Printable View
There's gonna be a red carpet premiere of Quentin Tarantino's latest work at the Scotiabank Cineplex next Wednesday night and I'll be there.
QT and Eli Roth will be there in person.
Hella yeah.
Maybe I can get an autograph, photos.
I'll let you know how it goes.
I just read one review and the writer said that this film is the one where Tarantino goes from director to MASTER.
I'm getting pumped...
I saw it yesterday but am holding my review till the US opening day. You have reason to be pumped. It's got a lot going on it it. The trailer if you have seen it is a bit misleading, just shows one good moment from it. But I like that. A trailer that doesn't give it all away -- probalby another example of Tarantino's smart directorial control.
I went to the Canadian Premiere of Inglourious Basterds last night. (I'm not telling you how I got two passes- that's my little secret) and Quentin Tarantino and Eli Roth were on hand to introduce the film, which packs one hell of a wallop!
I was late in getting there (I got there ten minutes before showtime) and Quentin was outside the Scotiabank theatre, on the red carpet, talking to reporters. It was a nice little gala- army camoflage nets up, vintage WWII ammo boxes everywhere, "extras" in vintage uniforms and ladies dolled up to look like Miss Hammersmarck? And a deuce-and-half army truck parked right near the entrance. It was awesome, and of course, I decided not to take any pictures because I wanted to get into the theatre and I figured I'll be able to get shots with QT and the setting outside after the movie. Not to be. Security was INSANE.
They took my camera. They took everybody's camera. Everybody's cell phone. Any suspicious looking backpacks- not going in. You get the airport screening with the metal detector, the whole nine yards. I was waiting for the body cavity search.
They were not fucking around with the recording of the movie.
No twittering no nothing.
This was one sold-out capacity crowd that I didn't mind being in.
Even though I was in the very first row, looking straight up the whole time, it kicked ass because I was five feet from Quentin and Eli as they introduced the film onstage.
They were introduced by the host of Canada A.M. and Quentin came out first, to a roar of applause. He looked great, black suit jacket with a t-shirt that had some kind of cartoon character on it, black slacks and the coolest pair of dress shoes I've ever seen. They were black, with silver melded into them and they were really shiny. I want to know where he got them.
He said he loves Toronto and that he was first here to promote Reservoir Dogs in 1992, was back in '94 for Four Rooms, was back again for his girlfriend Mira Sorvino's premiere, and other times since. He said he's been in many of Toronto's bars. Awesome. He introduced Eli Roth (to another round of applause) and Eli said he loves Toronto too because at the premiere screening of Cabin Fever two ambulances were summoned.
He praised "working with this man" and pointing to Quentin, saying We're all fans, right?.
Then Quentin got the audience to shout in unison:
ELI ROTH YOU'RE A BASTERD!!!!
Then he introduced the movie shouting: GET READY FOR INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS!, while throwing the microphone down like a gauntlet, so hard it bounced and rolled off the stage to the floor.
I couldn't believe I was actually there.
I'd give you a review now, but Chris is waiting for the opening next week to say anything and so will I.
Wow! I had no idea there would be a "Canadian premiere" of INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS at this point in time -- did you? When did you find out about this? . You're luckier than I was now. Your account shows this was a most vivid and memorable event. Obviously everything was done to insure that.
I think everybody involved is stoked about this show. As you probably know, or at least as is my impression, Tarantino took it on the chin for this at Cannes. I may be wrong but I don't think it was very well received there generally, though the Variety reivew is very favorable. This gave the misleading impression that the film was a disappointment. I think you'd agree that's not the case.
Forget about QT's shiny shoes -- they most probably come from the megabucks movie bigwig shop!
The showing I went to was more full than press screenings out here usually are, but not a full house by any means and tame stuff compared to what you witnessed.
Thanks for holding your remarks to the opening day.
It's hard to hold back on saying anything.
I wanna blast with both barrels...
I heard about it over a week ago and an angel gave me two passes. To prove I was there, I'll post pics on facebook of the pass I didn't use and the ticket of the one I did.
I'm not shitting you, I was front fucking row.
The audience was great. They seemed to get it that this was a special evening. You could hear a pin drop when it started and everyone reacted to the scenes/chapters in the way I would hope intelligent people would. Especially three sequences in particular...Holy fucking shit!
This film surprised me very much.
I was not really expecting what ended up being the finished picture. Sure it's Tarantino, all the way (Baby!), but this one is quite different from the others..you can tell he's shifted gears in his career. Some shots are glorious indeed. The women..Great God almighty...
I'm still in shock that I was 5 feet from the man last night and that I was actually at the premiere. It must be a dream. lol
You sly dog, you sure trumped my relatively quiet (if well filled) San Francisco press screening with this one. Let's not tell too much about the actual film till opening day though, please.
No more posts from me on it until then.
Hey, I said in my opening post here that I was going.
Nobody seemed to care...lol
Sorry I missed that. But did you give the date? I did not imagine it would be over a week in advance of the general opening date.
I love your vivid account of the experience Johann. Thanks. I'll probably come a bit late to the discussion of the movie. I am playing catch up. I don't remember August being so crammed with interesting movies. I still haven't seen JULIE AND JULIA and IN THE LOOP, for instance. And the new Miyazaki has arrived. And DISTRICT 9 looks like a must-see. I also want to rewatch MOON because I dozed off for about 10 minutes. Does that ever happen to anyone else?
Definitely JULIE & JULIE AND IN THE LOOP need to be seen. They are all dwarfed by INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS though. It and Jarmusch's THE LIMITS OF CONTROL are the two most exciting new American films of the summer. Didn't know about DISTRICT 9 but will see it, thanks for the heads-up on that. PONYO is not my thing, but I'm sure it's good if it's by Miyazaki.
I would also recommend, seen in NYC recently:
LORNA'S SILENCE (Dardennes)
LOREN CASS (Eric Fuller)
THE ENGLISH SURGEON (Geofrey Smith)
THE VANISHED EMPIRE (Karen Shakhnazarov)
FLAME AND CITRON (Ole Christian Madsen)
SOMERS TOWN (Shane Meadows)
As I said in my review in late June of "Moon doesn't dazzle but gives pleasure in its low-keyed conviction." I didn't doze off during it and rarely do but it can happen when one is very tired. It happened to me a bit during Park Chan-wook's Thirst. (I have not reviewed it.)
Chris is right with saying that Jarmusch and Tarantino have delivered the exciting goods.
But let's not forget Michael Mann and his brilliant Public Enemies, still my favorite film of the year.
Jarmusch's film is possibly the greatest work of the year too.
This is great year for cinema.
And it ain't over.
This invitation came in to get a front-of-the-line pass. I probably will miss it though I'd like to see Tarantino.I have a complete press kit for the film which has a lot of interesting anecdotes about the making of.Quote:
Woohoo! I’ve been able to create some room in my special screening of INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS featuring a Q&A with Quentin Tarantino. It’s after deadline, but I’m still happy to invite you to attend. (Sorry I couldn’t get this cleared before everyone attended the press screenings.) This will not be a typical screening, so please read the following very carefully.
IMPORTANT
· We are NOT accepting guests (Sorry! Please don’t ask.)
· We will NOT have a reserved press section. I can give you front-of-line access, but seating will be open soarrive early.
· RSVPs are for the entire event. No one will be admitted once the screening starts, and no one will be admitted just for the Q&A.
· There will not be a red carpet, nor will there be photo or interview opportunities at the event.
· Please do not forward this invite to anyone. We are not accepting new press list inclusions to be considered for this screening.
How to RSVP:
Please reply directly to me! You absolutely must have an RSVP confirmation from me to attend.
INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS featuring Quentin Tarantino Q&A
Wednesday, August 19
7:00 PM
Castro Theater
429 Castro St
San Francisco
Doors will open at approx 5:45 PM. General audience admission will begin at 6:15 PM.
The Castro is a classic big movie house and this would be fun, if a big hectic, but not worth the hassle for me given that it's hard to get there and I've already seen the movie. (I may see it again later; probably will, but later would be better.)
Anyway Johann, nothing could beat your description above anyway. But this is another sign of the showmanship surrounding the opening of this movie.
I wish I could see Tarantino at the NYFF, but that is not to be. It's Cannes or nothing with him. He's a Cannes boy. Tarantino loves this place. "There's no place like Cannes," he said at the press conference for his latest, "Inglourious Basterds," a May 20 article opens.* (He was at that point perhaps referring not just to the festival in general, though that has served him well, bu to specifically to the Grand Lumiere theater where the premiere of INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS was about to be shown to a full house.) Fifteen years ago PULP FICTION won the Golden Palm at Cannes -- and went on to make a lot of money. in the US, a rare combination. But Cannes reviews of the film were mixed and some were terrible. In perhaps the worst one, Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian said it was "an armour-plated turkey," "Gott awful," "a bore." (Some reports are there were tweaks based on Cannes reactions.)
*Guess who came through with a fair, balanced, and informative review of the movie at Cannes time? Michael Phillips of the Chicago Tribune, he of the new TV At the Movies duo with A.E. Scott.
Quotes from Tarantino in recent interviews (LA. dateline, but the photo and the newspaper are Canadian and refer to the recent Toronto appearance).
Tarantino is doing a blitzkreig of premieres for this film all over the world. Canada is just one stop. He was here only for the one night. And yes, he took it on the chin at Cannes.
Not well received there. Aside from acting honors.
Chris, do you think that the "Jew Hunter" deserved his Best Actor award at Cannes? I sure did. What a delicious performance...
Critics who pan it are idiots. Anyone who pans it is an idiot.
If you know Tarantino's M.O. (i'e. penchant for glorified violence) then stay the fuck away from the theatre! It ain't for you, no way no how!
Nothing boring about this.
I think QT pulled a Kubrick move- "Don't give 'em what they want. Give 'em what they don't know they want yet".
Tarantino fans will not be disappointed.
You have to be patient while watching this one.
A freight train is waiting...
Ha! Well, there's a certain amount of politics always, but I think Christoph Waltz chews up the scenery with appropriate delight. He's very good in the role and riveting to watch. I don't even know what the other nominees were for this award. It doesn't seem very easy to find the list of them. It appears that Waltz is another actor whose career Tarantino has rehabilitated, and Waltz acknowledged that: "You gave me my vocation back," he said in accepting the award.
Today I watched a profile of Tarantino that was put together by a local TV station. They used clips from the premiere and Tarantino praises Toronto's audiences: (paraphrasing) I love taking my films to Toronto. Some cities you go "Ah, I don't want to take my movie there". But Toronto..Toronto moviegoers are up for anything. A zombie movie, one of my movies, a foreign film- they're THERE. And I don't mean just for the Toronto Film Festival. Toronto has perfect audiences. I loved how they reacted to "Basterds" tonight.
So he watched us watch his movie!
Huzzah!
And Eli Roth was interviewed as well, saying how he wants to bring to his sets the same kind of "knowing your character" that QT made every one of the cast do. Apparently he has group meetings, where they flesh out characters BEFORE any read-throughs or costumes or sets or anything. Roth said he would grill you on your character: "What's your history? How did you feel about so and so joining the Basterds? How would you react if this happened? or that?" Eli said he's never worked on a movie where that kind of "getting into character" was emphasized like it was with Tarantino. He said by the time cameras started rolling everybody knew what was going on, what everybody else's motivations or roles were. It made it that much easier to go for it.
***EDIT*** I talked to one of the ticket taker staff members at the Scotiabank theatre when I went to see District 9 and he said that Tarantino was not in the movie theatre very long that night.
He worked the premiere and he said that Quentin & Eli left fairly soon after the movie started, within a half hour. So take from that what you will...
I don't think it's news that Tarantino's an actor's director. He has done wonderful things for actors. His casting is not only brilliant, but enormously human, in the way he revives careers and plays around with the cast member's personal histories and resumes in tuning their roles.
I've heard long ago that Toronto was a great movie town. So naturally it would be a great place to bring a new movie and promote it.
The method of working actors into their roles is not unique with Tarantino (think of Mike Leigh) but certainly is one that often improves actors' experiences.
I think this is recent. If it's not, correct me. The byline on KungFu Cinema is "by Mark Pollard | August 17, 2009." Tarantino has made a list of his 20 favorite films since 1992 when he became a director himself. You can get him presenting them on YouTube here. (Actually that is the KungFu Cinema site's page for it.) This list begins with his overall favorite and the rest are alphabetical (a practice I agree with):Watch the video to get his special favorites on the list and why he cose some of the odd ones. Others, he simply lists without explanation. BOOGIE NIGHTS, FIGHT CLUB, THE INSIDER, and LOST IN TRANSLATION he doesn't say anything about unfortuantely. Not here anyway.Quote:
1. BATTLE ROYALE
2. ANYTHING ELSE
3. AUDITION
4. THE BLADE
5. BOOGIE NIGHTS
6. DAZED AND CONFUSED
7. DOGVILLE
8. FIGHT CLUB
9. FRIDAY
10. THE HOST
11. THE INSIDER
12. JSA
13. LOST IN TRANSLATION
14. THE MATRIX
15. MEMORIES OF MURDER
16. POLICE STORY 3: SUPERCOP
17. SHAUN OF THE DEAD
18. SPEED
19. TEAM AMERICA
20. UNBREAKABLE
Thanks for that link. I enjoyed hearing his "20 faves".
Half on his list I haven't seen.
They just moved up on my must-see ledger.
I like his praise of Trier's Dogville and of the stunts in Supercop.
High praise there.
But of all films on his list, Battle Royale is the one I'm keenest to see. I'm with him in his praise of Unbreakable
(underrated Shyamalannadingdong movie- forgot about that one).
You can tell that Quentin likes to ENJOY a movie, not be too too critical.
I don't share QT's tastes, but I like what comes out of them through him. I don't really like Dogville either. But so what? Von Trier is an original too, and I respect and over time have begun to understand him. I thought I said that Shyamalan was good through Unbreakable. I have also not seen a lot on the list. I would have liked to know, but he does not tell, why he selects -- from all the generally admired movies of the period -- only BOOGIE NIGHTS, FIGHT CLUB, THE INSIDER, and LOST IN TRANSLATION. Why those, in particular? Well, I can see BOOGIE NIGHTS. But why not MAGNOLIA? I can see FIGHT CLUB. But why THE INSIDER nd LOST IN TRANSLATION,which are in such a different vein and so much more low-keyed?
I think he may just be throwing support to Sofia Coppola, P.T. Anderson, Michael Mann and David Fincher, giving them a nod as directors, as if to say "good job! nice work!".
That's what I got out his mentioning the Woody Allen- it was a shout-out to Jason Biggs, in particular.
I would also like to know why he didn't pick Magnolia, which I think is much much better than Boogie Nights. (But Boogie Nights Rules, I must add!)
I thought he might mention Gaspar Noe or Harmony Korrine or Donnie Darko. Or Ang Lee's Crouching Tiger or American Psycho.
Or maybe even Watchmen or V For Vendetta.
But, that's fine.
His list reflects his interests, and they are what they are.
I haven't found any truly insightful comments on this list elsewhere oneline, But National Post (Canada) comments:Using NYMagazine online as their source, National Post gives the list with the dates. I notice he has not included anything from the last five years but THE HOST. Others have remarked that "idiosyncratic" as the list is, there are some great movies on it.Quote:
Listening to Quentin Tarantino rattle through his favourite flicks since he made his directorial debut with Reservoir Dogs is entertaining in that what-can-I-throw-at-the-screen kind of way: You'll certainly disagree with him flat-out on some of the choices (for your correspondent this was the reaction to Anything Else and The Matrix — I'd have put those on a worst movies list). However, he does make a case for re-renting a few others, such as Unbreakable and Speed, to see if he has a point.
Quote:
Anything Else (2003)
Audition (1999)
Battle Royale (2000)
The Blade (1995)
Boogie Nights (1997)
Dazed and Confused (1993)
Dogville (2003)
Fight Club (1999)
Friday (1995)
The Host (2006)
The Insider (1999)
Joint Security Area (2000)
Lost in Translation (2003)
The Matrix (1999)
Memories of Murder (2003)
Shaun of the Dead (2004)
Speed (1994)
Supercop (1992)
Team America: World Police (2004)
Unbreakable (2000)
Yes. Some great movies on the list, no question.
Team America: World Police especially.
That movie is one of the greatest "stick it to the man" features I've ever seen. I love that movie.
I'm gonna put a Jihad on you.
Laughed my ass off. Plus it has a serious message about the USA's foreign policy under Cush and Bheney..
I haven't seen Anything Else but if it's got QT's stamp of approval it must be worth seeing or he would not put it on a list.
A list of only 20, to boot.
He likes his action movies. Over half have lots of action in them.
Violent reactions to INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS
The erudite Jonathan Rosenbaum, never a QT fan to begin with, goes positively bonkers over INGLOIURIOUS BASTERDS, primarily for the obvious reaons -- the movie's lack of solemnity or reverence in approaching WWII history, and its violent re-imagining of Jewish opposition to the Nazis. QT's now movie is even "morally akin to Holocaust denial," he says, "even though it proudly claims to be the opposite of that. It's more than just the blindness to history that leaks out of every pore in this production (even when it's being most attentive to period details) or the infantile lust for revenge that's so obnoxious. ..." and so on. So Rosenbaum recommends we all read "'When Jews Attack' by Daniel Mendelsohn, a two-page spread in the August 24 & 31 issue of Newsweek." It's obvious many would find INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS offensive, and QT's application of his methods to the sacred topic of WWII is destined to arouse greater outrage than usual. I think this was one of the main motives behind negative reactions at Cannes. It's hard to bring a sense of humor and Tarantinoesque camp to a movie about WWII. And you have to do that to appreciate the film. JR decided to dislike INGOURUIOUS BASTERDS from scene one. Indeed he can hardly conceal his contempt even for the title (" [sic sic -- or maybe I should say, sic, sic, sic]") After all, in his Movies As Politics book, he wrote "You won't find any serious discussion of art, literature, or philosophy or any serious technical innovations in Tarantino's PULP FICTION.'
As for the "lust for revenge" being "infantile," perhaps JR should tell that to the Israelis when they retaliate ten-fold against Palestinian attacks. And that may be cause for reflection that macho Jews are ot the monopoly of Mr. Tarantino.
There is going to be tons of debate and fur flying over INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, and for now there is an excellent summing up of debates so far with multiple links on The Auteurs , which I've only just begun to follow up on. This incidentally gives a link to SPOUT blogger Christopher Campbell's rundown of "a zillion responses" to Tarantino's Top 20 movies list.
There is all this debate going on. But the best answer I can ever give is my own review of a film. I am, however, still going to hold off and wait till release day Friday (it opened in England today and Borys Musialak of FILMASTER said he's going to see it today). I started this thread to post my review, but since the distribution reps at the press screening requested that we hold our reviews till opening day, I will wait till Friday before putting up my review here.
I know this movie is gonna be treated like a football.
Jonathan Rosenbaum is really being a "critic" here.
Sure, you can rip it apart on historical grounds.
No question. It's an alternate depiction of WWII.
And it's loaded with comedy.
Hell, even Mike Myers spoofs himself in it!
I'll hold off until friday to write anything about it too.
And I started this thread, Chris.
Don't ever try to steal my thunder again.
lol
Sorry about claiming to start this thread! (:-)
I start so many of them. But so do you!
Here's a link to clip from the Canadian premiere.
I had just gone into the theatre when this was taking place!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJu2Yd5sivE
I intend to watch this movie just like I've watched everything Tarantino has directed. But, as you guys know by now, I am not a fan. And what I get from the trailer is that this is a film that glorifies revenge, which totally turns me off. I actually think that this revenge factor, that Americans in particular enjoy so much, is philosophically tied to the fact that the US is the only "civilized" country where the death penalty is a legal response to crime. Tarantino's list of favorite films is indicative of what he values about cinema and reflects a worldview I find deplorable. Given the nature of his films, it is logical that his favorite film since he started making movies is the nihilistic Japanese exploitation flick Battle Royale. The only Tarantino film I would ever watch again is Jackie Brown. And it doesn't seem like he has any interest in developing that vein.
I actually offered my other pass to a friend and he recoiled in disgust: I hate Quentin Tarantino! His movies are so fucking stupid! Don't talk to me about Quentin Tarantino!
I couldn't believe it.
So I used one pass and have another as a historic souvenir..
Tarantino films have a very sharp violent incline to them. Agreed.
When movies like Coffy and My Bloody Valentine (Canadian slasher flick) are among his all-time faves, you know where he stands.
Love him or leave him, he's a "unique" man among directors.
Violence in his movies is "movie violence". He's said it repeatedly.
Oscar, you might want to stay away from this one completely if the violence in his films is a big issue with you.
He's got some set pieces in Basterds that top even Kill Bill in agressiveness.
To me, this film is a Masterpiece. His first true Masterpiece.
The acting, the premise, the camerawork...it's all stellar.
But you can judge for yourself.
I haven't stopped thinking about the movie since I saw it, actually.
It really stays in the mind's eye...but that's just me.
And "Basterds" is probably the Mother of all revenge flicks.
Seriously. Better than the Crow.
This is Jewish retribution in film form.
If I was Jewish (I'm not) I would be pumping my fist in the air at this film. Because this film takes care of Nazi's in a way that every Jew in the world should wish they were taken care of.
Exterminated.
With extreme prejudice..
Well, you're not, and Jews mostly find such a gesture and such fantasies of retribution uncomfortable. Eli Roth is atypical of the American Jewish self-image. Armond White calls the movie "Jewish revenge porn." And the "basterds" story line is that.Quote:
If I was Jewish (I'm not) I would be pumping my fist in the air at this film.
Retribution is uncomfortable?
Then they don't believe that "every action has an equal and opposite reaction"?
I'm not even Jewish and I love how the Nazi's get their "just desserts" in Basterds. One sequence in particular (that I'll discuss tomorrow, with a spoiler warning of course) had me shouting FUCK YEAH! and rocking in my seat...
Yes. Uncomfortable because too brutal, too much like the perpetrators. You can look at Daniel Mendelsohn's Newsweek piece -- not as strong as Rosenbaum's citing of it makes you expect -- which saysQuote:
Retribution is uncomfortable?
(See the whole paragraph.) Mendelsohn says QT's fantasy goes against the "never again" philosophy of Jews; that revenge only repeats the cycle and means there will be an "again." This is perfectly valid, and one must consider that Tarantino's viewpoint is morally dubious at best and resorts to an adolescent machismo. Nonetheless I would argue that as cinematic art one has to givie INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS its due as a remarkble effort nonetheless, in spite of those shorcomings, which are not new but typical of the director, and just happend this time to be applied to huge historical events.Quote:
Do you really want audiences cheering for a revenge that turns Jews into carboncopies of Nazis, that makes Jews into "sickening" perpetrators? I'm not so sure.
Quentin Tarantiino: INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS (2009)
Review by Chris Knipp
With its wealth of almost-themes and lush production values, amazing cast, stomach-turning spectacles, and morally dubious Jewish revenge theme, Quentin Tarantino's movie about movies about World War II is shocking, controversial, and a must-see.
W A R N I N G: S P O I L E R S
Tarantino's World War II feature Inglourious Basterds shows the director's best and worst features, but in a wholly new setting. Here is his propensity for sectioned films (there are five "chapters") with disparate plots with neat but wildly implausible interconnections. His love of elaborate extended set pieces where the dialogue takes over, sometimes at excruciating length. His playful, ingenious, and sometimes career-rehabilitating casting, which provides actors with irresistible opportunities to memorably strut their stuff. His mastery of old-fashioned camera-work, with bold and traditional uses of big close-ups. Jumping at the challenge of his subject, he tries out some pretty fancy production pieces, notably gun battles and a classic old movie theater rigged up for a Nazi gala, and these are never less than colorful and delightful eye candy. And also his indifference to reality or good taste and his moral blindness.
The new twist is the swing to Europe -- German-occupied France -- with tons of subtitled French and German dialogue, and even translating back and forth between them. A big question is this: can we really stomach a partly comic, partly grandiose, partly grind-house version of the war that is the most tragic event in modern European history? Can World War II be the basis for a movie about movies so fanciful that it seeks to resolve the war in that old Paris cinema with a host of Nazi bigwigs all on hand for a propaganda film? Besides the unbearably, cartoonishly brutal Dirty Dozen team of American Jews headed up by Brad Pitt's southern redneck and charged, as viewers of the movie trailer will well remember, to bring back "Nazi scalps" (a hundred each, in fact) -- something a little in the vein of Samuel Fuller's 1980 saga Big Red One, once planned in this long-contemplated project as a 16-episode TV series -- there's a not-so-secondary dual theme of concealment and identity. And the "Inglourious Basterds" story gets sidelined by the cinema story. But Tarantino has never been linear. And good taste or a firm hold on reality have not been his long suits. This is, no matter what, some splendid filmmaking, and however much it offends or annoys or tortures you to watch, it's a work of unquestionable proficiency, a reveling in the art of moviemaking.
Events begin without ceremony or prelude at a French dairy farm with a visit from the movie's most impressive and despicable character, Col. Hans Landa (played with relish and equal linguistic skill in French, English and German by Austrian-born actor Christoph Waltz), whose nickname is "the Jew Hunter." The farmer, Perrier LaPadite (Denis Menochet) is hiding Jews, and Landa finds them -- but it all happens in dialogue, followed by a violent rain of bullets. One of the hidden family escapes alive, Shoshanna Dreyfus (a touching Melanie Laurent), who reappears improbably several years later as the proprietor by inheritance of a Paris cinema, having taken on a French Christian name.
This dairy farm sequence is excruciating enough, but less so than the central set piece, a long and nerve-wracking scene in which an English OSS officer's posing as a Nazi officer, Lt. Archie Hicox (Michael Fassbender), is gradually smoked out in a cellar bar. At a certain point in this sequence the excruciating becomes hard to separate from the tedious -- till all hell breaks loose. Central here is the German actress Bridget von Hammersmark (Diana Kruger), undercover for the Allies, who's caught out later like a doomed Cinderella, by a shoe that fits.
Meanwhile there are brutal scenes of the "basterds" bashing Nazis, Jews belying the stereotypically "meek" Jewish identity by becoming comic book superheroes, foremost among them Sgt. Donny Donowitz (Eli Roth of Hostel and Deathproof), "the Bear Jew," who kills Nazis by smashing in their skulls with a baseball bat, preferably in front of their comrades. And there are several Germans who pose as Nazis while their real aim is to kill them. And there is young German war hero Fredrick Zoller ( Daniel Bruhl), fluent in French, and in love with Shoshanna as well as with movies -- and he becomes a movie star, like a German Audie Murphy, beginning by playing himself in a propaganda film, but becomes increasingly detached from the image he's identified with and finally unable to bear watching the reenactments his own famous deeds. The ingenuity and parallelisms of altered or reversed identity are so fascinating one might wish identity were made more consciously resonant as a theme.
Tarantino also makes ample use of his fetish for ritual deal-making as a motor behind scenes and action. Col. Landa makes a tough deal with the dairy farmer in the opener. Lt. Aldo Raine (Pitt) is ready to bargain with Nazis, letting them keep their lives and their scalps if they'll give up German military information. At the end, Landa makes the biggest deal of all -- his life for, well, the Third Reich, basically.
A big element is the celebration of movies, not only by the climax in a movie house, but in the constant references to old ones, to the point that Inglourious Basterds, the title itself a deliberate corruption of the English title of a schlock Italian WWII film, Enzo Castellari's Quel maledetto treno blindato, becomes more than anything a war movie about war movies. At times the whole effort threatens to get mired in material that is too familiar -- the nasty Nazis, the drinking scenes, the face offs, the suspenseful plots -- tropes executed often and with more gravitas, if less panache, elsewhere. Though inherently sui generis, Quentin Tarantino's movies have never been about originality, any more than they're about "reality." They're ingenious fantasies, built up out of cinema, delighting in the magic of what can happen on the screen.
And after all World War II was always movies, too, and propaganda. The "Basterds" -- the team of Jews out to give individual Nazis horrible deaths -- carry out their actions primarily as a propaganda weapon, its effectiveness underlined by the film's moments of gruesome brutality. Propaganda also is the movie "Nation's Pride," made starring Zoller, depicting how he singlehandedly killed 300 men, For that, Tarantino gives us something it's surprising he's not done before, a movie-within-a-movie. Zoller calls himself "the German Sgt. York." Tarantino does not resist the temptation (how could he?) to put his versions of Goebbels (a very juicy Sylvester Groth) as well as Hitler, and even, off in the corner of a scene, Churchill, on the screen.
Also present is the quintessential Tarantino theme: revenge. The "Basterds" are having revenge for the annihilation of Jews. Zoller's insistence that the premiere be transferred to Shoshanna's cinema gives her the idea of wreaking vengeance on a whole auditorium full of Nazis for the brutal killing of her family.
Things get very complicated when three plots by the British, the "Basterds," and Shoshanna -- with her black French boyfriend Marcel (Jacky Ido) -- all converge on the premiere of "Nation's Pride" at Shoshann's theater (with some confusion of the continuity in the lead-up to this event).
Whether or not you buy (or at some points can even stomach) the whole thing, the production is lush, the acting is rich, the set-pieces, however torturous, are impossible to look away from, and there's a fascinating interweaving of almost-themes. This is Tarantino -- and his big team -- working at full-bore. Waltz (who won Best Actor for this performance at Cannes) carries the day, but the film is alive with all the people in it. Brad Pitt, with his down-home shtick, his heavily drawn rustic tough guy and deliberately campy Ozark accent, though his character is not as funny or as vivid as stuff in Full Metal Jacket, is still quite entertaining, the heart of a style of movie in which comedy constantly turns scary and horrifying. Pitt's Lt. Aldo Raine (his name itself a war movie tribute) in turn gets his chance, like so many others, to put on a (in his case comically clumsy) fake identity. There are only two important female characters, played by Melanie Laurent and Diana Kruger, but both are fine and memorable. All in all Inglourious Basterds is troubling, drawn-out, brilliant -- and not to be missed. The answer to whether we can stomach the outrage and irreverence is that we just have to: Tarantino makes his own rules.
Inglourious Basterds
WARNING SPOILERS
The first chapter of Inglourious Basterds is intense. It involves the Jew Hunter making an official stop at a French farm to look for Jews in hiding. He sips some milk, kinda like how Jules Winnfield in Pulp Fiction sipped his Sprite. I'm sure it hit the spot..
The farmers' three daughters are absolutely gorgeous.
They are asked to leave the farmhouse while The Jew Hunter and the farmer discuss "matters".
When this chapter opened I felt like I was watching perhaps a tribute to Kubrick's Barry Lyndon, with a long shot of the farmer chopping wood. (Redmond is seen chopping wood in the same manner in the Kubrick).
The chapter ends in a horrific way. That's all I'll say.
Basically what happens in the next two and a half hours is the introduction of the Basterds and one highly decorated German privates' film career. (It also involves said Private's courtship of a gorgeous Jewish movie theatre owner who escaped from Landa's bullets).
The ending is an atomic bomb of a plot twist, which includes the incineration of Hitler and Goebbels.
Go see it now.
You won't fucking regret it.
Tarantino burned the house down with this Masterpiece.
I could watch it for infinity.
Roger Ebert gives the film 4 stars, saying it's one of the best films of the year.
His review is excellent and I'm so glad he's come out in defence of the film. (At Cannes he told Tarantino it could be one of the worst or best films of the year- glad he's settled his mind).
This film does indeed grow on you. For a short minute while watching it I felt it might be the one Tarantino movie that I wouldn't like. The "controlled uncertainty" of the opening *flawless* chapter for a minute just seemed to be a chapter that was jerking our chains. Then I realized he's just setting up Landa's character, making us get a real hate on for him.
Ebert says scenes aren't chewed in Basterds- they're "licked".
ha ha I like that. Licked scenes. Like wartime lollypops...
I could go into great detail about the scenes and what's in them and how I reacted, but I'd like to hear some other opinions before I say anything more.
I put in a spoiler warning, but the info I give is in the reviews I've seen.
Yes, Col. Landa in the opening scene is definitely like Jules.
LANDA: "This is very tasty milk." [His exact words I don't recall.]
JULES: "Mmm-mmmm. That is a tasty burger."
LT. ALDO RAINE: "If you ever wanna eat a Sauerkraut sandwich again take your Wiener Schnitzel lickin' finger and point out on this map what I wanna know."
I'll have a look at Ebert's review.
Ebert said he feels since this film debuted at Cannes, it's OK to let fly with spoilers. Enough time has passed.
The scenes with Lt. Hicox being smoked out that "ends with all hell breaking loose" was the sequence I was referring to when I said I was shouting "FUCK YEAH! and rocking in my seat.
And everybody else in the audience was just as shocked and rocked by it- loud applause broke out after that scene.
And then, the scene right after when Lt. Raine says "drop the gun or we'll drop grenades"- WOWZA. Miss Hammersmarck's survival was a shock. When she's called a traitor and then unloads..wow. Not expecting that at all