p r e f e r r e d r e v i e w e r s :
 |
 |
|
You haven't selected any preferred reviewers. To learn more about customizing your experience, click here.
|
|
|
 |
 |
o t h e r r e v i e w e r s :
|
|
|
DokBrowne [ 9.5 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
I loved the everloving fuck out of this. It made me giddy to watch it. I was laughing for no reason when it ended, and remained on a high for a while afterwards. Anyone with a particular fondness for film - the iconography of an unforgettable moment, the minutae of a perfect performance, the thrill of watching an artist's unique style in full bloom - will be endlessly smitten by Tarantion's latest. "Inglourious Basterds" is mesmerizing, beautiful, hilarious, exciting, a total rush, and all according to the auteur's own niche. It's not like there are great action scenes, or tearjerking scenes of high drama, or anything you'd get from 99% of movies. It's subtle and over-the-top, nuanced and grandiose, and almost entirely built around conversation although the movie hypnotizes you so effectively that you won't notice that while you're watching. You might even be fooled into feeling you got a whole epic story out of the experience, when, if you think about it, there are only about, what? 8 scenes about 20 minutes long each? Yet Tarantino's craftsmanship makes it feel so complete.
It also helps you overlook the bothersome details, or disregard them by the end. Like, why is it even called "Inglourious Basterds" when the actual screen time devoted to them is so minimal, even less than that given to Christoph Waltz and Melanie Laurent? Brad Pitt only appears in like 3 or 4 few scenes, really; by the time he's in a tux at the movie premiere you realize what a minor role he's played in the narrative despite being the top-billed actor and main character according to all promotional material. And you dont' get to know ANY of the Basterds. I liked them, but half of them didn't even have lines. Could've been a memorable group...ah well. But I can't say that really made the movie weaker because all the time they WEREN'T on screen was devoted to other characters who were wholly absorbing and memorable. So it just felt like false advertising, not a precise fault. I was really enamored with the characters created by by Waltz, Laurent, Diane Kruger, Michael Fassbender, Brad Pitt (especially his horrible non-attempt at pretending to be Italian at the premiere), that Nazi guy they met in the basement, Til Schweiger, and Daniel Bruhl. Any of them would make a fascinating lead in a movie.
Another problem I'm willing to forgive: it's cool to have Samuel L. Jackson involved but his narration parts weren't really necessary at all. Nor were the chapter divisions. Just a gratuitous Tarantino trademark. Not bad, but kinda redundant and over-explanatory
I read some review that singled out the basement bar scene as a really draggy, pointless lull amidst an otherwise brilliant film - wtf? The movie itself is comprised entirely of similarly drawn-out, talky moments, and one of the great things about the basement/bar scene, like all the other scenes, like all of Tarantino's career, is that it's this extremely deliberate, incredibly tense, deliciously playful prelude to a violent climax (or a last-second cancellation thereof). "Pulp Fiction", "Jackie Brown", "Kill Bill", "Grindhouse" all triumph with the same technique, don't they? If anything that bar scene is a masterful epitome of Tarantino's talent.
Anyway even though it's not really what you expect from the ads or even the title, it's quite possibly the most cinematically euphoric experience of the year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jeff_v [ 8.0 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
My biggest fear is that one day Quentin Tarantino is going to try to make some Big Serious Movie. Thankfully, Basterds finds him working within his range (only towards the outer edges due to the historical setting) and delivering the cinema par excellence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
chapter11 [ 9.5 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
Almost inarguably terrific. It's tempting to say that this is what Tarantino's been building to all this time - but then, Tarantino's modus operandi has always been his love affair, his lust for the language and the sport of film. This may be the purest distillation of that so far, and that cheeky final line is almost accurate. I mean, certainly it's a masterpiece - whether it's Tarantino's masterpiece is up for debate.
Either way, it's a contender. Christoph Waltz owns the ensemble cast, naturally - plucked from relative obscurity (stateside, at least), the guy's an absolute revelation. An instant classic, an all-time great screen ghoul. His Hans Landa is instantly iconic in the same way that only one villain per year really is - this puts him in the company of Javier Bardem and Heath Ledger, and hopefully in their Oscar gold company as well. Everyone else is pretty terrific, too - it's talky, to be sure, but it's Tarantino-talky, where dialogue is simply the foreplay for an oft-brutal climax. Really superb work all around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff_Wilder [ 10.0 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
My movie is not about Vietnam... my movie is Vietnam.-Francis Ford Coppola on Apocalypse Now
It is possible to see that quote as a prime example of directorial hubris. However, it can be forgiven somewhat if the final result is great. Considering that the movie in question is a masterpiece, we can forgive Coppola his hubris.
Upon getting home from seeing Inglorious Basterds, I find myself reflecting that Quentin Tarantino didn't want to simply make a movie about World War II. No, he wanted to make a movie that is World War II. And I will be damned if he hasn't near succeeded.
Let's get something straight first. This is NOT a historically accurate World War II movie. Looking for one of those? I can suggest a few excellent ones: Steven Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan". Clint Eastwood's "Flags of Our Fathers". Spike Lee's "Miracle at St Anna". All of them great historically accurate films that entertain you and draw you in. This film is out to entertain and draw you in without functioning as a history lesson. In essence, if those other films were the "Platoon" of World War II movies, this is the "Apocalypse Now".
In making Inglorious Basterds, Tarantino looked past the aforementioned recent ultra-realistic war films and instead looked back to classic Hollywood ones. The most obvious homage is of course to "The Dirty Dozen". But there are also elements from classic Sam Fuller movies as well as comedic lifts that would do Mel Brooks proud.
The "basterds" of the title are a Dirty 8. Their leader is Lt Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt) a Tennessee hillbilly out for Nazi blood. Eli Roth plays Donny Donowitz AKA "The Bear Jew" whose specialty is walloping the shit out of Nazis. There's also a member of the team called "the little man" played by BJ Novak and the psychotic Hugo Schlitz played by Til Schweiger. The basterds mission: kill Nazis.
That's the main plot. The other plot involves a young Jewish woman named Shosanna Dreyfus played by Melanie Laurent. After escaping being slaughtered along with the rest of her family by SS Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz) she's taken to hiding out in Paris and operating a movie theater. But secretly she burns for revenge on Hans. So all of these threads will eventually intersect at some point. There's also Samuel L Jackson as the occasional narrator, Diane Kruger as an actress who later on figures into the plot, Mike Myers as a British general and Martin Wuttke as Der Fuhrer himself.
So yes, you would be accurate saying that Inglorious Basterds is overblown. But that would also be beside the point. Tarantino lives to blow things up and not in a childish Michael Bay way. Some people have accused Quentin of borrowing or even plagiarism. Not quite. What he does is go back through film history, take various bits and pieces and blows them up in his own distinctive style. That works quite well here as we watch Pitt and co set out to win the war their own way. Way over the top to be sure. But again, this is Tarantino, not Bay, and so there's time for dialogue and moments of humanity. Humor too, albeit humor of the darkest variety.
Pitt does a good redneck Lee Marvin impression as Raine. Roth gives the Bear the right psychotic touch. But the two stand out performances are Laurent and Waltz. Waltz plays a truly cultured villain who always stays away from the comic book caricature he could've easily become. Even in his final scenes, he's still believable. Laurent is a shattered woman trying to stay alive yet still determined to avenge the demise of her family. Based on these performances, these are two actors to watch.
Inglorious Basterds is nowhere near subtle. But it's definitely the best movie to come out of a summer full of big budget mediocrities designed for no purpose but to get asses in seats. Not exactly for kids. But if you're fed up with GI Joes and Transformers and want a movie that will entertain you for 2 and a half hours, this is the one to see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
suminjoo [ 7.0 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
This was my first Tarantino film that I watched in its entirety - now, I understand why he has so many hardcore fans. The story, acting, and everything else were so good that two hours and twenty minutes felt short. I don't like gory movies but this one was so good that I had to give a somewhat high rating...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Weighted Rating | : 7.4 |
| No. Ratings | : 9 | |
| No. Reviews | : 6 | |
|
|
|
|
