you're already judging it as a turd? Thank you for proving beyond a shadow of a doubt what I've already suspected: all you Tarantino Haters have already made up your minds and will hate this movie REGARDLESS OF NOT EVEN HAVING SEEN IT! Okay, I get it now. Thanks for clearing this up, cunt juice!

I think when people say "too much dialogue", what they mean to say is, the film is filled with scenes of STATIC dialogue, scenes where the dialogue is filling screen time rather than ESCALATING any tension. Whether the dialogue is clever or not is subjective (I, for one, think it's not that clever. You may differ.) However, the fact remains that watching someone play a "guess-the-name-of-the-movie-character" game for fifteen minutes is STATIC screen action. Nothing is happening. The only tension results from knowing that SOON something is going to happen. A more talented filmmaker would make something ELSE happen while we're waiting for the shootout to happen, or cut the scene down. That is why people are saying "too much dialogue."

Just because there is the threat of violence in the air, or the tension of masked identities, doesn't give a writer a pass to make a lazy scene and have someone play stupid drinking games for 20 minutes. How about if we put a bomb under someone's chair, then watch them play solitaire for 20 minutes? Is that good cinema? No.

The apologists are giving a QT a pass on lazy writing. The movie is 7 scenes that could have been cut down to a tight hour.

IB isM more masterbation than masterpiece.

...the fact that the game went on for so long made me feel as squirmy as the characters were meant to feel. They had something deadly serious to discuss, and the fact that this ass intrudes on them and gets them to play a moronic game which goes on and on continually threatens their ability to pretend as if everything's peachy and that they're just out for a fun night. After awhile, the viewer wants to scream, "SOMETHING HAPPEN ALREADY," which is an analogous feeling to the characters feelings of "GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE ALREADY." When the cover is broken after all that pretending, it's a much bigger emotional payoff. At least to me.

My biggest problem with that scene was the selfish desire to see the German Basterd (whose name escapes me) wreak awful havoc on the prick officer and walk out alive. That character was far too interesting to see killed off so quickly.

In the bar scene, the captain KNOWS they aren't german but still yaks for twenty minutes. Nobody is playing games as everyone already KNOWS what everyone else is up to.

...was static and lacked cleverness, than you don't know the first thing about good writing. Period. True, QT maybe could have trimmed fifteen minutes from his lurid vision, but then, we wouldn't get this beautiful, lingering shots of Melanie Laurent, and especially my favorite shot of her as she puts on her warpaint/make up in preparation for the night's grisly events. Furthermore, I'll say that you have no idea what constitutes tension and suspense if you don't appreciate the long build ups towards the orgasmic explosions in BASTERDS. I said it after reading the script and I'll say it once again: that opening twelve minute sequence between Mssr. Lapaditte (the French Farmer) and Col. Hans Landa are the single best opening pages of any script I've read in the last ten years. And now that I've actually seen them turned into a cinematic Krispy Kreme, I just might go and revise that and say that they're the best opening pages I've ever read. What an amazing way to open a film. Too bad you think IB is all about masturbation. Well, you're partially right -- I did come all over the screen!

One teeny tiny little nitpick I have for the bar scene was -- why didn't that Nazi Gestapo officer recognize Stiglitz? According to Sgt. Rachman (the one who gets his head bashed in by the Bear Jew), "everybody knows who Hugo Stiglitz is." So, why didn't the officer recognize him, sitting a foot away? As I said, just a teeny, tiny nitpick. Otherwise, BASTERDS is QT's masterpiece. btw, I think QT and PT Andersen need to get together and film a sequel where the Basterds go floating across the world in a hot air balloon from war zone to war zone, stopping down occasionally to put the hurt on some evil, genocidal armies whenever they come across them. They could call their cinematic masterpiece "BASTERDS FROM A BASKET!" (Rimshot!!)

On it's way to the biggest opening for a Tarantino film ever, and deservedly so. All of you crying flop can stick your foot in your mouth.

Inglourious Basterds is great filmaking. Anybody who says is boring is because you are young and just like explosions and chase scenes or robots killing each other all the time. The basterds is not only Brad Pitt and his crew is about evryboady the is against the nazis is this movie. The movie goes at its own pace but is a beatiful pace, setting up the action scenes. Its a film for adults than can enjoy a movie that is 85% subtitle. I can enjoy an all out action movie but give me a movie like the basterds and i will enjoy it more because i can sit and watch characters play of each other with a great script. Tarantino has the ability and not much people can comprehend that kind of filmaking or just dont see the point of it. Me and millions of other people can appreciate when movies like this come once evry 3 or 4 years. Long live the basterds!!

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/

I hate the Zone now, and I haven't even been there! See what you've done??? BOYCOTT IT, PEOPLE!!

Fucktards!!

Huh? Did you say anything?

aaaaaaaaaand I'm done.

I'd say it's already killed.

Who's going to answer my Stiglitz music question?

Slaughter by Billy Preston. I believe there are a couple of different versions, but the one on the OST would be the one you are looking for.

I loved Pulp Fiction, loved the story of True Romance, was entertained by Kill Bill, but Death Proof (other than the stunts) was dreadful and this was just more pastiche. His schtick is tired, sooo self-aware, like he's sitting next to you in the theatre elbowing you in the ribs with each shot going, "This is really cool I got this part from that one movie and wait til you see this next scene where I got it from this other movie." Enough already.

Me and my younger brother went to see it this afternoon, and I must admit I was a little nervous prior to seeing this after experiencing Tarantino's other recent flicks (Kill Bill 1 had no substance, Kill Bill 2 was washy and inconsistent, Death Proof was a complete load of rubbish). So me and my brother bought our tickets and prepared to be disappointed....... .......And had our asses royally kicked!! Superb dialogue, great performances, scenes that lead somewhere, and that reverential treatment of moments that is the Tarantino I know (somewhat, in many ways, at times similar to Jackie Brown - yes, that good). Til Schweiger totally ruled (the face, contorted in a manner best described as Jack Dee with piles!!), and overall in a summer that's been rife with let-downs, it is the one that didn't disappoint. Now in the UK we have a couple of weeks to wait for District 9. *sigh*

Malformed and overlong as it was, I really enjoyed IB. Sort of surprised there wasn't a single shoot-out in his spaghetti western though.

Easily just as bad as Death Proof. Tarantino just can't write a script anymore. Ever since he told Roger Avary to get lost, he's been lost himself. Avary was the guy who kept QT honest. I read the script for IB, it was slow, had awful dialogue and awful situations with no tension. So I go see the movie and it's all there, the slowness, the bad dialogue, the stupid situations with no tension whatsoever, that is, unless you're 14 years old. Easily one of the worst scripts I have ever read and this film is one of the worst I have seen this year. Transformers 2 actually put me to sleep it was so bad, yet I still must say it was more enjoyable than this flick, which was just so stupid as to be rendered pointless. Another FAIL for QT, though the lovers have their usual blinders on.

When Death Proof came out all the lovers were here in droves defending that piece of shit. Now all of a sudden no one really likes it. It will be the same with this turd.

Hans Landa is almost always two or three steps ahead of everyone. So how could he not see Raine not screwing with their deal somehow? The second the handcuffs came out I felt Tarantino was going for an audience moment as oppose to being true to the script

I suspect the reason for this is that aside from being able to see everything, Hans is also a complete and utter egotist, as evidenced by him "buying" friendships like those of the movie star Bridget Von Hammersmark. He felt certain that his plan would work to perfection. Perhaps in the next decade, a revisionist sentiment will settle on Tarantino, and he'll edit the film such that Hans Landa will first shoot Aldo Raine, then force BJ Novack to take he and his second in? And I'll bet this new edit will be known as the "Hans shot first" revision. (Rimshot!!)

If this script was one of the worst you've read and the film as well, then you're brain dead. Seriously. Unless you're fucking Elmore Leonard or Tony Gilroy, no one should have the right to dismiss IB as having awful dialogue. Even QT's dialogue, essayed in French, no less, had amazing zest to it. Your massive ego has swallowed your pea-sized brain.

Just saw the film. As suspected, it's a series of entertaining short stories, but as an overall film? Too long, and way too over the top. But I can appreciate the over-praising of this film: You devoted your 20s to Tarantino, and it's nice to know it wasn't completely in vain.

1.Samuel L. Jackson's random narration was way too fucking distracting. Didn't fit with the movie at all. Also why only have him do it twice? If he's going to narrate the movie why not do the whole thing?

2.Mike Myers is also completely out of place in this. His annoying fucking mug took me right out of the movie.

3.Pointless flashbacks. Why exactly do we need that shot of Goebbles doing that French girl doggy style?? Was that supposed to be funny or something?? It added nothing. Same thing for Stiglitz being whipped, unless as someone said earlier that was supposed to be a metaphor for his inner thoughts, in which case I'll let it slide.

Other than that I loved this thing. As did the audience I saw it with. Very long applause when the end credits came up. Welcome back Quentin.

I feel like we barely saw them. Not asking for too much being that their name is in the title and all...

what Family Guy did for Land of the Lost

1) The false Italian name Donowitz has at the theater is Antonio Margheriti, which is the name of an extremely prolific schlock director of the 60s and 70s, usually using the pseudonym Anthony Dawson.

2)Churchhill was played by Rod Taylor (star of The Time Machine and many many other films) looking very old

great, great movie

What happened to the remaining of the 8 Basterds? Novak's character is apprehended somehow and survives with Pitt. Two go down at Tavern, two go up in flames at Cinema. What is missing from the script? What about "Neal Schweiber" from Freaks and Geeks?

I loved the fact that QT put Emil Jannings at the premeire...Jannings was the first ever winner of the Best Actor Oscar in 1928, considered by many to be the world's greatest film actor of the time and he later became a very big supporter of the Nazis.

As expected, editing continues to be not available to Tarantino. As for the box office results, watch it drop 80% next week after all the geeks have cleared out. Ta-da.

Somehow I didn't think the film was too long at all, I think as someone said here, if the dialogues were often long then the payoffs were short, brutal and shocking (the result of the game in the basement bar being a good example). I'm not going to defend Tarantino, I would merely say that this fim is going to be argued to infamy and beyond, and those who enjoy it will.

once you get over the initial antsyness of the first viewing, and you know how long everything lasts, the restlessness I had during the some of the first viewing went away, and I completely fell head over heels stinkin' drunk in love with "Inglourious Basterds".

cos he's really churned out fucking great masterworks hasn't he. give me a fucking break.when I see the names on here who have hated this film I am fucking glad they hate it. its a testament to how good it is that these pathetic fucks think its too boring or too talky. me want more boom boom bang bang. fuck each and every single one of you.

The script didn't really go into that either. Originally, Hirschberg (Levine) and Donnie went into the theater, but in the movie it was Omar and Donnie. Samm Levine and I think even Paul Rust were in the scene RIGHT BEFORE La Louisiane, so I just assume since they weren't part of the mission, so they just hung back or something.

Overall, I highly enjoyed this film. It was different than most of the films out right now. It was clever. It had a good mix of action, intelligence, and drama. The death of Shosanna was shocking and I truly wished she could have seen her revenge. Let's hope for more Basterds screen time in an extended cut.

Are you Roger Avary? I thought The Rules of Attraction was pretty good! I bet you wish you were as successful as QT. But hey, even some success is better than none, and you seem to get work still. It's okay. It's okay. At least you'll always have Pulp Fiction.

Well... After all these years reading material on AICN without never posting my own opinion on a given movie, I guess I feel now is the right time to do so; the fact that I'm just out of today's first projection of "Inglourious Basterds" might have something to do with it... For what it's worth, I think this is simply QT's best and most achieved movie so far (I would believe QT feels the same: ain't that Aldo's last line in the movie?) and by far one of this year's best. I've seen all QT's movies of course, and I've liked them all for various reasons (sue me...) but, boy, this one is surely a real treat for all movie lovers around. Everything in this movie is incredible: the plot (and what a plot: all those semi-isolated events merging into this grandiose finale!), the music, dialogs (and the cleverness used for switching between languages), and what about the acting (does this Austrian actor deserve his Cannes' nod or what?!?)! And regardless of its WWII context and location (and lack of muscle car...), make no mistake, "Inglourious Basterds" is a QT movie: the borrowed music, dialogs (again), outbursts of violence, etc. That being said, and I must admit I've not read all the posts in this forum, I'm a bit surprised to see that none of the few dozen latest posts mentioned that "Inglourious Basterds", as with all other QT movies, is first and foremost a movie about movies (put this way: an homage to various movies or various types of movies). And the facts that the finale takes place in a movie theater and that many key characters are somehow related to the movie industry (a movie theater owner, a projectionist, an actress, a minister of propaganda, an actor, a former film critic, am I missing anybody?) are other arguments in favor of that statement. Unless your attention span is average MTV, do yourself a favor: go see this movie. Regards,

I couldn't stop laughin' at the part when they kept playing the sound of the bat hitting the wall...hahaha. As they say in mortal kombat.. This movie was a "flawless victory"!

Considering the guys at this site won't say anything, I thought I would bring this up. Shutter Island has been pushed back to February. Not usually a good sign. I did enjoy the preview, though. And if someone already mentioned this, I didn't see it and am not trying to steal your spotlight.

For the shit that was death proof. I see it this way in Floydian terms: Reservoir Dogs: Dark Side of the Moon. Pulp Fiction: Wish You Were Here. Jackie Brown: Meddle. Inglourious Basterds: The Wall. Kill Bill: Animals. Death Proof: The solo disc of Ummagumma. (Haven't forgotten True Romance, 4 Rooms or NBK but not sure how to relate those yet.) We can only guess what his Final Cut will be! Seriously, this might actually be my favorite Tarantino film. Brilliant, genius and makes me hate Nazis and white power so much more. Oh, if only WW2 could have ended that way for real!

acquires not only a palatability bit a CHARM when it's not spoken in English!

so much. I mean I don't care when someone genuinely doesn't enjoy a film for genuine reasons. Hell there are tones of films I don't like but there are a lot of guys and girls on here who WANT to hate. They go in wanting to hate it, come out happy that they did indeed hate it and then come here and have some weird who can hate something the most contest. thats why it annoys. a lot of you wanted to hate this film and I am happy for you that you got what you wanted.

and it plays a fantastic part in the actual story.its great.

Really liked the movie but wish that the basterds had more appearances in it. Brad Pitt and the Jew Hunter were wonderful. Loved the final scene. Great cast. Still, I am going to be greedy as hell. Brad Pitt's character wanted scalps. I wanted more basterds.

great movie, BUT... i would have liked to see more of the basterds earlier missions

Could have sworn I heard his voice.

On the phone as the US Brass giving Aldo his final orders. And it was the perfect little sprinkling of fucking awesome that Quentin does so well. Keitel is my fucking hero, and hearing him on that phone provided such joy. I also thought the rest of the movie was fucking brilliantly awesome. My opinion, best movie of Summer '09. Star Trek a bit behind. Everything else was utterly forgettable, which is horrific.

at three, for me at least. I loved parts of it, but I didn't think it was the masterpiece some of you clearly do. The story made incredibly little sense in my opinion. It failed to make me believe. The effects and sequences were beyond brilliant though. Complicated feelings.

Thank God for D9 and Bastards swooping in here during the final weekends and redeeming an otherwise pitiful summer. TARANTINO'S BEST SINCE PULP, HANDS DOWN.

this one is rad to the nads.

I also heard about Shutter Island being moved to February. Disturbing indeed. I, for one, have read the book and while I thought it was fun and an enjoyable read, I was surprised to think Scorsese wanted to make a movie out of it. It's pretty by the numbers, as these things go, without giving too much away. I did think it could make a better movie than book, but a move to February is a clear indication they have no belief in it for awards season, or any real acclaim at all. Maybe Scorsese went full-on with the horror and thriller aspects and didn't give a fuck about awards, and just made a badass psycho-thriller. I'll be disappointed if it really is a waste of time..

Thought I might be losing it a little there.

Yeah. Glad that happened. Love Keitel also.

Fuck this movie-a waste of money and an afternoon.

Fucking A

Roger Avary "Pulp Fiction" scribe pleads guilty to manslaughter August 21, 1:45 PMHollywood Events Examiner Roger Avary, screenwriter of such films “Pulp Fiction,” and co- writer of the films “Silent Hill,” and “Beowulf” has plead guilty to drunken driving and vehicular manslaughter a for a crash that killed one passenger last year. He entered his guilty pleas Tuesday in a court in Ventura County, Ca. In January 2008, Avary crashed his Mercedes into a telephone pole while driving late one evening in Ojai, Ca. The alcohol induced crash injured his wife, Gretchen, and killed 34-year-old Andreas Zini, a resident of Italy who was visiting the couple. Avary has apologized for the accident. Avery, 43, was intoxicated at the time of the crash, authorities said. He was arrested and later released on $50,000 bail. In December, Avary originally pleaded not guilty to the charges. Avary — born in Flin Flon, Canada, and raised in the United States — shares an Academy Award with filmmaker Quentin Tarantino for writing Tarantino's 1994 hit Pulp Fiction.

Uh...Rotten Tomatoes has this at 88%. Sounds like a resounding success, to me, at least as far as the critics go.

Say what you want about the guy but he knows how to BUILD A STORY. Every action or event has a purpose that leads to a chain of events that have a greater purpose. And for that reason I will probably go to every one of his movies.

Oh and the guy who plays the villian (not familiar with his work) was PERFECT. Probably one of the best villians I have seen this DECADE in movies.

Like someone else said here, District 9 and Inglorious Basterds just saved the summer...

And I hope Shutter Island isnt getting pushed back cause that was the next movie I wanted to see...

And I don't think there will be anything better. I loved everything about it. The buildup is marvelous, reminding me of the days when the climax of a movie actually felt like a climax, and not just another piece of redundant action. The ending is one of the most satisfying endings I have ever seen. My theater was pretty quiet the whole time... I wasn't sure they were into it... and then everyone burst into cheers at the end. Can't wait to see it again. And I want to see more Melanie Laurent. She was excellent.

Not that I don't like a good female foot once in a while, but he takes it to another level. An upclose shot Uma's man feet? Really?

doesn't have ludicrous in it...then it sucks.

the exception being the maudlin pile of garbage, CRASH

which made ME LOVE AGAIN.

gamer, movie of the summer, sluts!

Every minute they were on screen was great. Every conversation that went beyond 10 minutes... agonizing. I liked it overall, but it should have been about 30 minutes shorter, or actually included the Basterds in those 30 minutes

Theater I saw Basterds in was packed and District 9 was the number one movie last week... Are Rated R movies making a comeback??? Good lord I hope so...

there's hardly any difference between PG-13 and R these days. Only the most literal-minded person could say The Dark Knight is less violent than District 9.

A lot of the Dark Knights violence occurs offscreen.

With so many characters and with the scenes being so long it felt like there were only four or five scenes and then it was over. I would have much preferred a longer TV series with decent time allocated to everyone.

I'm not sure studios realize what an R-rated film is anymore.

I was trying to type when I hit the enter button. Anyway, I don't recall anyone blowing into chunks and splattering blood all over the place in Dark Knight. I mean, I know Maggie blows up, but all you see is her hair get pushed aside and then the building explode. Nothing anywhere near as violent as D9 if you ask me. Hitler's face getting blown apart in Basterds was certainly something you won't see in a PG-13.

Roadside shotgun killing, knifing the mob boss to death through the mouth, death by ingesting acid, etc. It's offscreen, but it's violent stuff.

I haven't seen this movie yet but I'm sure when or if I do I'm gonna hate it. Why? Because Tarantino is one of the mist overrated directors around. He always feels it necessary to have to add pointless boring stupid dialouge in almost all his films since kill bill. Yes, the dialouge can be very pointless at times and so corny and unrealistic because Tarantinos trying to be cool and original. He's a douchbag and all you faggots who say otherwise know this. Retarded ass plot on IB by the way. I don't care if Tarantino is just making his version of war movie, he can't try to make it more factual. Stupid ass big empty headed alien lookin like motherfucker. Anybody who likes QTs movies after pulp fiction is a fucking tasteless idiot.

So was Basterds. A 13 year old could watch either.

For judging a movie without seeing it. There's no worse kind of talkbacker than you. Congrats.

He always feels it necessary to have to add pointless boring stupid dialouge in almost all his films since kill bill. Yes, the dialouge.

I like watching people talk in a movie, for a change. That's exactly why I go to a Tarantino movie. In real life, people have pointless conversations. That's what people do. But, if you pay attention, many of the conversations in Tarantino's movies (especially this one) apply to the plot in an obscure way.

You know he is the mist the mist man. Lol, so I didn't spellcheck. Get off my nuts already. And please I can judge a movie before I see it especially after half the talk backers here already revealed the plot twists and especially the end so go Jack yourself in the corner.

No, no, no. Go see the fucking movie you idiot.

Doesn't make you particularly intelligent though. If you haven't seen the movie, whether you know fucking plot twists or not, you have no clue what you're talking about, and your opinion means dick.

No no no no no no no no no no no no and no. Looks like shit and mist likely is. Brad pitt is a terrible actor Quentin Tarantino is a terrible director and writer and a fat headed douchbag. He's worse then Cameron sometimes. So fuck off fag il not paying 10.50 to see a mediocre unrealistic war movie.

I love how a troll's last resort is calling someone a "fag" when they lose an argument. You haven't seen the movie. That's all there is to it.

Wow insult my intelligence because I said I don't like Tarantino and I think this movie is hot before actually seeing it. You know how I know your a dumbass? Because you jeep trying to defend the movie. Your entitled to your opinion as am I and you don't have to get so butthurt because i'm pointing out the obvious about Tarantino and his shitty prematurely ejaculated work.

You are a fag. And what argument? I didn't know we were arguing because it just seemed like you were trying to convince me to watch a shitty movie from a shitty over rated actor. Apparently you haven't convinced so it would seem you've lost whatever argument you're referring to.

I get that under the right artistic circumstances certain movies make sense to portray characters as having a true to life persona that may include being a racist (which Quintin seems to always manage to find for at leat one character in each movie) but how in a movie about Nazi's and Jews does he figure out a way and/or need to even bring up African Americans yet alone make fun of them in such a pointless and out of context manner? It's like he goes out of his way to do it for some personal vendetta.

They are all under 18.

I never did. I'm not trying to convince you to see it. I'm simply saying you're opinion of a movie is invalid until you've actually seen it. Anyway, I'm done. Feel free to demonstrate your considerable verbal prowess by calling me a fag again. That was sarcasm, btw... you should look it up. Also, look up the definition of the word "argument," since that seems to be a source of much confusion for you.

I couldn't disagree more. I think Quentin use of "racist" humor in most of his movies, is first, incredibly indicative of his characters the situations they are in, and two, is actually very honest in showing how casually racist so many people in our society are. Every single Scorsese gangster movie is full of racist jokes and stuff, just like Quentins gangsters. In this, I found the first part, the joke about the Olympics, was fairly in line because the Germans were absolutely obsessed with finding ways to explain why they didn't win more gold medals at the olympics, and loved shitting on african americans for their athletic prowess, it fit perfectly. The second, the king kong joke, was just plain fucking funny, almost too good to be true, and was again, definitely something a fucking Nazi would figure out a way to say. It was just set up so well, I don't really think it was actually racist at all.

Did anyone genuinely find this movie suspenseful?

Sure you don't give a shit. Dumbass! Now that's sarcasm by the way.

Reading Harry's 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 that they were a couple also. I think it was purposely left ambiguious but some seem very certain that they were a couple. Wondering if I missed something

Yes they were a couple. She told him she loved him more than anyone and that he was the only person in the world she could trust. And they are passionately kissing in the projector room at the end. Marcel wasn't gay. I think its one of the strongest and most powerful subplots in the film.

Why was it a strong subplot? I'm not trying to bait you or anything. Just curious as to peoples positive responses to the film.

The opening sequence for fuck's sake. If you don't consider that first 20 minutes suspenseful (or the card game, or the pastry scene, for that matter) then you're just being The Comic Book Guy. GREAT FILMMAKING ALL AROUND. WELCOME BACK, QT.

I thought the Mike Myers scene was really well done, and really well written. That scene had to be in there. That scene is in every “man on a mission” film and it’s always the most boring or the first to be forgotten. But not with Myers. TCM played “Battle of Britain” last night and Dirk Bogarde (one of my favorite actors) did the same scene, except he showed the map to Sean Connery, Gene Hackman, and Ryan O’Neal. Even with all that talent, it’s the most boring and easily forgotten scene in the film. Having Myers do what he does best made this scene memorable and even has some here talking about it. And Pitt was great. That “Sling Blade” face he makes through half the film is brilliant.

No, I didn't find it suspenseful. I mean, did you think it would end any other way?

Wow, one of the most satisfying endings I've ever seen. Seriously (SPOILER), when Donnie was just unloading clip after clip into the audience I could almost FEEL what it must have been like as a Jew to get that revenge. And it never even happened! Waltz is a genius, absolute genius. And Fassbender ruled it hard too. The only thing that felt like it got glossed over was the fact that it was an absolute suicide mission, and it seems like they didn't ever get a moment to ponder that, especially Donnie. And did anyone else find the last moments between Zoller and Shoshanna kind of heartbreaking, even though in the end Frederick proved himself to be a boorish asshole?

Tarantino loves to use racial slurs in his work. In past interviews he's claimed he uses the N word so that the "power" of it can be taken away. How noble. In reality, his films give people a sense of entitlement in using racial slurs, because after all, "Jimmie" said it. That's just reality, whether intended or not. Just sayin'.

It's about suspending disbelief, caring about characters that you meet onscreen, and wondering what will become of them. Just my reaction, but Bastards exceeds in suspense from start to finish.

I am sorry .. but seriously stop ... there are so many things wrong with your posts .. english seems to be one of them. As for this movie. All I can say is I hated death proof and grind house / loved rez dogs/pulp and kill bill was watchable because of the martial arts angle / jackie brown I saw once and either I need to revisit or I snored through it / THIS MOVIE, however, was VERY good. I will go back to it again and again just for Brad Pitt alone. Him doing the "I"talian was quite good.

Best of the decade?!?! Maybe?!?! It's THAT good. I'll have to see it again.

The Hurt Locker is the best movie of the year. www.megacity8.blogspot.com

Look, I can be sensitive. But I also know Quentin has a real history of personal and professional association with black folks, and makes jokes from a point of familiarity and affection. I cannot otherwise explain how he made me laugh at a white man raping a black man in the ass (Pulp Fiction). He's playing a different game, a brilliant, bratty kid who makes movies about the movies he likes, and movies he would like to see. Completely individual, and not to everyone's taste. But he plays with race the way he plays with a number of other factors...to unsettling and artistic effect. Like him or not, you certainly can't ignore him.

I was referring to the opening scene that you mentioned, specifically. Suspense is uncertainty. And I wasn't uncertain as to how that scene would play out.

and no, i'm not some Tarantino apologist -- hated his half of Grindhouse, ferinstance. But this was great. Crackling dialogue, fascinating characters (I hope there's a lot more of the basterds in an extended cut, since i wanted to see more of em) and terrific performances all around. I've read through the complaints above and they seem to largely be (a) people who are so determined to hate on QT they can't see past their own fixations or (b) people who act like some tiny thing (like, say, Mike Myers' cameo) is the end of civilization as we know it. That bar scene that some in the TB are whining about was phenomenal BECAUSE Of its length... we got to feel the tension of "what's going to go wrong here?" rather than some Short Attention Span Shoot Em Up.

I agree about that, I think most of the audience could anticipate what was coming. But I disagree that suspense is uncertainty. According to that logic, would you try to say that there's no suspense in the opening shots of Saving Private Ryan? Because we all knew exactly what those soldiers were approaching as they neared the beach.

how can you POSSIBLY say you knew how that scene was going to play out? it could have gone in so many different directions. the farmer could have resisted and seen his daughters tortured. the nazis could simply burn the house down. they could leave them alone, because Landa believed what the farmer was saying. the farmer could have betrayed the people he had been hiding for months. (which he did). The scene had plenty of tension to it.

That's what I meant.

Skipping this...like a felon.

Almost full screening, during the day, same ovation as I got on the friday viewing. Despite critics being kinda split on this I think this thing struck some weird vibe with the common masses.

Brad Pitt is gut-bustingly fucking hillarious. He reaches near Jack Burton levels of comedic presence in this flick in that you cant help but crack the hell up every single second he's on screen. A CLASSIC character. Note to all actors: Body language is key. Be it drama,horror,action and most importantly comedy. Every little groan, tick and twitch mr Pitt does is to perfection. It is, in my opinion, the funniest, character to grace the silver screen in many a moon. Bra-fucking-vo. As for the rest of the film I agree with most that at times it does drag a bit. Its like almost to much time is devoted to characters that disappear far to soon. Take Diane Kruger's character as case-in-point. All in all though a great godamn film. Jackie Brown is still my personal favorite of his but this flick, upon a single veiwing, is chipping away at that pedastal. Cant wait for a second go round. And that my friends is the highest compliment a film can earn. Godamn right. Ps.Sorry but QT's Segment in Four Rooms is far and away the best. Though, four super sexy witches in dire need of a mans essence is a close fucking second.

I think your assesment of the film way early in the talkback was spot on. I loved the film - saw it twice - and really got into the spirit of the piece, but I hadn't processed everything yet and had not seen some of the deeper themes. I think your deconstruction was terrific, and I told a couple friends about your pov. Deception and duality definitely are at play. However, I had trouble with a comment you made later. You said Pulp Fiction wasn't about aything. I'm not sure how you could argue that. I won't go into it all, but basically Pulp is about redemption, as has been addressed by numerous critics, fans, and Tarantino himself, I believe. Jules and Butch's stories are about redemption, and to some degree, Pumpkin and Honeybunny are being "turned" onto the correct path in theirs. Vincent does not accept the miracle Jules witnessed, does not change his ways, and so he ultimately dies. Also, taking into account the 'soul in the briefcase' angle, which, if not intended is at least arguable, then Jules is doing God's will, as it were. So faith, redemption, etc. are the major themes of Pulp. Thus, I'd say it's a lot more than just fun.

Please do as the titl says and then go fuck yourslef. I'm typing on a sliwass iPhone if that explains your issues with my English. Or were you offended because I use the word fag? Which is it. In any case you can go up your own ass becasue the last time I checke I can say whatever the fuck I want to. Everybodys a fucking seventh degree black belt mma fighter with a degree from oxford on the internet right?

Dumb people coming out and saying "Too much talking not enough dead Nazi's"... Good luck getting your GED dumb ass. Jesus some of you are so stupid it hurts to read your comments. Also this is to everyone who posts on any movie board and goes "I'M NOT SEEING THIS BECAUSE blah blah blah" no one cares. You are a loan dumb ass. You are not important. I'm not saying I'm important because I'm not but just hating people's success is pathetic. James Cameron is a good example of this, guy makes millions and everyone hates him. So it becomes "cool" to hate on a movie made by someone who has gained public success. This has happened to QT problem is for these idiots is IB is actually good. For those of you writing this movie off for no reason but your own stupidity, do yourself a favor and see it, You might be surprised.

You were just weeded out idiot. Get over yourself.

I remember seeing Melanie Laurent in an asian film called "Rice Rhapsody", She absolutely stole my heart in that film, I actually said "Oh my god!" When I saw her name in the credits. Fantastic actress. Christoph Waltz needs an oscar for this.

C'mon people that wasnt even close to being QT's best film. Maybe if your jewish you'll think that but it defintely doesnt measure up to his early work. He's become a genre film maker who wants to imitate his cinema heroes. This movie was laughable for the wrong reasons. Mike Myers seemed like he was doing an Austin Powers character. Hiltler and Goebels seemed like they belong in Mel Brooks Hitler on Ice. Eli Roth was cast for his Boston accent and I didnt hear a Boston accent.Pitts Aldo Raine was also kinda laughable in his acting . I think Pitt has done that awful southern accent before. Plot points that made no sense that others pointed out. Only Christoph Walz saves this movie.

It was a strong subplot because it summed up calm vengeance. In many ways it was film noir. She hoped for the day but never thought it would come. Then the opportunity presents itself and she strikes. It was Jackie Brown in many respects. Its her character that really holds the story together in my opinion. Similar to how PTA's Magnolia is structured around Melora Walters. And I thought the most romantic moments in the were between she and Marcel. They gave the film its core. In end war is about good people doing bad things. They sum this idea up perfectly. Hence why it is a strong subplot.

iPhones have an auto correct feature, and if it's not on it's still easy to type, you illiterate fuck. This was typed on an iPhone...wait let me translate for you...Tils wus tipd on an ipoon.

Probably Tarantino's worst movie. I was bored to tears watching it. I didn't care for any of the characters and most of the time they're talking German. Speaking of talking, ever watch two people calmly talk for 2hrs and 30 minutes in 1940's WWII?, most of it in German. That's what this movie felt like. There were some quick action scenes, witty lines, but nothing you didn't see in the trailers. Oh and there was gore of course and the ending is a massacre of biblical proportions. What it boils down to is, The movie is a love letter to the late great director, Sergio Leone. Who's most famous for his Spaghetti westerns, starring Clint Eastwood. So the film has slow motion shots and moves at a snails pace and just like Sergio Leone films. It has a score by Ennio Morricone and that's unfortunate, because they're taken from all the classic Sergio Leone films and I've seen a lot of Sergio Leone films. I associate that music with those classic Sergio Leone movies. So the music was out of place for me. Speaking of out at of place. At one point out of the blue. Tarantino decides, let me put an 80's song by David Bowie in a movie, that takes place in 1940's Germany during WWII. Really? Yep, really. They say Tarantino films grow on you after repeated viewings. Maybe I have to see it again? I don't know about this one though. I have no real desire to see it again.

"But I want to see a Basterds film like the "National Pride" Nazi fim. Heh. They even threw in a Wilhelm Scream sound effect" The Wilhelm was awesome to hear, as always. However, I personally do not want to see a "nations pride" of IB. I think that the irony of the film, The Nazis, and Hitler, whom we have (rightfully) villainized over the past 60 years are shown eating popcorn and laughing at what amounts to nothing more than 2 hours of Zoller sniping American soldiers. The MAIN DRAW of this film, via the marketing, was the promise that it would be 2 hours of Nazi scalping! Hitler and Goebbels are doing what 95% of the opening ticket sales of this movie were planning on doing: LAUGHING AT MINDLESS VIOLENCE. Its a deilicious commentary on us, our action film tastes, and a credit to QT's abilities that he wrote this into the script at the climax. I LOVE LOVE LOVE that people expecting stupidity were duped into seeing a Dirty Dozen/Leone/New Wave film. Phenomenal film.

I know the iPhone has an auto correct feature you stupid ass biffs penis paradise or whatever the fuck your name is. It dosent always input the right words fuck face. By the wy just saw the movie online and it sucked just like I thought it would. So to all nausayers out there trying to make it look like I'm just wrong I have one thing to say. I was right. Bastards was stupid and cartoony. The avatar trailer looked more realistic and believable than the plot of this whole film was. Now biff let me translate that for you in a langauage that your mom can understand.....bow wow wow bow wow bow wow.

Um, Brad Pitt has been funny as FUCK in several movies prior to Basterds. Snatch, 12 Monkeys, and he damn well deserved a Supporting Actor nod last year for Burn After Reading ("You thought it was a SCHWIIIIIIIINNNNNN!!!!!"). I've always thought Pitt was a top-notch character actor trapped in a leading man's body, and as he's aged, he's only gotten better as a performer. Lt. Aldo Raine is one of his sharpest roles to date ("A-river-DEER-chee!").

It's not hard, Leone only made about 6 films, and none of the Morricone music in IB was from any of his movies. Yes the first two chapters were spaghetti western homages, but only the first really referenced Leone (TGTBTU).

The R rating limits what you can do and that bothers me. There should be no limits. Would Inglorious Basterds been a good movie with a PG-13 rating??? Maybe but it would lose a lot in the process.

I dont know. I'm a child of the 80s and right now if I see a new action, horror, or sci-fi movie and it's PG-13 I almost always avoid it. Especially if the movie is focused on adult themes.

Now Dark Knight is the exception to the rule. That movie really pushed the limits and I'm still shocked that movie got the rating it did. People are dying left and right in gruesome horrible ways (off-screen but still) and Two-Face waving a gun at Gordon's son's crying face was pretty disturbing. IMO, TDK was a lot darker than say Public Enemies.

Bottom line, if you want to make Transformers I got no problem with it being PG-13 but if you're making a movie that deals with mature subject matter, it should be R...

His best movie IMO...

Was meant to make fun of King Kong as a bizarre racist fantasy, not making fun of African American history.

There is only a copy with Russian subtitles available. Can you read Russian, or do you understand any of the foreign languages in the film? You didn't see it. You're just a troll, and a bad one at that.

First scene, when Landa asks to switch over to English, his excuse that his French is lacking is obviously untrue, but I'm thinking maybe it's just a practical way to get rid of the subtitles (and, ok, show that he's manipulative). But the reveal of the reason he does it is such a character statement, and I thought a lot of the dialog was just as sharp and subtle throughout. Question: when Landa orders milk for Shoshanna, is he telling her he knows who she is? One last thing: Tarantino gets such great performances out of his actors; he can never get enough credit for that

I don't understand the backlash against all the talking. I always believed that's what made Tarantino movies Tarantino movies. I mean a whole generation talks like that now. We do know that right? People did not use such elaborate vernacular back in the day. I guess it's possible some people here weren't alive before then and maybe don't know. But he changed our culture with his rapid-fire reference-filled dialogue. Seriously.

Really. Pitt's been funny since forever.

Exactly! So I'm a lame ass idiot for expecting exactly what was advertised? Look I liked and in fact enjoyed the film, but I want to see the god damn fartenshtink'n Basterds kicks some royal ass and converse over a bottle of moonshine and whiskey.

"We've got the best silky velvet chocolate you can ever eat. Come on over"
"Actually instead of chocolate we've got chicken sandwiches"
Wait... what?

Suspense can be generated by your anticipation of what is certain to happen. Tarantino wasn't trying to hide what was going to happen there... he was drawing it out, making you anticipate when and how it was going to happen. I thought this was one of the most suspenseful movies I've seen this year.

Hate it all you want haters. It was fun. More fun than Transformers 2, Wolverine, Terminator: Salvation, Half-Blood Prince, Star Trek, G.I. Joe or any other lame-ass big budget turd from summer 2009.

"Be sure and get some...cleaning supplies."

I'd like to see Pitt in another Quentin universe.

It's amazing that people don't think Pitt is a bonafide actor.

...didn't see Assassination of Jesse James.

... I'll fuck'n kill ya"

"Ladies and gentleman we have ourselves a homicide" Pitt is awesome

It was too short. Like Harry said...I wanted more! Beautiful movie. Awesome characters...

Iwas sad when the brit and hugo got killed in yes my favorite scene in the film, the bar scene.

and she's laughing...freakin sick! Kinda funny to think of her filming that....i mean she's laughing for awhile. Awesomely cool.

I thought the same thing. But was it intentional for Tarantino to point out the audience this way or was it just by chance that they advertised the movie to be the same dumb flick Hitler was watching?

Go to google & search for watch movies links. There's are several different copies on that site and what's with this troll busniess? Is that the best putdown you lame ass nerds can come up with or is it just gay computer jargon because I ain't familiar with it.

Besides the movie being amazing, i think this movie had the first Joseph Goebbels sex scene ever, can anyone say milestone?

He usually just plus the same kind of character. It's either guy with bad accent, pretty boy with broken heart, or good looking crazy guy. That about it from Pitt. But I do have to admit he was pretty damn good in Jesse James but in my opinion his performance was mostly elevated by Casey afflecks.

Definitely a milestone, but it did seem kinda out of place to me. Apparently that guy has played JG before.

But the Nazi's wouldn't have been in her theatre.

She was probably the low-point for me. Her performance was well-timed, but every close-up was just a blank stare. Nothing seemed to be going on in that face, or behind those eyes. It was like Tarantino replaced Thurman with her stand-in.

(this post is just for people who've seen the movie)

All those online copies have no English subtitles. So once again, you didn't really watch it. Fuck off, and that's the last I'll say to you.

I think we've pretty much got it down to both plans working if the other one hadn't existed. If there were no Basterds, Shoshanna's plan would have still worked. And without Shoshanna, the Basterds' plan would have taken place at another theater and still worked.

She did remind me a lot of Uma. I don't know whether I'd say she was a low point though.

Wrong , wrong, wrong. Just wrong. Look again butt nut.

Seemed a bit out of character for him to handle her the way he did, until you think about Landa's image of himself as a detective/manipulator of people and situations. The fact that hammersmark came up with such a halphazard explanation for her leg was one thing (thus his hysterical laughing fit). the fact that she did such a shitty job trying to sell the lie to Landa once he started putting it too her really set him off. Viewed her as an adversary unworthy of his abilities. Anybody else feeling this?

enjoyed it, verily.

that he used music from Kill Bill? One scene that jumps into my head is when she's on the ladder at the theatre and the two germans pull up.

I believe she gave the 'blank stare' a lot because she really had to mask her emotions around all of the evil around her...and maybe she just couldn't "her character" act happy around all that evil.

I think the Basterds had less screen time than any of the other characters... Just add 10 more minutes to the previews and that's about all they were in it... I liked the movie, but damn... don't name the movie after minor characters

jen is an ice bitch. Angelina is a earth mother.

Which in turn is music from somewhere else. I also noticed the use of the same opening credits font from Pulp and Kill Bill, and other fonts used throughout the film that he used in Kill Bill. Some people may hate that he does that, but I kinda dig it.

He just disappeared from the movie. Did i miss something??

He just disappeared from the movie. Did i miss something??

Sure there wasn;t that much nazi killing, but it had some intense conversational warfare and tension was everywhere. It was darkly funny too! Tarantino fans will love it. Those expecting some sorta dirty dozen action movie will be disappointed.

from kill bill when she's got her sword stuck inside one of the 88's and the baddies are surrounding her...ahh i love that track.

"I think this might be my masterpiece." was QT referring to the movie.

I think the Basterds are dbags. I wonder if dbagtodayDOTcom agrees with me

It seemed like alot of wasted screen time. The whole project Kino scene with Mike Myers(in AWFUL makeup) could have been axed as well as the basement scene being shortened. The whole story seemed a bit all over the place. I saw it twice thought the same thing both times. I think everybody wants to kiss the film's ass because it's QT, but it's tremendously overrated.

Yes, but even during her most visibly fraught moments (during and after pastry with Landa) she was fairly blank. It seemed like Tarantino was trying to construct a silent film performance like Passion of Joan of Arc, but there was nothing in the actual performance to read. The actress wasn't really hiding anything - she was just sort of sedate. Like a store mannequin.

It didn't much affect my enjoyment of the film. The only part of her story that seemed vital was the ending, which was complete cinema artifice - it didn't much depend on her skills as an actress, anyway.

That's great. The scene almost made me laugh it was so well done. Kruger died amazingly.

i fell asleep twice i almost left three times and i think a root canal would have been more fun sorry QT but you are officially washed up in my book oh and hans landa was mediocre at best

but this was just too much?

Still an unusual little film. Also could've been retitled SHOSHANA'S STORY. This wasn't an inglorious basterds film. We just didn't spend any time with them. What you see in the trailer? That's all you get with the basterds. the rest was other stuff. still an unusual film. with nice performances. the dude who got shot in the balls for throwing up the wrong number "3"? he was really good. and of course the nazi guy at the beginning. yo, do any of yall know how shoshana gave herself away with the struedel and cream?

Your mom asked me to tell you to turn the computer off and get to bed. She also said she accepts you for who you are as a person, even though she's upset about the whole "being into men" thing. She just doesn't think 13 year olds should be that in touch with their sexuality. Good night.

Anyone in the film who kills Nazis without compromise is a "basterd," so the title is appropriate. Shoshana's story also meets up with Pitt's, so I'm not sure why people are saying these should be two separate movies. Everything comes together in the end. Pulp Fiction also had two story threads that interwove... the two hitmen and Bruce Willis.

As far as a common definition of a bad movie goes. And if you don't enjoy IB, with all respect, you probably don't understand it.

Just saw I.B. and I must say--it was good. My wife is a Jew, and I wasn't sure how she'd react, but she enjoyed it. The film has all the Tarantino hallmarks we've come to know and love (and expect). The only place where I felt the film was lacking was the soundtrack. But as this was a period piece, I can let that slide (although that Bowie song just FELT stupid and out of place). Like DEATH PROOF, I can see how some in the audience might have gotten a little bored--but I personally have always enjoyed QT's chatty-moments. Sure, it's a talky picture, and yeah...there wans't as much of the Basterds as I'd have liked...but it's still a fine piece of film.

Was when Shoshanna gets killed by Zoller. She begins to feels sympathy for him and kneels beside

Mods please delete. Hope i didn't ruin it for anybody. Fuck.

When Shoshanna is killed by Zoller, I thought it was unreasonable for her character to feel sympathy for him when just seconds ago he became more that just an annoying suitor and morphed into a violent creep. It would've made more sense if she just shot him and then felt sympathy for him if he hadn't gotten rough with her.

Especially when you see in her eyes the moment she realizes she's not gonna get out of this one. Very good acting on her part. I think her getting shot and surviving lures you into a false sense of security with her character. Shoshana's death was ironic... her only mistake in the entire movie is feeling sympathy for a Nazi. It's too bad she didn't unload that gun into his skull.

His Four Rooms segment was awful.

Death Proof was okay but kinda boring in the long run.

Tarantino is a one-trick pony and way too overrated.

Completely unwatchable. Just like Assturds will be down the road.

Yep classic phrase for shit movie.

I went to the 10:35 at the Bridge in Los Angeles and I can confirm that he was in the audience. A friend of mine is one of the managers there and he tipped me off to his presence. He tried to sneak in after the lights went down but I still spotted him (he's hard to miss). My friend and I were pretty sure he left during the third act but it was still cool to watch (the majority) of the film with him in attendance. It was actually my second time seeing it and I liked it even better. As Aldo says at the end of the film, it might just be his masterpiece...

Why the fuck are you watching a QT movie? Anyways, no one can say he hasnt mastered the art of ratcheting suspense to the degree of making the entire audience nervous. I loved the jew hunter, he deserves an oscar nod. Eli Roth and Brad pitt were great as well. I like how they built up to the jew bear, not many movies foreshadow like that anymore. Aldo Raine was f'ing hilarious, a perfect Tarantino character. He will be remembered as one of QT's best characters. All in all, I think this movie was every bit as good as Pulp Fiction, but in it's own way.

Nice one man. Making a coy homosexual reference to me. How original. Now why don't you go back to the drawing board and come up with something more intresting because that was just weak. And while you're at it please could you fill up your mother's water bowl becasue all her howling is keeping me awake. Anytime somebody has a differing opinion about a shit movie on here all the fucktards on here feel it necessary to gang up on that person. I mean I know all you guys are good at doing things in gangs, like gangbanging each others moms and what not but cool it fellas you're getting ahead of yourselfs with all this self righteous assurance.

... is a Pufter! ;P

That was probably my favourite experience in a theatre in years. I thought Tarantino was channelling Kubrick and Hitchcock in their primes. I don't expect people on this board to like it though. It's not the action movie it's being promoted as. Every scene is a wonderful game of one-upsmanship. It's a movie about wits.

Once again very original comeback. I'm gay thanks what a revelation. its just kind of though dead geek because I just got off your mother and I can promise you she'll testify I defenitely aint gay.;p

I did not think there was any 'pointless' dialogue in the movie. I thought it was all essential. There are several major characters in the movie who barely speak. Others who are quite loquacious. This was Tarantino's tightest movie, it bests Reservoir Dogs.

I don't think it was sympathy she was feeling so much as pity. I also think she was taking in the tragic irony of the situation.

The genius of the Shoshanna and Marcel characters in my opinion is that without them the Basterds' plan would not have fully succeeded. I think in a very interesting way Tarantino is commenting on how war needs "soldiers"of all shapes and sizes. War is not about simply wearing a uniform. The german actress (who was also fantastic in the film) is another example of this. The funny thing about QT's film is that for the comic book moments in the film it tackles very real issues related to World War II and many other battles in general over the course of history. That's the genius of the film in my mind.

Still a classic but I watch it less and less as time goes on. Meanwhile his other movies like Jackie Brown, Kill Bill (2), and Death Proof seem to get better each time I watch them.

But then they are dumb. I saw this first in a critics screening practically by myself. But then I watched it with an audience yesterday and they were not enjoying themseleves. Stupid GI JOE audiences can't stand foreign languages, subtitles, slow unwinding plot, and lots of dialogue. Funny, the "action" scene at the end seemed to disturb the fuck out of the audience. You could have heard a pin drop in there, lol.

The ultimate dvd set STILL hasnt been released?

gave it a standing ovation after. So did I.

I agree. Pulp Fiction is an IMPORTANT film...But not his best. I would rate them like this for now: 1. Inglorious Basterds 2. Jackie Brown 3. Reservoir Dogs 4. Kill Bill Vol. 1 5. Death Proof 6. Kill Bill Vol. 2 7. Pulp Fiction 8. Four Rooms Segment If QT had released Kill Bill as ONE film then I think that would be higher on the list taking the place of Reservoir Dogs. Tarantino has really matured as a filmmaker with this Basterds. And I mean that in the best way possible. Its like everything he's been trying to do for so many years came together perfectly. I wouldn't change a single thing about the film. It has just the right amount of dialogue and just the right amount of action. The music is great. Richardson's cinematography is amazing (as usual) and the ending is one of the best I've ever seen.

Let me guess: you liked GI JOE and TRANSFORMERS 2, voted for McCain, enjoy Nascar, and think Larry the Cable Guy is pretty funny. You are a fucking dullard, boyo.

Awesome about the audience giving it a standing ovation. That certainly did not happen here.

On his Twitter, Xzibit the rapper just said, "Just saw Inglorious Basterds. Tarantino will never get another dime of my money." This is going to sound arrogant, and I apologize, but this just isn't a movie for dummies...

The film theater scene is one of the greatest sequences in film history in my opinion. You can't really top Shoshanna's rebel yell about "Jewish Vengeance" as the screen goes up in flames. INCREDIBLE.

The image of Shshanna's face looking twisted and sadistic projected against the smoke was fucking BRILLIANT, right?

Did Xzibit really say that? That's disappointing. Oh well. I guess Mr. Pimp My Ride doesn't know a great film when he sees one. His loss. All I can say is this brotha enjoyed it IMMENSELY. Its Tarantino's best film. I'm not even sure that's up for debate as arrogant as that might sound. It felt like Sam Fuller, Fassbinder and Hitchcock all rolled into one. Sam "White Dog" Fuller would have LOVED Tarantino's film I believe. All I could think about watching it was how much it felt like Fuller had Hitchcock come on the set to lend a hand. The fact that Tarantino is getting better with each film and continuing to work at such a high level really blows my mind. I don't think about Tarantino that much when I consider my favorite directors (Fassbinder, Hitchcock, Verhoeven, DePalma, Lynch) but I realize having watched Basterds that Tarantino is probably the most "dependable" director working in Hollywood today. ALL of his films are entertaining. Can't say that about a lot of filmmakers. I think I'll have to add QT to my top ten (maybe even top five) after this masterpiece.

I appreciate your appreciation of good cinema.

Thanks, man. Ditto. The theater scene in a strange way made me think of the burning theater scene in (dare I say it)... ...Gremlins. Which hit me as kind of brilliant (seeing as I love that film) because of the World War II references and mythology with Mr. Futterman. Hard to articulate but I think you'll get my meaning.

Never thought of that, but a very interesting comparison.

Those trailers were diabolically awful, but having seen a few scenes in reviews I'm now quite excited Tarantino is back on form..

I'm starting to wonder if trailers arent actually the enemy of marketing films in this day and age.

Tarantino LOVES movies. He really does. He's like Scorsese in that respect. That's why they are sooo good. I don't think I EVER had a bad experience seeing a Tarantino movie. Although in the case of Grindhouse I could have done without Rodriguez's Planet Terror. Didn't really think much of that film at all. Wish it had just been Death Proof and all the trailers. I'm curious about Machete though. Rodriguez (a director I'm not a fan of at all) seems to have put a decent cast together for that one. Bizarre too. But how can you top De Niro, Fahey and Seagal in the same movie? It will either be a HUGE let down or a great popcorn flick. Tarantino is totally different though. He's really on the level of people like Spike Jonze and Nolan. Like those guys every penny of the budget shows up onscreen. I pay very close attention to that sort of thing (for better or worse). I don't think I ever saw a Tarantino film that looked cheap. Even Reservoir Dogs has some killer action scenes that feel bigger than the 450,000 dollar budget. Did you seen the Inception trailer? That is going to kick serious ass. Right now my list for the rest of this year and next is 1. Inception 2. Tron Legacy 3. Book Of Eli 4. Where The Wild Things Are Whats yours? The weird thing for this year is the two best films I've seen in 2009 are Inglorious Basterds and Bigelow's The Hurt Locker. Two very different war films. Not sure why that worked out that way but they are really amazing films. I honestly didn't think anything else I saw this year (other than Wild Things) would be better. That was until I saw Basterds. I was really excited to see Shutter Island but I heard that it got pushed to a release date that usually doesn't bode well for how the studio is feeling about the film. But Scorsese is a master so he'll have my $12.50 when it gets released.

I really didn't like the marketing for Basterds at all either. BUT...The films itself is a masterpiece. I think Tarantino and the studio did the right thing by not showing too much. The reason I wound up still going to the movie even though the trailers didn't grab me is because of Tarantino's strong track record. I think if you like Tarantino's films then you'll LOVE Basterds. The thing about the film is even if you're not a fan of his style you've at least got to appreciate the boldness of his approach.

Sure the Basterds plan wouldve worked without Shoshana. They blew up their bombs and Landa's bomb went off as well. Aside from the opening scene the movie felt very much like a cartoon or comic book. You could never take this movie seriously. I think the movie required a more serious , realistic tone. I know some will defend it as it supposed to be fun. By making this subject matter fun we risk devaluing what happend . This was like a Call of Duty video game, lets see how many nazi's we can kill.

The focus is truly on the antagonists, and how their inevitable demise. The movie title may be it's own enemy - it implies a men in action type film, like Dirty Dozen/ Navarone but it is more about WHO they are hunting down. Usually portrayed as generic avatars of evil, here they interact, have protocols and personal agendas. Refreshing use of subtitles. It turns a genre upside down rather than rehash it like people would expect Tarantino to do. Note that the Basterds get as much screen time as the bad guys normally do in the source films. Many comments are missing the obvious because they are swayed by pre-determined expectations instead of watching a filmmaker take it up another level.

People complaining about the historical inaccuracies of the film. "Oh, Hitler would never do that." "Goebbels would've done this."

THE MOVIE IS CALLED INGLORIOUS BASTERDS!!! STARRING BRAD PITT AND DIRECTED BY QUENTIN TARANTINO!!! It's not SUPPOSED to be historically accurate!

She would have been a hole in his deal. He wanted to receive the main credit for jumping sides. He knew that a glamorous actress who was wounded working for the Allies would have received the glory, not the SS officer who switched at the last minute.

I just had to put the "is wrong". Look... ...I come from the Landis (An American Werewolf In London) school of filmmaking. I go ape shit for shifts in tone in movies. Thats what the great filmmakers do...Period. Take Hitchcock for instance. I don't think there is a single suspense film he ever made that didn't have tons of moments of humor throughout. Tarantino does what few filmmakers do...He gives the audience a little bit of everything. Yes, Basterds feels at times like a comic book...But many comic books and graphic novels are very serious in their subject matter. Spoiler ahead - Clearly with QT does to Hitler he never INTENDED for the film to be taken as historical fact. And honestly I think he hit more of the right buttons with this film than many other filmmakers have in trying to make war films. And I don't think he "devalued" what happened at all. The opening of the film at the Frenchman's house felt true and cinematic all at the same time. And when the theater scene at the end happened the crowd I saw the film with near Lincoln Center went into stunned and hypnotic silence. So, you saying its just Call Of Duty is just silly. And one more thing... ...Why exactly would we not want to kill Nazis? I can tell you what I did think about watching this film. I'm a New Yorker. I'm also a big Obama supporter (and anyone who has a problem with that? bring it on) but as a New Yorker I am still pissed we never got Bin Laden. If he's dead I want to see the body. That said. The reason I am bringing this up because I wish Hollywood made more rah rah movies for the troops. There is nothing wrong with Tarantino making a balls to the wall war epic that gets you pumped up about going after those who promote tyranny, death and destruction. The Nazis (not Germans - this is an important distinction seeing as there were people many people in Germany who DID NOT support the Third Reich) were spreading terror, hate and supremacy. We still have many enemies around the world who believe in terrible things. I don't care if you're black, white, Jewish, Catholic or German...There is nothing wrong with seeing an evil man getting his just deserts. And Tarantino's film (better than any other war film I've ever seen) captured the root of World War II and many other battles our nation has faced...Vengeance. George Bush took us to Iraq for vengeance...But for the wrong kind. It wasnt about 9/11. And if it had been he would have focused more on Afghanistan and Pakistan. But it was about avenging Saddam's attacks/threats against his father. A lot of Tarantino's films are about vengeance. Yes they have larger than life elements but they have power because of their underlying humanity and their deep understanding about the base nature of human beings. I think the spirituality and questions of loyalty are very interesting in how they show themselves in his films. To write off his film as merely a "video game" is simply naive.

Great point. The title serves that purpose when placed in that context.

For the Basterds half of the movie, Tarantino mimics his own version of Goebbels and has the audience cheering the slaughter of Nazi soldiers just as the filmed audience of Nazis cheer on the unending pile of American bodies. The fact that everyone seems to leave the theater wishing there was more slaughter and less talking seems only to deepen the joke that seems to have been perpetrated here. Taking the time to sketch out German soldiers as living human beings and then gunning them down is a simple test of the audience - I think perhaps that Tarantino is hoping we won't cheer, but if my crowd was any indication: we do. Is it possible that people don't understand the definition of "Inglorious" anymore? Let me help you: it means "Shameful." The Shosanna section of the movie that is framed as some sort of Jewish revenge tale only serves to highten the historical irony: Britain and America chose to do nothing to stem the bloodshed of the Holocaust. The movie could just as easily have been a tale of how Americans and Cambodians banded together to eliminate Pol Pot and save millions of lives - or any other of a dozen things that were NOT done. Shosanna's story is the fairy-tale of what you *should've* said to the pretty girl back in high school. It is a story that is built upon regret - if only something like this could've happened. It was just a very sad movie.

The only thing that seperates it from a Call of Duty video game is all the "witty" film references.Yes we all want to see Hitler get his just desserts but the way that it comes about is comical. Goebls and Hitler are made into laughable buffons. They werent, they were pure evil. Even the scene where Hitler gets his face blown off looked cheesy and low budget, laughable. Tarantino didnot capture what WW2 was about , more than any other filmaker. Thats really shocking that you would say that. You obviously havent watched many WW2 movies or should think about it again before making a silly statement like that.

I was speaking flippantly about it. I don't see how anyone can argue the themes present in Basterds though just due to them PLAYING THAT NAME GAME DURING THE SHOOTOUT. It's so brilliant, because you just think it's a simple game, and a way to get through exposition at first, but that scene represents the WHOLE movie. Also, just thought I'd mention. True Romance's movie producer character's last name is Donowitz. His big movie is supposed to be a war film. I doubt Donnie's last name being Donowitz is a coincidence.

First off, I loved the movie. I am glad I found out before going it that it was a QT talker and not a QT action film, otherwise I might have been somewhat disappointed. Great dialogue as always and it was the most suspenseful film I’ve seen in a very long time. But there are some issues that give me pause. MAJOR SPOILERS here just in case anyone popped in who doesn’t know it’s a spoiler zone. One: Why did the Colonel strangle the actress? He was clearly already planning to change sides. She was as big a traitor as he was and sparing her life could only have helped him in his scheme to change sides. The Colonel was the consummate planner and tactician, why would he waste such a resource, even if it was nearly meaningless in the larger scheme of things? I suppose it was to establish him as personally evil instead of institutionally evil, (i.e. doing evil for his own enjoyment instead of part of his job), and thus further justifying his final fate, but it feels awkward. He had no idea how much of a sticking point her life would be with Pitt’s character. And why did the two commandos in the theatre stick around? They knew when the bombs were going off. Was the plan always to shoot Hitler instead of blowing him up? If the doors hadn’t been locked a heck of a lot of high ranking Nazis would have gotten out of the theater before the bombs went off thanks to their noisy assassination. What the heck were Pitt and the actress supposed to be doing during all this anyway? They must have had a separate mission as the two commandoes didn’t seem very distressed at their not being around. Maybe they were supposed to blow up Goering across the theater? And WOW did Hitler have lousy security! The highest ranking bigwigs of the entire Third Reich and the only security they have are two guards in front of Hitler’s box? Nobody in the lobby to notice the projectionist sealing the doors? If there had been just one guard standing around the lobby he would have been bagged the minute he had walked into the room. But these a minor quibbles, and I wish to state that this was one hell of a good movie. Go and enjoy!

Is the sympathy she feels is due to watching the warm closeup of Zoller in the movie. She's tricked by cinema. Again, the falseness of reality and reflexivity of the simulacrum is HUGE in this movie.

You're the one who is acting silly here. My favorite World War II film up until seeing Tarantino's was the Young Lions with Marlon Brando. Why? Because it showed both perspectives in a powerful way. Saving Private Ryan is an overrated piece of dogshit (with basically one good scene). Thin Red Line is pretty incredible visually. Pearl Harbor is crap (again with one good sequence). Downfally and Cross Of Iron are okay. The Great Escape is decent. But its really held together by Mcqueen. Audie Murphy's (a true war hero) To Hell And Back is quite good. Das Boot is amazing. Although as far as submarine movies go Crimson Tide will always be my favorite. I've seen plenty of war films. World War 2, Iraq, Vietnam. Whatever. The best WAR films ever made are: Paths Of Glory All Quiet On The Western Front Casualties Of War Inglorious Basterds Full Metal Jacket The Hurt Locker PERIOD. I think you're the one who lacks any taste honesty.

Great point about Shoshanna's death.

Am I too late for pop-culture reference?

Liked it, didn't love it. But got a feeling this one will get better with subsequent viewings.

I think the reason Landa kills Bridget von Hammersmark is because he is actually enraged that the Reich is falling and that he has to switch sides in order to save his own ass (Hitler mentions the Allies are on the beach and morale is poor, thus the need for the movie premiere). There were no guarantees (at the time he kills her) that his plan to switch sides would succeed. I think he felt a lot of anger that he has been put in that position by people who had sought to bring down the Reich from the inside.

He was a Nazi through-and-through, and he hated the fact that he wasn't going to get to be a Nazi much longer.

switch Eli Roth and Samm Levine's roles...Yes, make Samm Levine the Bear Jew.

Some articles that appeared in newsweek and elsewhere compelled me to start a film blog responding to them. here it is. http://watchinshits.blogspot.com/ if you like what you read, follow me; i intend to stay fairly regular

I really loved the way elements of Morricone's other soundtracks were woven into the film. the one that jumped right at me was the use of the music from "Battle of Algiers" during the scene where the basterds sprang Stiglitz. It is the subtle "film geek only" references and the lengthy conversations that make (or break if you hate them) any Tarantino film or script--the "Like a Virgin", "Why I don't tip" riffs in RD, all the way thorugh "Royale with cheese". You like it or you just say WTF? and move on. That said, I thought we'd actually get through an entire QT film without a closeup of a female foot.Silly me. No dice. Was RD the only film he's made without one? I mean, I know the guy is self indulgent, but, jeez!!

It was the Mythology of Cinema that is thematic to IB, which Tarantino is tyring to convey here. To quote myself from way earlier in this Talkback: "Loved how the mythology of cinema played a huge role in the film, thematically. That penultimate moment, just after Shosanna has shot Zoller twice in the back, when she turns to watch the unspooling movie, seeing a sad, torn Frederick Zoller playing himself, bearing the weight of all the lives he's taken from atop the tower he's perched upon. And she softens, for a moment, thinking that she's just had a glimpse into the tortured soul of the sincere young man who lays dying ten feet away, leading her walk up to the prone soldier, touching him.... only to have him lift his gun and shoot her three times. Brilliant. She was suckered in by the myth of the moving image. It's what Tarantino's been suckering us into for nearly two decades now. Can't wait to be suckered in by QT's mythology again."

...general audiences "got it".

Just wanted to throw that out there.

Its not an action movie AT ALL. Its barely even a men on a mission movie. All of these haters showing up here are dimwits who were sold a bill of goods they didn't get. I LOVED the movie, but I can understand how people looking for an action movie would be disappointed.

and it wasn't an action movie. More like a pulp-noir / comic deconstruction movie with moments of ultra violence. Oddly enough, and I know many of you will shout this down, I think that BASTERDS and WATCHMEN are aesthetically similar. They're both uniquely original (I can't really compare either of them to anything else other than each other), both fuck with genre conventions, both are set in an alternate history setting, and both feature both absurd and brutally violent moments. Probably the biggest difference, other than the obvious historical frameworks, is that BASTERDS is, more often then not, quite funny, whereas WATCHMEN is rather somber.

how did she give herself away?

I like how fanboys that sit through Tarantino's horrible films like Inglourious Basterds and Death Proof argue that mainstream audiences don't get it. No, they merely don't like crap movies and like entertaining movies. Maybe it didn't bomb but people are coming out of it, I'd say 70%, HATING IT. And with good reason, Tarantino is done. He's never getting my money again. Right on Xibit.

but Death Proof didn't kill Hitler. IB is probably going to win Best Picture solely for that reason. It's a good movie, but I'm already getting sick of this "masterpiece" BS. I was just on another site reading how Laurent should get supporting actress for the flaming screen scene. Unbelievable. It's been two days since I've seen it, and quite enjoyed it, but I'm already getting put off by the after-hype.

In other news, I completely agree with LaserPants re: Seven Samurai. I think I'll watch it tonight.

Last night I watched Herzog's Encounters at the End of the World, highly recommended. There are still so many of his films I haven't seen that I'm planning to have something of a Herzog-fest sometime.

I won't go that far. Death proof was as slow as paint drying and the dialog was dull. That was a truly boring movie that I had to walk out of before it was over. Planet terror was a lot of goofy fun by compare. IB has better dialog and a better story than the DOA death proof and it's head and shoulders superior. It is no masterpiece, not even close. but it is an entertaining WWII fantasy.

dont make us wait! keep working!!

does anyone know why the Madame Mimieux scenes were cut? Sam Jackson makes up the difference in exposition, but wonder why she was cut completely.

Are you standing outside theaters exit polling it? According to Box Office Mojo, viewers gave it an average of a B+. The movie made $37 million this weekend, far more than expected. It's fine you don't like it, but don't pretend the majority of the world agrees with you. Tarantino is done? He just had his biggest opening weekend yet.

Especially anything with Brad Pitt and Cristoph Waltz. Ate it up.

Why does there stupid as shit news thing post that this is getting mixed reviews when it has a overwhelming majority of positive reviews. Dumb fucking European cunts!

I think Nightheat500 may be slightly retarded.

Always intentionally misquoting actors out of context. It's disgusting.

When Shoshana's(sp) ghostly head emarges from the screen to reign terror on the burning nazi hordes. Glad he left it subtle and didn't have a Williams cue.

to all QT haters (small, extremely vocal group): The "Moon-faced One" laughs at you...

So now Death Proof was supposed to be bad? Fuck off dude. No one makes a movie to purposely put an audience to sleep.

And people who didnt like IB didn't "understand" it? I guess you like to think you're super deep or something, cause there was nothing to "get." It stunk, plain and simple. Right down to Tarantino's tired use of chapter headings. So fucking 90's. So fucking bad!

People like you, with your moronic box office statements, betray your lack of knowledge about the film business. IB had a production budget, it also had a marketing budget which cost almost as much. The movie is not even close to half it's money back. And then you take into consideration the exhibitors and their cut, IB is going to have a very hard time breaking even, much less making money. Don't speak of things you know not, child.

ok I liked it but I used to LOVE Tarantino's movies.

If you think Sam Fuller would have liked Inglourious Basterds, then everything Sam Fuller did in The Big Red One went completely over your head. Fuller would have been disgusted because he would have thought everything he worked toward in his filmmaking, and as a participant in World War II, was being completely ignored and twisted. The very moral ground he was trying to protect, and is blissfully ignored by filmmakers whose only knowledge of WWII comes from movies, has been obliterated. Congratulations Tarantino, Fuller is turning in his grave.

Great, great movie. The face projected onto the smoke was one of the most powerful visuals I have ever seen on film. The alternate history was shocking and thrilling. I don't know what to say, aside from... WOW. I love this movie, and I can't wait to see every incredible moment again.

Quentin Tarrantino’s Inglourious Basterds may be getting mixed reviews from leading U.S. critics; it is getting scathing reviews from the Jewish press.

The national Jewish Daily Forward calls it “Jewish revenge porn.”

In Connecticut’s Jewish Ledger, Michael Fox writes that since the film doesn’t pretend to be historically accurate, “there’s no percentage in railing against [it] as blathering, self-indulgent drivel.”

Nevertheless, he writes, Tarantino’s plot amounts to “pages and pages and pages of amusingly pointless dialogue.” He concludes, “Tarantino’s riff on Nazis and Jews may amuse and satisfy less mature audiences. For those with a deeper and fuller understanding of the Third Reich and the Holocaust, particularly one gleaned from sources other than action movies, it is shockingly superficial.”

The movie features scenes in which the “good guys” scalp German soldiers, beat them to death with baseball bats for refusing to reveal the location of comrades, carve swastikas into the foreheads of those who do cooperate, and commit suicide bombings.

Jonathan Foreman in Britain’s Jewish Chronicle comments, “There is something about the idea of inspiring holy terror by mutilation, decapitations, etc. that inevitably evokes today’s real-life masters of cruelty and demoralization by atrocity, al-Qaeda.”

Make al-Qaeda the enemy? And have our heroes scalping terrorists and beating them with baseball bats? I highly doubt it.

Everything in this movie is wasted. You feel that this movie is a cheap attempt at being Tarantino, except the problem is — it is Tarantino. It’s too long, you never give us any full character development, we know you like the Uma Thurman lookalikes, and none of your screen animation or regression scene tricks work, or were really even needed, in this movie.

Tarantino doesn’t come anywhere close to reaching his earlier great films in this wasted attempt. It’s like even Tarantino wasn’t trying with this one. After he came up with the brilliant title, he had to backfill in the rest of the story, but he only used filler instead of substance. And we get to see each piece on the screen. Pity.

And … we all already know the story of the rat and the squirrel, giving nods to the squirrel simply because of the tail. Come on, Tarantino, is this what you resort to now in telling your stories?! Waste.

The first “chapter” is surprisingly very good and very effectively contrived.

The rest of “Basterds” largely has all the heft of a Die Hard or a Dirty Harry flick – albeit with some occasionally amusing twist or let's make stereotypical fun of the English characterisation. The story is unsurprisingly completely full of holes – especially the point of just how and why do the tiny band of the “Dirty Eight” Jewish GI’s and their decidedly wooden talking southern hologram Lootenant Brangelina Pitt manage to end up supposedly racking up so many brutal killings of smallish numbers of Germans (in rural wooded settings)?

Yet in the plot they have virtually NO serious, let alone systematic attempt ever made by the Germans to hunt them down … which beggars belief. Given the film’s first chapter’s meticulous “accounting” by the extremely convincing SS Colonel of just one rural Jewish family in a tiny French town … and of course the evil genocidal German “efficiency” in the Warsaw Ghetto and elsewhere.

Even more pathetic is the plot’s unbelievable ‘ruse’ of giving Hitler just two armed guards outside his private box – and NOT ONE armed guard in the cinema’s foyer during the actual screening in the film of Goebbels’ latest propaganda effort – allowing who ever needs to (plot wise) to come and go at will, in NAZI OCCUPIED PARIS with a visiting Adolf, Goering, Borman etc for Christ sake!! Yeah – its a “fantasy” … but its a joke of a plot.

Tarantino is too clever by half in some places and woefully flip, – more like smugly contrived – in so many other places. You know with growing certainty what’s going to happen at the end, long before it happens. With few real surprises.

No seriously - dont quote Variety or Reporter or even Nikki Finke but cut n paste off IMDB... riiight...

WENN news - its what the players read...

Wake me up when you feel like making an actual point. I forgot industry people ONLY read industry mags. Same with doctors, they only read magazines about medicine! Learn something new every day.

The film was shite. No one will remember it next week. Except for people who suck QT's dick, like you.

"Dumb European cunts"... you realize that those places in Europe probably still have buildings that were demolished in the *real* war that Tarantino is using? It;s like when people trashed France for not entering Iraq - the people there actually know what real war is like.

lmao drawing comparisons of this movie to Al Qaeda. hate to break it to you, but there were Jews who were committing acts of terrorism during this time frame. obviously not so much in Germany and there were a lot of Jewish collaborators etc but who bombed the King David in '46 and killed all those people? it wasn't the A-rabs. also there were at least SEVENTEEN assassination attempts on Hitler and dozens more plots including one attempt where a lone Roman Catholic seminary student walked right up to within 20 yards of Hitler with a loaded gun during an open air parade. IMO this movie is in fact a sort of backhand comment by Tarantino on the revenge fantasies that Jews do have about Hitler and the fixation they have on rewriting everything that has to do with WWII history to have Jews front and center of everything (all of the sudden the US went to war to save the Jews... not the Brits, the Nazis' primary purpose was to exterminate Jews not to redress perceived wrongs from the Treaty of Versailles etc) And you're honestly going to tell me that Jews dont have these sort of revenge fantasies about Hitler? I mean I have friends who went to Jew school on the weekends and conducted discussions about the morality of killing Hitler to prevent WWII

Aww, snookums not wike the moobie? Aww. Went over your head? Aww. Didn't get it? Aww. Its okay. No, don't cry! There, there. There, there. Have fun bending over backwards trying to explain away the critical acclaim (87% Fresh at RT! Oh, but that's probably invalid in thine eyes as well, hmm? How amusing!) and the money its making! #1 this week. $37 million in the can - out-performing expectations. Does that make you sad? Aww. Keep it coming though, seriously, I enjoy watching self-appointed film experts (aka some 18 year old kid who took film crit 101, got a C+, and now thinks he's a filmmaker because he made a YouTube video of his friends hitting each other with lightsabers) attempt to dissemble current events to suit their own opinions! It's both sad and charming in a way; watching you flail about, sputtering, weeping, FAILing. It's like watching a maggot slowly inch up the trash bag, perhaps its a Super Maggot! Which will metamorphose into A Super Fly! Or maybe its just some fat kid in a basement furiously masturbating to pix of Megan Fox he photoshopped with boobies. Either way, you I'm enjoying your Ongoing Failure, so please continue.

That says a lot about the film. Just check out Nikki Finke's Deadline Hollywood Daily forum where people are pointing out how weak the Jews were during World War II. It doesn't matter what the argument is, Inglourious Bastards seem to empower racist maniacs into feeling they're now part of some movement to put the Jews in their place. I've already been hearing from friends how this movie seems to give the feeling of weight to Holocaust deniers, and I have to say that this is feeling more and more the case each day.

I am reviewing Inglourious Basterds on my weekly show tonight. Join us and voice your opinions. 9pm central http://www.tinyurl.com/logansrunpod

Happy Boy - "Jew school" ???? Go fuck yourself you anti-semite.

LaserPants - wow, I must have really hurt you with my post. Sorry dude, but the truth hurts. You go on some puerile rant wherein you fail to refute anything I said about your utter ignorance of the business side of filmmaking. One needn't take a class to know that exhibitors get a cut and that marketing costs a shitload. But no, dopes like you only look at the production budget and think the studio keeps all the grosses. FAIL!!! hahaha. You're such an imbecile. You make ridiculous statements like the film made half it's money back already, yet somehow I am the idiot. Gotta love bullshit AICN talkbackers who suck QT's dick for no apparent reason while being utterly and completely ignorant of the film industry.

They're bigots. Or are you one of those closet bigots that thinks Jews are not white?

It's just a fuckin movie. Anyone who takes anything in it seriously is a moron to begin with. They are reading into something that is clearly not there.

Are you really going to take all that time out of your trolling and flaming of this board to have an argument with me about semantics?

If that's the case, then why is it everywhere? Why has Jewish Daily Forward pointed out what it's doing? Or the New Yorker made an argument that's empowering Holocaust deniers, WHICH IT CLEARLY IS DOING. I'm sorry that you're too emotionally undeveloped to handle the possibilities that entertainment can have a negative impact on culture, but I doubt you have enough of an understanding about art, mechanical reproduction, filmmaking or psychology for me to explain it to you. I definitely don't have the time.

http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.com/?p=16514

http://www.newsweek.com/id/212016

http://www.studiobriefing.net/studiobriefing.net/FILM_NEWS/Entries/2009/8/21_JEWISH_CRITICS_CHIME_IN_ON_INGLOURIOUS_BASTERDS.html

i just felt it unnecessary to turn Zoller into a monster after making him the only humanized Nazi. I have no problem with her dying. I just felt that his last moment of aggression was unnecessary to the plot. Would have made more sense for her to approach him had he not gone all crazy.

Haven't heard anyone put it to words more eloquently.

I thought the movie was great. Easily right up there with Jackie Brown in my book for best QT film.

And for my money, "Death Proof" was much better than "Planet Terror".

Let me guess. 20 minutes of endless dialogue followed by 5 mintues of action. Rinse and repeat for 2 and half hours and there you have it another typical Tarantino movie.

I just believe that anyone who reads it that way is an idiot. I don't care how many articles you present me. Of course they're gonna write that shit because it gets attention. They take something negative and blow it out of proportion, that's what the media does. It's sensationalism. I'm not Jewish myself, but my fiancé is and her family are and they all loved it. Along with my Jewish friends. None of those points ever crossed their minds. Again, I GET where they're coming from, but those who take it as some anti-Semitic film are clearly missing the film's intention. You don't have to resort to insulting my artistic intelligence just because I disagreed with you. I double majored in Film and Political Science, with a masters in Law, so please fuck off.

I married two Jews and adopted three, so you know I got cred. All y'all haters who trying to come up with some weirdo reading on this movie: Tarantino himself already told us how we're supposed to read it. Why can't you just trust the man? I listened to him on Kill Bill and now that's the only movie I need to see to understand the 70s.

HAven't seen it, but when I read the script, I was fricking depressed. Not that I found it particularly anti-semetic, but that it was glorified torture porn. I hate the idea, popular since 9/11, that sadism can somehow be righteous. Call me a bleeding heart liberal if you must, but the whole idea that "when they do it, it's horrible, when we do it, it's righteous" is sickening. Yeah, it's just a movie, and that's just my opinion.

i hope you dont mind another dude saying that.

i hope you dont mind another dude saying that.

i hope you dont mind another dude saying that.

and i was just talking about your comment. it made me smile

Don't forget about apocalypse now.

I see what you're saying, and it's definitely a tough ethical question. However, isn't violence sometimes needed to counter a violent enemy?

That's fantastic Biff! Do you want to play "how many Jews I know" or do you want to cut to the chase and measure you dick to mine? Honestly, your infantile "fuck off" makes it that much more obvious how uncomfortable you get that this movie could have qualities negative enough to transcend the film experience. But it's cool, I get it. Your major in film has taught you that it's best not to read into a film, that it's just entertainment, and that the Jews you know are smarter than the Jews you don't. You know, I can't tell what you're frustrated about more, that you can't come to terms with a movie that has a really terrible message that empowers even worse people, or that you simply can't read a movie that well. Oh well, I'll be here if you want to start counting our Jews. Btw, feel free, at any time, to read those articles I posted. I mean, I can't imagine you think you know so much better than critics like Jonathan Rosenbaum who have been writing film critique and analysis for decades, that you would be too chicken shit to even hear him out...

THe problem is that revenge becomes a circle. As well, I haven't seen the finished movie, but there's the problem that the world was also at war with another major power. I'm guessing that showing the Basterds beating Japanese guys with baseball bats would probably not go over that well.

Ageed. We also can't divorce this film from the fact that is was written and produced at the height of our Guantanamo Bay/Iraq/Iran/Pakistan/torture/secret prisons/etc. debates... and Tarantino's previous film presented an argument that you beat rapists by absorbing their negative behavior and beating them with their own tools.

I don't think Tarantino cares. If he could get away with it, he would have made it about US soldiers in Iraq. I think it's time we admit that Tarantino, talented though he is, is a moral vaccuum. I just don't know if I want to see this movie. Yeah, that makes me a pussy, whatever.

the reconstructed version of Sam Fuller's The Big Red One? It's a perfect, PERFECT counterpoint to this film. The (most) complete version of the movie exists expressly to present an argument that the difference between the Nazi's and the Allies was our sense of self and morality. It hits the dehumanization of the Jews during the Holocaust dead-on in the last act, and even changes it's visual aesthetic to humanize the experience of the central characters "seeing" the eyes of the survivors, rather than turning into it a visual feast of withered and destroyed bodies. There is a similar back and forth between the "men on a mission" and the terrible lead Nazi officer, similarly to IG, but here it is precisely the differences between our two forces that define the moral argument and attempts to retain the truth about who we were in comparison the Nazi party. The movie was made post-Vietnam, which is even more fascinating because the film courts Fuller's familiar pulp characters and tone, but constantly reminds us of the presence of both the writer and the filmmaker (who even makes a cameo). Unlike most modern filmmakers to approach WWII storytelling, Fuller WAS in the war and felt he had to relate to audiences why it was so important to hold onto our humanity. You simply need to see this film, because it will prove itself extremely distinctive from the cynicism, dehumanization and casual moral disregard of most WWII films today. Anyone who tells you that IG is something Fuller would have done is completely full of shit and just dropping names to add value to their praise of IG without even thinking about what they're saying.

I remember seeing the posters as a kid and thinking "cool! Luke Skywalker's in a war movie." Probably not the reaction FUller would want.

No, Tarantino doesn't care. And you shouldn't feel obligated to see IG just because friends want to talk about it, or your co-workers need you to be cool during "Cooler talk". I really recommend that you take this discussion as an opportunity to check out the World War II films that IG is supposedly referencing (exploitation, historical or moral plays) because there are so many great films out there with so much more to offer than a random mix of dialogue, music and set pieces from infinitely superior films. Hell, I would easily recommend the original 1977 Inglorious Bastards, or the two terrific Brian G. Hutton actioners Where Eagles Dare and Kelly's Heroes, or the historically accurate The Longest Day.

Also From Here To Eternity (a little bit soapy, but good), most of Longest Day (*very* long), PRivate Ryan, and Thin Red Line. I'm surprised to say that I haven't seen a lot of WWII movies as I look back. Oh, and Pearl Harbor, which shouldn't really count.

I don't know about Tarantino, but I *do* know that Eli ROth is an utterly amoral moron. The fact that Tarantino considers him his cool young buddy says a lot about him.

I despise "torture porn" films. Refuse to see them. This was not torture porn. Not at all. In fact, it wasn't even that violent as Tarantino films go. The Nazi "scalping" was done on dead nazis, and, while the baseball bat scene was brutal, it was quick and was hardly something that would fall into the "torture porn" category.

There was even much less "foul" language in this one. Did it end with some sort of morality nugget, some sort of "what did we learn from all of this" pearl of wisdom? No, it didn't. But I wouldn't call it a moral vacuum of a film, either.

And as I said in earlier posts and others have said, the final scenes in the theatre were among the most brilliant, powerful moments of film I've ever witnessed. Did you ever tear up not because something necessarily touched you on a personal, emotional level, but simply because what you were seeing was so immaculately beautiful? That's how I felt at that theatre sequence. Just a tour de force.

So, wookie, I don't care what you smell. Get in there and don't worry about it.

Triumph of the WIll was also powerful cinema. So was Birth OF A Nation, for that matter. I understand that you have to divorce morality from art, but jesus christ, burning people alive in a movie that's supposed to be AGAINST the Holocaust?

Believe it or not, the director's cut of Hostel shows a lot more judgment and criticism towards those who exploit or torture, and the circle of violence that revenge can contribute, far more so than anything Tarantino has ever done. Yes, I'm defending aspects of Hostel, crazy isn't it? I saw the film and instantly realized they had changed the ending, because it's Wicker Man sense of disgust for the out of town main character and the punishment dealt to those with ignorance of international culture was too hard to ignore. Sure enough I found out the next day that the original ending was something to see and when the audience didn't respond well, they reshot it and destroyed the entire point of film, replacing it with the same eye for an eye shit resolution you'll see in IG. Unfortunately, Hostel II pretty much destroyed whatever opportunity Roth had to distance himself from the "torture porn" moniker or to bring any credibility to his Hostel work, leaving IG to pretty much solidify any argument people might have to avoid anything he does from this point on. It's important to note that Tarantino was a script editor and producer on Hostel though, so whatever anyone associates with torture porn and Eli Roth should be attributed to both. It's really disappointing for me to see Roth pretty much toss his credibility in the toilet now, because his Holocaust imagery in Hostel made it pretty apparent he was appalled by the images he was creating and at least attempting to create a line between what his main characters were participating in and where that attitude can lead. Unfortunately, in IG, he seems as blind as Brad Pitt to the moral vacuum. I do find it odd, though, that people seem to be projecting all their ill feelings and uncomfortable observations of IG onto Roth, considering he's just an actor in the film...

directed "Nation's Pride", the film-whithin-the-film. Interesting.

About Japanese soldiers replacing Germans. Then again, the most horrific act in that theater of the war was commited by us.

Interesting analysis... I couldn't even see either Hostel movie. My main opinion on ROth comes from the fact that in the "Book Of Lists:Horror" (good book, btw) he contributes a list of "Best Genital Mutilation Scenes" This gave me the impression that he just likes violence, period. I think the reason for the animosity is primarily because people associate Roth with Tarantino after Death Proof, which was one of the biggest disappointments by a major director in a looong time.

a lot of people forget that there was a full year between VE and VJ day. the Japanese did not give up easily.

Does anyone know the name of the song when Shosanna gets escorted by the SS officers to meet Goebbels? I loved the movie btw :)

The torture porn of IG is all over, you just choose not to see it. Quoting Mendalsohn's article When Jews Attack, "in history, Nazis carved Stars of David into the chests of rabbis before killing them; here, the "basterds" carve swastikas into the foreheads of those victims whom they leave alive." The visceral enjoyment of watching these characters enact Nazi-levels of violence on the "bad guys" is to reward the audience's, and obviously Tarantino's, taste for revenge. This film is designed at it's core to excite you through "righteous" brutality. Talking about how well the production is mounted or how the plot isn't centered on characters who torture because porn doesn't work anymore (Hostel) doesn't change that it is pornography of the eye, centering on torture.

Eli Roth, at least in press releases, is an annoying attention hound who purposefully relies on sensationalism, tastelessness and blatant self-promotion to navigate his way through the industry. It's pretty frustrating and gross, especially when you consider that he coined the term "jewsploitation" in relation to IG. Oddly enough, if you corner him and talk to him personally, he drops the bullshit pretty quick and will engage you on a far higher intellectual level. I wish I could describe his last film the same way...

If I'd heard both applause and booing at the end of the movie, that would have been more remarkable to me. As it was, there was scattered applause at the end of the matinee I saw. I don't know how the silent majority felt about it. Plenty of laughter during some scenes, and occasional sounds of revulsion during other moments.

If the film had been what the trailers let on to be, then perhaps a Nazi "torture porn" movie might have been the end result. But this isn't it. It's not me "choosing not to see it." I have never seen an Eli Roth-directed film and CHOOSE not to, because those films have been the definition of toruture porn to me, and I despise them. So you're not talking to someone who likes that sort of thing to begin with.

The Basterds were a very small part of this film. Their exploits were TALKED about more than they were shown. To me, the heart of the movie was Shoshanna and her story. And what she did in the theatre, from the point of view of her character, I have zero problem with. Wookie, you're really drawing some sort of parallel between burning Nazi officers, AND HITLER, in a theatre and the burning of Jews in the ovens of concentration camps?? Sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. In fact, it's preposterous.

This woman's family had been massacred, along with probably hundreds of friends and relatives. She had a chance for a measure of revenge, and she took it in the only way available to her. And it was a thing of beauty to see that her character actually ended the war and helped destroy the most ruthless maniac in recorded history.

Then again, you haven't even SEEN the movie, am I correct?

I'm pretty positive there is no mention if Japan. At least that I can remember..

You're completely emotionally dependent upon fictionalized entertainment to find both a carthesis involving real life genocide and morality that has no basis in fact and is meant to stimulate your pleasure centers... as it clearly did. So much so that any argument that attempts to break the execution down into form and intent leaves you with single word responses like "ridiculous". If you really want to use the "righteous" context of the characters of Shoshanna and the Basterds and their assassination of Hitler in an argument involving revisionism of the Holocaust in storytelling and using visceral violence as reward to the audience, you're not going to get anywhere here. No woman's family has been massacred. Nobody actually ended the war. You can't remove yourself from the story to see what the aesthetic is doing.

I really wish Tarantino made films more often, cause he's one of the best filmmakers working today. I really do not understand some of the hate that he tends to generate in people. If yo don't like his films, fine, but some folks out there really seem to want this guy dead for some reason. Yet they don't feel the same way towards other directors who constantly make bad films. Directors like Brett Ratner and Uwe Boll, there are plently more, but I don't know their names because they make shit. For the QT haters out there, answer me this please. Who would you rather continue to have a career, Tarantino or Brett Ratner? And why?

Yes, Tarantino has stripped us bare as the hypocrites that we all are! We are all guilty of reveling in the deaths of all those Nazis just as we're caught turning up our noses and loathing Zoller for doing the same. All of us, of course, except for someone as highly enlightened and above the rest of us sheep-like peons as you obviously are. Self-righteous bitch. Guys like you *almost* make me want the Ann Coulters and the Bill O'Reillys of the world to win the media war. Go choke on your cunt juice.

Very few in filmmaking could do what he did with some of those scenes in a film. You spend what seems like 20 minutes - probably less but it's damn tense- watching 2 guys talking at a table and it proved way more exciting that most entire films. The other big scene in the basement was amazing. I liked the end too. Good on him!

Thanks! I agree with you on Death Proof, though I hardly found that entry of the Tarantino ouvre to be nearly a tenth as exhilarating as Basterds was. Also, didn't you just love that music that was playing over the scene when Shoshanna kneels over the prone Zoller, and is about to lovingly touch him? Great fucking movie making. Can't wait for his next.

To break it down in cinematic language, the QT Haters are all the Salieris of the world who just CAN'T STAND to see that the Lord God has seen fit to place His artistic vision in the hands of such an enfant terrible as Tarantino often comes across as. QT truly is Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart as channeled by Tom Hulce.

Surprised no one has pointed out that Laurent is far more Deneuve than Uma. Also, Landa is clearly gay and even tries to have his lover "spared." Great movie.

...not apologize for. Not nit-pick. Not defend. Those of us who fall under the spell of these films "get it." That's what makes it art. It's not an intellectual admiration that folks have for, say, District 9. It's love. And it's why we watch movies.

You continue to be wrong. First off, there was no "one word" response of "ridiculous," so if you're going to try to use the tired, lame conceit of "when you're beaten intellectually, you can only respond with insults" as a way to buttress your balsawood-thin arguments, then, well, you're not going to get anywhere here.

Now, who said this film was meant to be some sort of Holocaust revisionism? This film is not ABOUT the Holocaust. It is about characters and their individual place in history during which the Holocaust occured. It's a complete work of fiction, obviously, and I personally love the revisionist approach to the War, i.e. the assassination of Hitler. To my knowledge, that's never been done before. A sacred cow that no one dared milk. I found it exhilarating to see him die, not because of the CATHARSIS (which I'm assuming is the word you were going for there) of watching an "evil Nazi" be riddled with bullets, but for the simple emotional factor of considering something that "might have been," and what that event could've meant to history. Bravo, Tarantino.

Now, you claimed that torture porn was "all through" this film, which I find to be idiocy. But please, show me where I'm wrong. Where, ALL THROUGH this film, can torture porn be found?

The only thing you mentioned was the carving of the swastikas into the Nazi foreheads. We see this act occur ONLY ONCE, at the very end of the film, and I'd hardly call it torture. (Your correlation between that act and what was done to the Rabbis, as if the two are equally evil and repugnant, I completely disagree with, but that's for another argument.)

So, maybe the bat scene? Brutal, yes, but torture? No, especially considering the officer was dead, more than likely, after the first hit.

The scalping? They were taken from dead soldiers who were shot, so, no torture there, either.

And that about sums up the bulk of the violence in the film, save for the ending and the other shootings that occur.

This is not a torture porn film. You may find it offensive on other grounds. If so, I DO offer a one-word retort: "Whatever."

But you have proven nothing regarding the notion that this film is "full of torture porn," nor can you.

Death Proof buzzes with life and tension. Its completely unique, even within the Tarantino universe. But IB is the best by far.

Tarantino really is Hulce as Mozart. Haters just can't wrap their mind around a chatterbox goofball being so effortlessly, ridiculously gifted.

"end the war?" um, there was still another part of the war going on in Japan. And seriously, what the hell is that supposed to mean? That in order to end a war, we should act as bad as the people who started it? As for the thing about locking them in the burning building, it was pointed out not by me but by a Newsweek writer who is also a Holocaust scholar. You do know that that was the sort of things the Nazis did?

I love how Inglorious Basterds forces American movie audiences into watching what is essentially five European art-house films. There was even an argument in a kitchen! All around me the forces of the Idiocracy grumbled as scene after scene of well c...rafted cinema refused to be dumbed down for them. They hated every minute of it! I'm putting in a Goddard film right now in celebration.

he cant make a genuine genre picture - try as he might to convince us he can with all his talk show guest bluster - kill bill got the ball rolling - it plus deathproof and now basterds are all cut from the same cloth - theyre not genuine to their respective genres or realities - theyre all a specific genre filtered through qt's cherry picked cinematic sensibilities - the dirty dozen is a real ww2 action movie with balls, no irony parody or inside jokes - none of qt's last 3 are authentic to their genres or settings/realities - he made a ww2 men on a mission flick with no real mission in the movie and full of modern vernacular and a david bowie song (taken from cat people no less) - id love to see him apply his "talent" to making a real ww2 actioner or a sci fi flick or horror flick... without all the winking at the audience bs - even the name had to be a variation on an existing b-movie - why? - enough homage and parody - make a real fucking movie already - im sick of his zeitgeist obsessed collages

I suppose you would have no probolem then, with "Inglourious Basterds II" in which lovable AMericans, all picked because they had relatives who died in 9/11, going into Iraq and torturing arabs? Or, even better, "Ignlourious Nahzis," in which the relatives of the people killed in the first movie go and hunt down Americans? Where does it fucking end?

I was mesmerized by every minute of District 9. It made me think, sure, but there was movie love there, too. Enough of this "pure cinema" bullshit. Images actually have meaning, and these ones go out across the world. The notion of "this is how the war should have ended" is absolutely frightening, becauuse it suggests that free nations have to sacrifice their souls to win the war.

but he's no fricking mozart.

I think Tarantino tried to make a critic proof movie. Jews killing nazis would hopefully get most of the predominatly jewish run hollywood to like it and having all the film references and final scene set in the cinema woild get the movie critics to like it. The action and violence would get all the "geeks" to like it. Didnt quite work out. On the whole it was an okay movie not great and not his worst. The fact that Hilter and all the top Nazi brass were so acsessible in the theatre was annoying. It made the plot very unbeleivable. I wish the movie was a little more realistic. Also some of the acting was weak. Christoph Waltz was great.

Well Behemoth as you well know from being a human being, the cycle of violence never ends. Never. No need to be pissed at Tarantino, and I'm sure he won't be making any Basterd sequels. No need to. Humans will eventually have a "sequel" to World War II. You can bet on that.

Where in my post did I say "this is how the war should have ended?" Where do I say "pure cinema" (what does that even mean?) I'm thinking perhaps you've responded to the wrong post?

Look--the guy had one major goal, like any film-maker--to be provocative. Which he clearly was. I teach history and have for 27 years, including a WWII class.You want historically accurate and incredibly well done drama about the holocaust? Rent "Band of Brothers" and watch the episode titled "Why we fight". This was not meant to be that. The irony and the provocation of the ending-Jews incinerating Nazis speaks for itself and will stir up all sorts of hornets nests. That's what any provacateur does, and that's what Tarantino is. Love him or hate him. And, BTW--the Brits DID have a commando unit of Jewish soldiers at the end of the war. You can read this link to inform yousleves about the real story: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-08-09/my-father-the-inglourious-basterd/ And finally, while our dropping of the atom bomb was certainly a horrifying act, it was one of many. Granted, the final one, but let us not forget Japan's rape of Nanking or the Bataan Death march to name a few. EVERY nation involved in that war, winners and losers crossed the line, which is why even using the term "good war" is an unfortunate oxymoron. Take the film for what it is--and it certainly is NOT, nor is it meant to be history.

...in Last Crusdade? What if the Basterds found Harrison Ford dressed up as a Nazi and brutally tortured him?

Now that's revisionist history with a statement about cinema that you can get behind!!

I apologize for drawing you into it.

Not really disappointed since my expectations were low. Brad Pitt was terrible as I predicted, only thankful his screen time was limited. Nothing about this movie is extraordinary or worth remembering.

That's ridiculous. You can't have it both ways, playing off the horror of the Holocaust and thn say "ah, it's just a movie, not history." ]

Cause I don't wanna waste any more keystrokes on you, I'm cutting and pasting what I wrote to Cutter99 - suck on this shit!: "Tarantino has stripped us bare as the hypocrites that we all are! We are all guilty of reveling in the deaths of all those Nazis just as we're caught turning up our noses and loathing Zoller for doing the same. All of us, of course, except for someone as highly enlightened and above the rest of us sheep-like peons as you obviously are. Self-righteous bitch. Guys like you *almost* make me want the Ann Coulters and the Bill O'Reillys of the world to win the media war. Go choke on your cunt juice.

Bite me. So I actuallky think about the meaning of a movie rather than just watching it, and somehow that makes me wrong? Give me a fucking break.

Sight And Sound just released their list of "Mad, Bad, and Dangerous Auteurs", and Tarantino didn't even make the list. Because, frankly, when it comes to "uncompromising provocateurs", he's lightweight compared with Lynch, Jodoworsky and Herzog.

hahaha, had a blast. i think it's a formidable film... but kill bill is still his masterpiece in my humble opinion.

So, then, Something like "The Devil's Arithmetic" or "Life is Beautiful" which "played off the horror of the Holocaust" and were equally historically inaccurate you'd find equally horrible? WTF is your point-that anything having to do with the Nazis and that period has to be painstakingly accurate historically or it's vile crap? I guess that would include "The Dirty Dozen" (lots of Nazis burned to death while helpless there), "Saving Private Ryan",and a few dozen others? How about Lina Wertmuller's "The Seven Beauties" or "Europa, Europa" ? And the fact is that free nations DID sacrifice their souls to win that war.Every nation, including the US crossed the line to the point where terror bombing civillians was considered a necessary evil. And I don't mean just Hiroshima and Nagasaki--we killed more civillians firebombing Dresden, Berlin, Yokohama, Tokyo than we did in both atom bomb blasts combined. The Brits were just as involved. particularly with Dresden.That is, unfortunately, what it took to win that war. So some revenge fantasy alternative presented by a quirky American film maker is child's play to the reality of what actually did happen. War is hell-there's little noble or glorious about it, but it is sometimes an unfortunate necessity, which is whay you'd better make damned sure you're gong in for the right reasons when you do.

Just got back from seeing the "BarStewards" this evening and as I predicted after seeing the trailers for this a few months ago, I feel a bit conflicted.

I think overall that it is a fine movie, there is plenty to admire from the muti-layered story to the inspired casting (particularly Christoph Waltz who just steals the movie).

The parts that give me pause are the basterds going about their work and some aspects of the finale. Nobody is suggesting that the Nazi's didn't deserve retribution for the holocaust but there is a fine line between justice and sinking to their level. I'd argue that the Germans in WWII movies (like this one) are dehumanised so that we can do all kinds of horrific things to them and not feel bad. interestingly, that is precisely what the Nazi's did to the Jews, Gypsy's, homosexuals etc so that they could exterminate them.

WWII was basically Good Versus Evil, employing the sort of methods the SS might use blurs the line somewhat. My dear departed Gran lived through the war and the The blitz and she hated the Germans but I can only imagine what she would have made of this movie...

As for the finale, I did feel trepidation as it approached having a pretty good idea how it would play out. Shosanna's revenge was poetic and inspired. The face projected onto the smoke and flame will remain with me for a long time. What will also remain with me were the images of women being machine gunned. The bit where Goebbel's mistress gets about a full clip emptied in to her was just disturbing, also when the audience are climbing over the seats, scrambling to get out, Donnie and Ulmar shooting them like fish in a barrel. I noticed a few wives and girlfriends getting riddled.

Pretty unsettling stuff.

was the basterds plan a suicide mission?

Actually, a lot of people did think :Life Is Beautiful was pretty vile. As for the other examples you give, there's a big difference between taking some liberties with history and throwing the book out the fricking window. Surely you know that. And you're right about the bombing of cities, but so what? Does that mean all bets are off? And show me one - one movie -that celebrates the firebombing of Dresden or the atomic bombs.

Did you happen to read the piece on Basterds in Film Comment? Addresses the controversy in an interesting way. The writer ultimately defends the merits of the film so I don't imagine you will agree with the arguments, but still interesting. Haven't seen the Sight and Sound article but I find those "best" lists to be insufferable. And for whatever reason, British publications seem to do them constantly for movies and music. I find it to be a lot of name-checking without any insight.

you're right that they do too many lists, and i'll admit that half the names I've never even heard of, but Ken Russell (to name another on the list) makes Tarantino look like Stephen Sommers.

I should check this out. I realize I'm taking this way too seriously, and I respect that a lot of people disagree. But I refuse to apologize for thinking that the basic idea of this movie is pretty damn wrong.

What you said reminds me of when Uday and Qsay Hussein were killed and their pictures paraded around the world. Few would mourn Saddam's sons, but what was little noted was that they also killed Saddam's 14-year-old *grandson* who reportedly ran into the compound because he saw his dad getting killed.

It was FAN-FUCKING-TASTIC!

Give Christoph Waltz the oscar today.

I've never walked out of a movie theater with a bigger smile on my face.

It's tremendous film with balls.

That opening scene on the dairy farm, and that never ending, tension grinding, bar scene are worth the price of admission alone.

Beautiful, just beautiful. :)

As the FC article points out, much of the critical establishment at Cannes felt Tarantino shouldn't have "gone there." Unfortunately, Film Comment is not online so you will have to check it out at Borders, etc. It's interesting because Tarantino is the first major post-Boomer director to take on WWII. In my opinion, he isn't shackled by the reverence treated by the boomers, which is really about them reconciling your relationships with their fathers. As a "bastard" himself, Tarantino perhaps doesn't feel beholden to bowing down the the Greatest Generation. I digress but its a point thats been on my mind since I saw it yesterday. I don't bring it up to defend him, only to address it from a sociological perspective I haven't read or discussed before.

I perfectly understand the people who don't like this film.

It's being advertised as another Dirty Dozen.

It's not.

You're either the type of person that is going to let Tarantino "scalp" you, or you're not.

Personally, I love Sergio Leone and François Truffaut.

That's why I appreciate this movie so much.

Your comments are valid. I never thought about the post-Boomer thing. Suddenly I have this fear that Eli Roth will make a feel-good movie about the My Lai massacre.

"The Dirty Dozen has, essentially, the very same ending as "Inglorious" Actually, worse in many ways since the Nazi officers are trapped,some with with family members . They all get incinerated, but we are still prompted by the film-makers to mourn the deaths of the members of the Dozen who die (and please don't anyone give me any shit about spoilers, the flick is over 40 years old). Dozens of Germans burned to death while helpless, but let's all get teary-eyed as Jimmy Brown sprints to the halftrack and get machine gunned.Now THAT film took itself seriously, which I really don't think anyone can accuse this film of doing. Which is worse? How about "The Seven Beauties" ? Give that one a gander if you haven't seen it. WAY more provacative than anything here and it deals directly with death camps and what some people are willing to do to "survive". Look--I half agree with you.I know I'm going to now spend half the damned school year trying to convince my students that freaking Eli Roth didn't blow Hitler's face off to end WWII and the other half saying "no, we will NOT be watching Inglorious Baterds when we get to WWII". But I have less of a problem with something that in no way proports to be history than the plethora of films that did make that claim and failed miserably-Pearl Harbor, U571, the Battle of the Bulge, Enemy at the Gates,and on and on and on.As far as I am concerned, the only one who got this right was Clint Eastwood, doing the mirror image "Flags..." and "Letters..." You root for the soldiers in both films, even thogh they are actually fighting against each other--not to win, but just to survive, which is what this all really comes down to. I'm NEVER expecting that level of thoughtfulness from a QT flick.

Yeah, I get your point. and I don't give a shit about spoilers, ever. Don't get me started on U571- I'm a codebreaking nut, ?Never saw Flags.., but Letters... fucked me up royally. the scene with the schoolkids singing... my god.

When you describe your class there, it sounds like something out of the Simpsons.

Whereas Tarantino uses freshly-scrubbed all AMerican Jewish kids whom we're supposed to root for. I dunno, movies are a weird thing.

Wish you were my history teacher when I as in school! But seriously, by opening the film with "Once upon a time in Nazi occupied France" serves two functions: 1. What you are about to see is as much, if not more of a spaghetti western as a war film 2. It's an alternate fantasy version. I'm not calling Tarantino a scholar by any stretch, but he's more literate than some folks give him credit for. During the card game, one of the literary characters is Winnetou- a popular Apache hero written by a German who never stepped foot on American soil ;) Tarantino is saying, "relax folks. Yes, I got my knowledge of WWII from watching movies...now here's my take on it."

The whole thing was a beautifully shot and acted stress test. Just waiting for each scene to eventually explode... was... an awesome experience. I was also considering the idea that throughout that time and place in the world it must've always felt that tense, with a sense that you don't know what is going to happen next, but whatever it is... it'll be huge, traumatic and life changing. So I propose that QT better captured WWII from an EMOTIONAL standpoint than many every had. However, what do I know about what WWII felt like? Just my initial thoughts...

I don't know about the Boomer bow-down thing. Eastwood is older than that and showed the Americans killing unarmed Japanese, and Spielberg showed Americans doing the same to germans in SPR ("Look I washed for supper...")both of which got quite a pasting in certain circles for doing so when those films came out. What QT has said, essentially,is "screw history", which is another thing all together and not the province of any specific generation of filmakers-Oliver Stone did the same thing in JFK, really.I mean, this film DOES start with "Once upon a time..." like any fairy tale.

The Winnetou observation came from the Film Comment article. I am no expert in German literature.

Who really cares? It's entertainment. Not history. (although history can be entertaining) If anyone is stupid enough to not separate a QT film from history, they shouldn't leave the house. Nor do I think they would go outside since all the recent zombie outbreaks, alien invasions, super-villains, meteors, cartoon characters and big blue dicks running around. IT'S. A. FUCKING. MOVIE.

It's a movie. People forget that shit sometimes. I'd rather open up the history books and read he died in a theater in Paris anyway. When Eli Roth started shooting him in the face that was fucking CLASSIC.

I got the chills. Big time.

You'd be amazed how spot-on the Simpsons has it in terms of what I often see on a daily basis. I don't show "Flags..." in my WWII class, but I do show "Letters..." because all the kids have seen the former but few the latter. I've actually had kids thank me later because they were finally able to see the Japanese as human beings. Of course, a lot of what they did leading up to that point certainly gave them a deserved reputation. If you get the chance and are so inclined, try to watch the two back to back, and you'll get a real sense of what a genius masterpiece the pair, together, really are--at least in my opinion. And, for the record, I do respect the fact that you take the historical aspect of this seriously. I guess with QT, I just can't. I have to kind of accept or reject this on an entirely different basis.

and say how outraged, disgusted and offended I was at the depiction of MY PEOPLE in 300. First of all, it wasn't 300 Spartans, it was 297. I'm writing Zach Synder a letter...

were fucking amazing i was really disappointed by death proof, but this movie made up for it and then some

I'd love to hear what directors you dig. So we can come on here and trash the fucking shit out of them. Oh wait, I forgot. You're waiting for the fucking 'Expendables' movie. A film that'll star a bunch of "action heroes" from the 1980's still pretending to be action heroes. Fuck the fuck off.

<>> You're an absolute idiot for making such a stupid comment or for jumping to this assinine conclusion based on ANYTHING I've said.

As I've said here in just about every post, I did NOT want to see a film that glorified the torture of Nazis, or a film that used Nazis solely for the excuse of showing two hours of vile torture and brutality.

And that's not the movie I saw, thankfully.

As I've said again, many times, the heart of this movie, what made it work for me was the story of Shoshanna, not the Basterds. Yeah, they were interesting characters, but it was the story of Shoshanna that captured my heart.

And again, comparing the burning of a theatre with the incineration of Jews is complete and utter STUPIDITY on your part. You'd have a point if the Basterds captured a bunch of Nazis and decided to brutally burn them alive for sport. That's not what happened here. But you wouldn't know that because YOU HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN THE FUCKING MOVIE.

Let me spell it out for you. Shoshanna was just trying to live her life when Goebbells himself decides to bring the top Nazi officers, INCLUDING HITLER, to her theatre. She hatches a plot to kill them, the most evil scum on the face of the earth at the time. THe only way she can do that is to burn down the fucking theatre. And yeah, there was a certain, satisfying irony to it. Unless, of course, you don't believe that Hitler, Goebells, et. al. deserved to die. I thought it was absolute cinematic beauty, that scene.

So no, no one wants to see American victims of 9/11 go torture Iraqis, jackass. You're talking about the mindless "eye for an eye" mentality that exists among centuries-old feuds like the one between Israel and Palestine. This movie was dealing with an individual gaining a measure of revenge against a group of other INDIVIDUALS who were directly responsible for the death of her family and for the genocide of millions. If she had just gone after random Germans citizens, then yeah, you might have a point. But she killed a room FULL of the higest level Nazis of the time. If this movie HAD been actual history, I guaran-fucking-tee you that historians would be celebrating Shoshanna and what she did, not criticizing her for "using methods that were too distastefully similar to how Jews were killed in concentration camps."

What a fucking moronic viewpoint.

Unbelievable that you have more posts on this TB than just about anyone and you HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN THE FILM. Pathetic.