Inglourious Basterds (2009)

10 Comments

1. 

   PraetorianBG from Serbia
   30 Mar 2012, 8:17 am

   After watching Inglorious Basterds i was really surprised when i sawratings on IMDb. Didn't expected high ratings and top 250 place. If wecan only isolate and rate Christoph Waltz's acting performance i wouldagree that this movie deserves 10. But he is not alone, and hisperformance can't cover horrible plot, boring conversations, unfunnycharacters, alternative QT WW2 fantasy and Eli Roth as Jew bear.

   The opening scene with Denis Menochet as farmer and Christoph Waltz asSS officer is best part of the movie. Only part that have same qualityand connects tension from that scene with the rest of the movie is abasement scene. Basement scene was crossroad for me. Michael Fassbenderwas great in role of British spy and his character adds some new layerof logic and realism in movie. In moments you can actually see someplot finally breaking through the rubbish you watched after the farmscene. After the basement chapter, movie is going nowhere.

   Empty space. A lot of empty space for movie that last 153 minutes. Longand boring scenes with boring characters and conversations. Childishfantasy mixed up with Spaghetti western movies and some atmosphere thatdon't belong to WW2 period. Thats why we have basterds to filleverything else and patch the rest of movie. They failed. Basterds areweakest/undeveloped and most boring part of movie. Movie is named bythem, yes – Brad is on Movie poster … but they are horrible. Worstrole of Mr Pitt and i hope last one from Eli Roth.

   Cinema/Shosanna story with David Bowie music was just another QT patchv1.1 to fill huge empty space between farm and basement. Extremelyboring scenes with Mélanie Laurent (taking off cinema letters, reddresses, secret love Marcel…) will blast your brain. Yes – headacheis a must.

   Beside 2 good scenes, i really enjoyed listening smooth gradient ofGerman, French and English language. But again, this is connected toWaltz and Fassbender and their personal knowledge that Tarantino usedfor his fantasy.

   Inglorious Basterds is Hybrid movie where gangsters are replaced withNazis adding them wild west background layer with Brad Pitt on movieposter just to sell tickets. It doesn't work in this case.

   5/10 – only for Christoph Waltz and Michael Fassbender.

   Reply
2. 

   Dr. Sam from Lebanon
   30 Mar 2012, 8:17 am

   I will just start with some quotes from other reviewers that describesit the best.

   "This is easily one of the most overrated films of the year andprobably the worst film Tarantino has ever done." "The ONLY good thingin this movie was the performance of Mr. Waltz".

   "So I was really disappointed, and seeing this movie on place #40 ofthe greatest movies of all time is the only thing about this, thatleaves me with my mouth opened" Now for more details go and read "Hatedit" reviews.

   One thing I hate about a movie is when it treats audience as bunch ofdumb people. (Spoiler ahead). Now I know Tarantino's style is based onfantasy and fictitious plots, but come on, Adolf Hitler and 200 topNazis Officers will be in attendance of a movie premier in occupiedFrance and you have only two guards in the whole theater and thesurroundings? Where also an American-African walks around freely withsteel pipes locking doors and setting fire. These 2 guards are thenexecuted in seconds opening the door for our 2 "heroes" to slay Hitlerat point blank with around 100 rounds… very dumb. At least, challengeour intelligence and create a smarter plot to kill one of the mostfeared tyrants of all time (Go watch Valkyrie). Besides, Mike Myersimpersonation of a British general is more realistic and authentic thanthe guy doing Hitler, just picture that.

   What ruined it further, is that the only smart and powerful character,which nailed everyone in the movie, with his psychological and mindbending interrogations, ends up to be effortlessly tricked by the mostmindless character in the movie.

   After watching the movie, I was sympathizing with Nazis, who wereportrayed to have more bravery and humanity than our Basterds!!!Imagine that.

   My recommendations, if you have insomnia, 2hrs 33 min to waste or youwant to give your mind a break, go watch this movie.

   Reply
3. 

   motta80-2 from London, England
   30 Mar 2012, 8:17 am

   It just goes to show how wrong you can be. I had not expected to likethis film. I was disappointed by both the Kill Bill films (although ipreferred the second) and Death Proof (although it was better in theshorter cut of the double-bill release). I love Reservoir Dogs, admirePulp Fiction and think that Jackie Brown is Tarantino's most maturepiece of film-making – technically his most superior – including thelast great performance elicited from Robert De Niro. Since then itseems to me while his films have been okay (i haven't hated them) hehas been treading water in referential, reverential, self-indulgentjuvenilia.

   Then i read the script last year for Inglourious Basterds – and i hatedit! Sure it had some typical QT flourishes and the opening scene wasundeniably powerful. There were a couple of great characters. But onpage it was more juvenile rubbish, largely ruined by the largess of theuninteresting Basterds of the title. It made me seriously contemplatenot seeing the film. The trailers did nothing to convince me. I onlychanged by mind when i had the opportunity to see the film with aTarantino Q&A following in London. I figured it would be worth enduringto hear him in Q&A as i know from interviews how entertaining he can bein person.

   So little was i prepared for the sheer exuberant fun and brilliance ofInglourious Basterds.

   Easily Mr Tarantino's best work since Jackie Brown it is a triumph.

   Yes the references are there but they do not interfere with the story,they are not the driving force. Yes Eli Roth is stunt casting but heworks fine, with little to do but look aggressive, and does nothing tohurt the film as i had feared. While i admired Mr Tarantino for usingstuntwoman Zoe Bell as herself in Death Proof in order to amp-up theexhilaration of the major stunt scene her lack of any acting ability ina key role was a problem for the film. The same could be said ofTarantino's own appearances in several films, especially RobertRodriguez's From Dusk Till Dawn, which Tarantino wrote.

   What really makes this work is how BIG it is. The spaghetti westernvibe to much of the style, dialogue and performances is wonderfullyover the top without descending too far into the cartoon quality ofKill Bill. The violence is so big. The audacity so big. Brad Pitt is sobig! In the trailers the Hitler moment and Pitt's performance botheredme but in the context of the film they are hilarious. Pitt is actuallybrilliant here, exactly what he needs to be. He is Mifune's blusteringsamurai in Yojimbo, he is Robards Cheyenne from Once Upon a Time in theWest, there is a very James Coburn vibe to him, and of course asuitably Lee Marvin edge.

   Christoph Waltz (who i did not previously known) and Melanie Laurent(who i first noticed in a brilliant French-language British short filmby Sean Ellis) are sensational and i expect to see both used a lot morein the future. Tarantino has clearly not lost his eye for casting,which seemed to desert him in Death Proof. Waltz is equally large inhis performance. Chilling, yet theatrical. He is Fonda from OUATITW,Van Cleef from Good, The Bad & the Ugly. And Laurent is suitablyCardinale innocence but tough, a fighter. They both dazzle here.

   That every member of the cast gets the fun to be had from what they aredoing while not indulging themselves in just having fun and trying toget laughs helps tremendously. The laughs – and there are loads – comeorganically. Only Mike Myers comes close to tipping the wink andpushing it too far but his scene is reigned in just enough – with thehelp of a fantastic Michael Fassbender who seems pulled directly fromthe mold of Attenborough's Great Escape leader.

   All the actors shine and Tarantino throws in wonderful flourishes, butones that work with the story. The introduction of Schweiger's HugoStiglitz is a riot. After a sensational slow-burn opening and aglorious intro to those inglourious Basterds the pace never lets up andover two and half hours flies by.

   It also looks beautiful, marking this as a return to real film-makingrather than just self-indulgent silliness. The musical choices, asalways, are inspired from Morricone on.

   The film is audacious and hilarious. After a summer when nearly everyfilm has disappointed me it came as a huge surprise that the real funand entertaining, but also involving and impressive film should be thisone, when i would never have believed it from script form. Welcome backQT.

   Reply
4. 

   lee nicholson (dolemite72) from middlesbrough, UK
   30 Mar 2012, 8:17 am

   This usually all sounds a lot better in my head (so forgive me forrambling) I'm hardly Tarantino's biggest fan (and will *try* not tostoop to calling him a 'hack'….which is quite hard) I don't like tomock or critique a movie before seeing it. So with cautious hesitation,i walked to the cinema today to watch 'Inglorious Basterds'

   Now, to call it a 'rip-off of a rip-off' would be unfair here.Tarantino is happy enough to take the title from Enzo Castellari's(less than spectacular) Dirty Dozen clone, but not it's plot points(that, he takes from all other genre of movies) 'Inglorious' opens witha Nazi officer and his lengthy interrogation against a farmer who ishiding Jews in his basement. This is such an anti-climax, in that, it'sdialogue is stale, and outcome signposted a mile off. Of course, one ofthe hidden Jews makes her escape (but more of her later) We (theobviously, easily pleased) audience are treated to the introduction ofLt. Aldo Raine (ha-ha, that name almost sounds like B-movie king ALDORAY….ha-ha Quentin…keep those 'tributes' coming) and this characteris played by none other than Brad (DALLAS) Pitt (sorry, DALLAS wasabout the only good thing he's ever starred in) and with jaw-jutting,Mr Jolie treats us to a hound-dogged, southern drawled, smirkingNazi-killer. Meanwhile Mr Tarantino forgets that actual grown-ups maybe in attendance, so assumes that the teenyboppers won't have heard ofthe 'Dirty Dozen'?

   Raines 'platoon' consists of (John Cassavettes looking) blood-thirstyJewish soldiers, all looking to get the big payback on Adolf Hitler.Tarantino in all his superior knowledge, pays special attention to twoof these men, by casting his long time best buddy (and fellowhomage-sycophant) Eli Roth (as the baseball bat wielding 'Bear Jew')The other man is called Hugo Stiglitz (and i'll wager more than halfthe QT fan-boys had never heard this name before this movie) Keep upthe good work Tarantino, you've managed about 6 or 7 'hommages' so far(in the first 15 minutes) keep adding them, and it may detract from theplot (or lack of?)

   Anyhow, cutting a long (and extremely boring and protracted) storyshort, both Raine and his men (the 'Inglorious Basterds') and the solesurvivor from chapter one, both have separate plots to kill Hitler atthe showing of a Nazi-propaganda movie, in a french cinema (owned bythe fore-mentioned survivor, now grown up)

   More boring (and pointless) conversations follow two and fro, as Pittmugs away at an audience past caring. And any genuine suspense, leadingto the assassination of the most deadly tyrant of all time, isthrown-away by the directors insistence of placing a 1980's David Bowiesong in a WWII movie.

   My problems (and there are many) with this movie, is the re-occurringproblem i have with most Tarantino product…..he rarely knows when toeither start or stop. I don't need 'homage' after 'homage' to get the*joke* (whatever it may be) I knew of Inglorious Bastards, EnzoCastellari, Aldo Ray, Hugo Stiglitz (and the ultimate crime of theentire movie) Ennio Morricone's haunting score from REVOLVER. I go tothe cinema to see the stars…..if the best you can do is the direBarad Pitt, i'll assume You (Mr Tarantino) are the main draw here? Idon't want the audience directing the movie. I pay to see YOUR vision,your ideas, your creativity….NOT how you can patchwork (time and timeagain) endless scenes from endless movies. It's high time the fan-boys(on IMDb) employed some 'tough love' on your 'idol' (god knows, if youdon't….the studios should?)

   The tired old argument with Tarantino worshippers is "well, if you cando better…do so" Let me tell you, if i was a 46 year old director,with the (unfortunate) pull QT has…..i'd want to offer YOU a lot morethan a warmed up muddled re-hash of better WWII movies than this tripe.The directors he attempts to emulate, made movies so bad by accident,or due to budgetary constraints. It's a cop out, time and time again,to hear his fans campaign his lack of imagination as 'art'. I'm surehe's capable of better (but after giving him the benefit of the doubt,once more….and not to mention 2 and a half hours of my life…..)maybe he isn't?

   Reply
5. 

   produpp from United Kingdom
   30 Mar 2012, 8:17 am

   Reply
6. 

   sssalem from Egypt
   30 Mar 2012, 8:17 am

   Seriously disappointing performance by Brad Pitt and Q T, the plot isvery superficial and lame, and, unless indirectly intended, this filmactually glorify the Nazis and portrays them as men of honor, and showthat the Jewish people are deceiving, cant keep promises and bloodyvicious. ((THE FOLLOWING CONTAINS SPOILER)) Hitler together with themost notorious Nazis are attending a stupid plot less movie about thekilling of 300 Italian soldiers in a small cinema theater in Paris isunbelievably ridiculous. the Nazis laughing and hooraying each killingin the movie as if watching a basketball game STUPID, the deal at theend is lame. whats really appalling is that the movie earned greatreviews and is ranked here in the 40s amongst the greatest 250 films.will not be surprised if it harvested many awards, including Oscars, aswell. the movie is simply a kissing ass to the Jewish people, but heyreconsider, its not even doing a great job doing that. it truly dwarfedthe whole Nazi – Jews conflict and a pure insult to all who fought andsuffered from the tyranny of the Nazis.

   Reply
7. 

   mr_chatila from Lebanon
   30 Mar 2012, 8:17 am

   Previous Tarantino movies were from a guy in love with other movies.This one is from a guy in love with his own writing. It isn'tInglorious, its disgusting.

   I absolutely hated Inglorious Basterds. The entire point of a film isto entertain – if u call bashing people's heads and removing theirscalps entertaining!!!! – and if there is one unforgivable sin a moviecan commit, it is extreme boredom or disgust.

   The movie is just a collection of endless and excruciatingly boring anddisgusting scenes of people talking at tables in various languages.There is even one scene where 3 people talk for nearly 45 minutes atthe same table, before, thankfully they are all shot. I wished theywould have been killed off after 5 minutes. Even Woody Allen knows whento shut the F**K up.

   This table talk style is a Tarantino hallmark, but in other films, Iactually cared about what they were saying and the people who weretalking. Here, I couldn't care less. All of Quentin's films display anenormous confidence, particularly Jackie Brown. But here there is apervasive feeling in every scene, Tarantino had no idea where he wasgoing with the film.

   Is it violent? Sure there's torture and scalping galore, but you'd haveto remind me. Thankfully, the film was so thin, I didn't even rememberI had seen it earlier in the day when until I saw a review headline onMSNBC.

   He's out of gimmicks and apparently dying to write a novel. But do us afavor QT and spare us the movie.

   I walked out of this movie halfway through and I would never recommendanyone seeing it no matter what a die-hard quarantino fan he or she is.

   I give it 0 / 10.

   Reply
8. 

   Llakor from Montreal, Quebec, Canada
   30 Mar 2012, 8:17 am

   Inglorious Basterds is a dark and violent comic fantasy, gloriously so.Built on the framework of The Dirty Dozen, Inglorious Basterds ditchesthe elongated training sequences of The Dirty Dozen to plunge into theaction right away. In the process, Tarantino fixes one of The DirtyDozen's major flaws by giving the bad guys screen time to remind usjust how bad the Nazis were. The Nazis with the most screen time end upbecoming the most completely human characters in the film, whichironically makes them even worse monsters.

   Bu ditching the training sequences, Tarantino is also able to give us apicture of the entire war, showing us not only British, American andGerman soldiers, but also giving us glimpses into the world of Frenchand German civilians, both collaborators and Resistance.

   It goes without saying that any Tarantino film is going to havefantastic dialogue, but when Tarantino made the decision to have theFrench characters speak French and the Germans speak German, beyondadding a level of authenticity, Tarantino also somehow ensured that hisdialogue in French was as sharp and funny and clever as his Englishdialogue.

   Case in point, during the opening sequence the Nazi "Jew Hunter" SSColonel Hans Landa (Christian Waltz) is interrogating French dairyfarmer Perrier LaPadite (Denis Menochet). Landa suspects that LaPaditeis hiding a family of Jews. While subtly pressuring LaPadite, Landaasks for a glass of milk. After greedily gulping it down, Landacompliments LaPadite on his daughters and his cows, "à votre famille età vos vaches, je dis bravo." The thing of it is, in French "vache"means cow, but it is also a vulgar name for the vagina. If reprimandedfor this vulgar pun, Landa could quite convincingly claim not tounderstand French well enough to have meant it that way, but Landa doesmean it that way and he means it as a threat. And LaPadite understandshis meaning all too well.

   That is a really subtle piece of acting and word-play that manyaudiences would never catch, or at least they might understand thesubtext without knowing the exact nature of the threat. The film isrich with that kind of detail. All of the French and English dialogueis chosen with that same attention to detail and while I can't swear tothe German, I would suspect that it shows a similar level of craft.

   Inglorious Basterds opens with the phrase, "Once Upon a Time… inNazi-Occupied France." Personally, this reminds me of the opening ofevery Asterix book and movie, another comic fantasy in a war-tornoccupied France. Like Asterix, Inglorious Basterds is howlingly funnyin places, although the film also turns darkly serious.

   In its more serious moments, Inglorious Basterds reminds us that thefirst casualties of war are compassion and the ability to relax, as inalmost every elongated sequence of the film, Tarantino finds a new wayto build cruel tension to almost unbearable levels.

   Tarantino also reminds us that film is dangerous, even inflammable andthat its power deserves respect.

   If you can see this film as I did in a packed theatre filled withknowledgeable fans who get every joke, that you will see this masterfulfilm the way that it was meant to be seen. If you are not that lucky,all that you will see is a great, great film that delivers a darklyfunny punch.

   Reply
9. 

   I_Hate_Almost_Everything from United Kingdom
   30 Mar 2012, 8:17 am

   Chapter One: Once Upon a Time… At A Table (1941)

   In which a German Nazi and a French Dairy Farmer talk at a table for 20minutes; first in French, then in English.

   Chapter Two: Three Years Of Inglorious Basterds In Sixteen Minutes…Without Tables (Mostly)

   In which an American Lieutenant talks to his newly formed 8 man Jewish-American commando unit. There are no tables present. Cut to AdolfHitler, three years later. He is angry at his men's inability to dealwith the Basterds. Hitler does have a table. We return to the Basterdsin a flashback. Again, distinct lack of table-based content.

   Chapter Three: German Night in Paris… At A Table… Talking

   In which a Jewish woman who escaped from under the table in Chapter Onehas somehow managed to become the proprietress of a cinema. The Jewishwoman talks to an Actor at a table in a bar. Later, the Jewish woman,the Actor, Joseph Goebbels and a Translator talk at a table in aRestaurant. The Actor and Goebbels talk in German. The Translatortranslates the German into French. The Jewish woman replies in French.The Translator translates the French into German. Goebbels decides tohold a film premiere at the Jewish woman's cinema. The Actor andGoebbels leave. The Nazi (who talked with the Dairy Farmer at a tablefor twenty minutes back in Chapter One) arrives. He talks with theJewish woman at the table. He leaves. The Jewish woman breaks down;overcome with emotion at having spent so long talking at a table.

   Chapter Four: Operation Table Talking

   In which Austin Powers sends a British Officer to join the Basterds andan Actress on a mission to talk in German at a table in a Tavern. After21 minutes of talking at a table they all shoot each other. The actresssurvives but spends the next 5 minutes lying on a table talking.

   Chapter Five: Revenge of the Giant Table

   In which, The Basterds decide to continue the operation by talking inItalian and suicide bombing the cinema. The Nazi takes the Actress intoa small room where they sit next to a table. A hoe that he found underthe table in the Tavern fits her so he kills her. Then he takes two ofthe Basterds to a big room, where they sit and talk at a table.Meanwhile, the cinema burns down, Hitler is riddled with bullets andthe two Basterds blow themselves up for no good reason at all.

   The End

   Reply
10. 

    telboy1999 from United Kingdom
    30 Mar 2012, 8:17 am

    I deliberately did not read any reviews of this movie on IMDb before Iwatched it because I really wanted to see it and make up my own mind. Ihave been a big fan of QT in the past, I think we can all agree he hasmade some great movies, but lately he seems to have been overcome byhis own mystique and disappeared up his own fundament. This "movie"proves that. It consists of few scenes of the Basterds at work. Itconsists instead mostly of long, tedious, boring stretches ofconversation between people that, after a while, you realise you justdo not give a stuff about. It's longwinded and lacks any of the greatsparkling dialogue that QT has been responsible for in the past. Theentire movie is anticlimactic. There is no tension – what is going tohappen in every scene is telegraphed so clearly in advance that by thetime it happens you just don't care. Honestly folks, don't believe thehype. This is a very boring movie and you will be missing nothing ifyou don't see it.

    Reply