Fourthcoming: Inglourious Basterds

Discuss releases from Arrow and the films on them.

Moderator: yoloswegmaster

Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#401 Post by Finch » Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:49 pm

colinr0380 wrote:Interestingly though he doesn't comment on Speilberg 'atoning' for making Nazis cartoonish villains in the earlier films through his period dramas and updating to the Cold War for the fourth film's villains. Not that I want to put ideas into White's head, but believing in cartoony rewriting of history to provide catharsis for a contemporary audience is something Spielberg moved past (and into a much more morally difficult area of putting 'history' on film with a straight face, but with just as much showmanship), and that might have been a good stick to bash Tarantino's film with.

Sadly though I don't think Armond was particularly upset about "Jewish revenge porn" because revenge is an ugly and degrading concept in itself, but more just because it may devalue what he sees as 'justified' revenge fantasies by association (as exemplified on film by, of course, the reference to Munich)
I'm glad someone pointed it out because White exposes himself yet again as a hypocrite. So his implication is it's acceptable to give Spielberg a free pass for roasting Nazis in the finale of Raiders (I don't hear anyone complaining about "offensive revenge fantasies" in that film?) but when Tarantino does it, it's pornographic?

I look forward to reading your own thoughts on the film, Colin.


User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#403 Post by mfunk9786 » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:20 pm

I know this movie probably isn't everyone's cup of tea, but in the words of Susie Greene: "Fuck you, and fuck your tea."

rs98762001
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:04 pm

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#404 Post by rs98762001 » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:20 pm

Fuck QT?

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#405 Post by domino harvey » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:34 pm

The ultimate sacrifice

Caged Horse
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 2:41 pm
Location: Dead

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#406 Post by Caged Horse » Sat Aug 22, 2009 2:46 am

During sex, I wonder which films Tarantino thinks of in order to postpone orgasm?

I fear the answer is, "None at all," since such a tactic would require QT to regard a film as dull, when the man's fundamental flaw is that he loves movies, every movie ever made, too much.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#407 Post by knives » Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:19 am

Caged Horse wrote:During sex, I wonder which films Tarantino thinks of in order to postpone orgasm?

I fear the answer is, "None at all," since such a tactic would require QT to regard a film as dull, when the man's fundamental flaw is that he loves movies, every movie ever made, too much.
Doesn't he, somewhat ironically, hate Trauffaut with a passion?

AttitudeAJM
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:51 am

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#408 Post by AttitudeAJM » Sat Aug 22, 2009 4:58 pm

He hates someone whose work has influenced his own? Interesting.

User avatar
Mr Sheldrake
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 9:09 pm
Location: Jersey burbs exit 4

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#409 Post by Mr Sheldrake » Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:18 pm


User avatar
ellipsis7
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#410 Post by ellipsis7 » Sun Aug 23, 2009 12:09 pm

It's a big hit, far from a miss, at the BO worldwide... (From Variety)...
Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglourious Basterds” opened to a glorious $65.1 million at the worldwide box office, including a domestic haul of $37.6 million.
It’s the biggest Tarantino opening by far at the domestic B.O., and a major win for the Weinstein Co., which is handling the World War II pic domestically.

Overseas, where Universal Pictures Intl. is distributing, “Basterds”--shot entirely in Europe--grossed an estimated $27.5 million from 2,630 playdates in 22 territories. It’s the first Tarantino film to open day and date on such a scale.

User avatar
exte
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 4:27 pm
Location: NJ

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#411 Post by exte » Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:36 pm

Bravo Quentin.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#412 Post by domino harvey » Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:38 pm

Tarantino

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#413 Post by mfunk9786 » Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:15 pm

exte and Mr. Tarantino go way back.

User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#414 Post by Finch » Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:15 pm

The Weinsteins must be hoping that the new Halloween pic will do similarly well and that IB won't drop by too much next weekend. Considering that the pic cost 70 mil to make, those early figures pretty much guarantee that they're going to reap some profits in the weeks ahead (assuming the marketing costs are included in the figure above?).

User avatar
Fiery Angel
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 1:59 pm

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#415 Post by Fiery Angel » Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:16 pm

Big box office = masterpiece

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#416 Post by mfunk9786 » Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:53 pm

Fiery Angel wrote:Big box office = masterpiece
Who's making that claim?

User avatar
Fiery Angel
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 1:59 pm

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#417 Post by Fiery Angel » Sun Aug 23, 2009 4:48 pm

exte wrote:Bravo Quentin.

captgriff
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:45 am

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#418 Post by captgriff » Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:41 pm

All of the mainstream media discussions of "Jewish revenge porn" are totally missing the point of the film, which seems to be that everyone commits atrocities during war, but the winners are the ones who get to write the histories, and more importantly, make the movies about what war is like. This is probably lost on audience members who clap
SpoilerShow
when the baddies finally get massacred in this particular film, but somebody out there needs to point out that this "victory" happens right after a scene in which the Nazis cheer the massacre of Allied soldiers in a film they're watching in the same theater. Add to this that QT plays Bowie's "Putting Out Fire" (with gasoline) over the whole sequence, and you think someone might realize that he's got more up his sleeve than trying to "rewrite history."
The indignation that Daniel Mendelsohn and David Denby have expressed regarding the film make me wonder what might have happened had they wasted less energy trying to find reasons to be outraged and paid more attention to the film's own narrative logic and formal arguments.

The "happy ending" of the film is hollow as hell, and there is plenty there to argue that QT is telling us that the revenge fantasy we've all been hoping to fulfill is another form of atrocity.

I understand that many critics and filmgoers have issues with Tarantino that no film he ever makes will ever be able to change. Sometimes I wish he would be more like Thomas Pynchon and just let his work speak for him. Nonetheless, Inglourious Basterds feels to me like the best essay on the complicity of the spectator and the consequences of violence since Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut" -- which needed about ten years to simmer. We'll see what happens with this one.

User avatar
GringoTex
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 5:57 am

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#419 Post by GringoTex » Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:58 pm

captgriff wrote:The "happy ending" of the film is hollow as hell, and there is plenty there to argue that QT is telling us that the revenge fantasy we've all been hoping to fulfill is another form of atrocity.
Nonsense. Tarantino films the whole thing so that the audience cheers on the revenge fantasy (and that's what they did at my screening). I guarantee you he's cheering it on. There's no claim to moral equivalence being made by the movie theater scene. Having the Nazis cheer the slaughter on the screen right before the audience cheers their slaughter is nothing but high-five irony to make their own slaughter more cool.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#420 Post by knives » Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:01 am

I'd agree with you captgriff, but I doubt Tarantino is smart enough to think that up, plus his comments in interviews have suggested that Gringo is on the ball. But is a nice reading that makes the film seem good outside of a performance.

User avatar
kaujot
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: Austin
Contact:

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#421 Post by kaujot » Mon Aug 24, 2009 4:33 am

I've always been of the mind that it doesn't matter what the director (or artist, really) meant to say. What matters is what the work actually says.

User avatar
ellipsis7
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#422 Post by ellipsis7 » Mon Aug 24, 2009 4:43 am

A characteristically intelligent review from Philip French in 'The Observer', which actually makes me want to see the movie...
Quentin Tarantino's films are celebrations of cinema and, more specifically, of popular genres and he is in love not only with their conventions but with the American language which has been part of their fabric. His new film, Inglourious Basterds, is a homage to the war movie, which became an entertainment genre during the course of the Second World War as a vehicle for allied propaganda, though the war was not, at least directly, a major concern of Goebbels's Nazi cinema.

It continued when peace came, its heyday being the 1950s and 60s, but Tarantino's inspiration was a schlocky Italian exploitation movie, Enzo G Castellari's 1978 Quel maledetto treno blindato (That damned armoured train) that received a limited release in the English-speaking world as The Inglorious Bastards. In Castellari's coarse, clumsily plotted film, a bunch of American misfits on their way to a military prison in France some weeks after D-Day escape from their guards. But they are then drawn into a secret anti-German mission while heading for the Swiss border. Tarantino's plotting is not that much more refined, but his film-making is and he follows the original film in having the Germans, the French and the Americans speak their own languages.

The film unfolds in five chapters and chapter one is as good as anything Tarantino has done and is wonderfully lit by one of America's finest cinematographers, Robert Richardson. The chapter is called "Once Upon a Time in German Occupied France, 1941", its title, mood and Ennio Morricone music evoking the opening sequence of Sergio Leone's Once Upon a Time in the West.

It's an idyllic day in rural France. A farmer is chopping wood outside his remote farm, a small party of German troops on motorcycles approaches from the distance. Their leader is SS Colonel Landa (a brilliant performance by Christoph Waltz), a suave, charismatic sadist charged with hunting for fugitive Jews. As the camera circles around them, Land interrogates the farmer LaPadite in a wheedling, menacingly playful, manipulative manner. The tension resembles a violin string just before it snaps. Landa has been talking a silkily fluent French, but suddenly suggests they talk in English. Is Tarantino compromising by this language switch? No, it's part of Landa's deadly strategy of getting LaPadite to betray himself. Suddenly violence erupts and the episode, shot in some 25 minutes of real time, ends with a dramatic link that isn't picked up until the third chapter.

This opening is both entertaining and morally serious and one thinks of what Robert Warshow wrote in his great essay The Westerner in 1953. "In war movies, it is possible to present the uses of violence within a framework of responsibility," he remarked, adding: "At its best, the war movie may represent a more civilised point of view than the western, and if it were not continually marred by ideological sentimentality we might hope to find it developing into a higher form of drama."

Ideological sentimentality is not a charge that could be made against Tarantino, but his film thereafter, though consistently gripping, is uneven and fractured as it follows the revenge motif set up in the first chapter. The second chapter, set two years later, introduces us to the eponymous "inglourious basterds", a band of American Jewish soldiers sent to perpetrate anti-Nazi atrocities in occupied France. They've been recruited by a Gentile from the Deep South, Captain Aldo Raine, a name derived from the bull-necked actor Aldo Ray, star of such war films as Battle Cry and The Naked and the Dead. Brad Pitt's Raine's opening address evokes the mission speeches of George Scott's Patton and Lee Marvin's maverick major in The Dirty Dozen, and this unlikely bunch torture their prisoners, beat them to death with baseball bats, scalp them and carve swastikas on their foreheads. They become, as well they might, an irritation to Hitler.

It is true that Hollywood studios were very cagey in the representation of Jews in wartime movies. In 194O, Joseph Kennedy, the isolationist American ambassador to Britain, father of JFK, had advised the Hollywood moguls to "get those Jewish names off the screen" and to "stop making anti-Nazi pictures or using the film medium to promote or show sympathy to the cause of 'democracies' versus 'the dictators'." As late as 1944, Jack Warner, head of Warner Brothers, told the producer of Objective Burma!: "I like the idea of a Jewish officer in Burma. See that you get a clean-cut American type for Jacobs." But Tarantino's readjustment is a mindless, puerile gesture, especially viewed in the light of Defiance, Edward Zwick's recent film about Jewish guerrillas in Second World War Byelorussia.

The film's revenge theme takes an extraordinary turn in the later chapters set in 1944 between D-Day and the liberation of Paris, when the Nazis decide to stage the world premiere of a patriotic movie at a French cinema managed by the attractive Shosanna (Mélanie Laurent), the sole survivor of a Jewish family. Churchill and a British general (played as a parody of a stereotype by Mike Myers) send a British film critic with special knowledge of German cinema (Michael Fassbender) to collaborate with the Basterds on destroying the Germany high command, Hitler, Goebbels, Bormann and Goering among them, at this premiere, while Shosanna independently plans her own Götterdämmerung.

The result, involving some slack and highly ingenious plotting, features a beautiful German movie star working as a double agent and a German version of Audie Murphy, and invokes The Dirty Dozen, To Be or Not to Be, The Last Metro and a dozen movies set in cinemas. The grand central conceit is that those who worship and glorify movies but are unworthy of them (eg Goebbels) will die in a cinema. The violence will spread from the screen into the auditorium and the fuel to burn them or ignite their pyres will be provided by the inflammable material of film itself. The notion is as intoxicating as it is demented.
And the reception in France & Germany is interesting (from Hollywood Reporter)...
In France, "Basterds" also opened in the top spot with $6.1 million from 500 situations, or 30% of the market, per Universal figures. The first-place Germany intro produced $4.3 million from 443 sites and a 26% market share.

User avatar
foggy eyes
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 9:58 am
Location: UK

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#423 Post by foggy eyes » Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:40 am

kaujot wrote:I've always been of the mind that it doesn't matter what the director (or artist, really) meant to say. What matters is what the work actually says.
Well, you'd wind up in the same place here - both are doing exactly the same thing. It's like a propaganda film or something. Formally sophisticated, but morally bankrupt.

captgriff
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:45 am

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#424 Post by captgriff » Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:09 am

foggy eyes wrote:
kaujot wrote:I've always been of the mind that it doesn't matter what the director (or artist, really) meant to say. What matters is what the work actually says.
Well, you'd wind up in the same place here - both are doing exactly the same thing. It's like a propaganda film or something. Formally sophisticated, but morally bankrupt.
Wow, I'm really surprised so many people feel this way about the film. I really do think there's more than meets the eye in IB.

HarryLong
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:39 pm
Location: Lebanon, PA

Re: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

#425 Post by HarryLong » Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:49 am

kaujot wrote:I've always been of the mind that it doesn't matter what the director (or artist, really) meant to say. What matters is what the work actually says.
Which is, of course, a subjective call.

Post Reply