Did anyone else not like Inglorious Bastards
- Thread starter MajorMurray
- Start date
-Ive seen das boot. and it was good. ive seen inglorious bastards. and it was good.-SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Post:
Everyone thinks that just because a group of people did what they did they had no souls or human emotion. Completly bs. Many germans joined the army for the same reasons people do today. People had families the wanted to protect, honor, only job they could get etc.
And honestly, i love dialogue heavy movies because it means a hell of a lot more thought went into than standard plot talk.
And the guy who played the Jew Hunter, Fucking amazing man.
1. Yes the Basterds are stupid. They are comedy relief characters. Shosanna is the hero that we take seriously. The two Basterds shooting into the crowded cinema are SUICIDE bombers.
2. The basement scene is my favorite scene from this movie. I don't think we are supposed to empathize with the celebrating German soldiers, they are there to aid in SUSPENSE.
3. The Basterds are terrorists not cunning commandos. They kill any german soldier whether they deserve it or not, and afaik no Germans or Nazis (except Landa) do anything EVIL in the entire movie. Yes, the Basterds are morally worse than their victims (as far a the audience knows).
4. Thats... like.... a matter of opinion, man
5. I don't mind long movies.
All in all, I'd say most viewers of the trailers were lied to. People expected a grindhouse WWII action flick, but instead got a western suspense movie with 'gasp' a ton of dialogue in subtitles. I really like this movie but I told a lot of people not to go see it.
DeathProof was boring though.
2. The basement scene is my favorite scene from this movie. I don't think we are supposed to empathize with the celebrating German soldiers, they are there to aid in SUSPENSE.
3. The Basterds are terrorists not cunning commandos. They kill any german soldier whether they deserve it or not, and afaik no Germans or Nazis (except Landa) do anything EVIL in the entire movie. Yes, the Basterds are morally worse than their victims (as far a the audience knows).
4. Thats... like.... a matter of opinion, man
5. I don't mind long movies.
All in all, I'd say most viewers of the trailers were lied to. People expected a grindhouse WWII action flick, but instead got a western suspense movie with 'gasp' a ton of dialogue in subtitles. I really like this movie but I told a lot of people not to go see it.
DeathProof was boring though.
My problem with Inglorious Basterds is the same problem I have with all Quentin Terrantino movies, that being an overdose of just bad dialogue. More than half the movie entails the characters sitting around for RIDICULOUSLY LONG amounts of time, talking about things that have absolutely nothing to do with anything. Don't get me wrong, dialogue-heavy scenes are fine in films, but not when they're badly written.
Besides that, there was the grievous mismarketing of the film. The media marketed the film as a humorous Nazi-slaughterfest starring Brad Pitt. In essence: action-packed, explosion-packed, and laugh-out-loud funny. This was not the case, it cutting out the main plot of the film: the owner of the Theatre's revenge. When watching it, the Basterds felt largely irrelevant to the entirety of the thing. Considering they were the focus of plot that this movie is a remake of, that's also a mark against Terrantino, attributed to his narcissistic love of his own bad writing.
It had a few good qualities, Christoph Waltz and Brad Pitt's performances in particular, but overall, it didn't work for me.
Besides that, there was the grievous mismarketing of the film. The media marketed the film as a humorous Nazi-slaughterfest starring Brad Pitt. In essence: action-packed, explosion-packed, and laugh-out-loud funny. This was not the case, it cutting out the main plot of the film: the owner of the Theatre's revenge. When watching it, the Basterds felt largely irrelevant to the entirety of the thing. Considering they were the focus of plot that this movie is a remake of, that's also a mark against Terrantino, attributed to his narcissistic love of his own bad writing.
It had a few good qualities, Christoph Waltz and Brad Pitt's performances in particular, but overall, it didn't work for me.
Well it's heavily subtitled, and pretty long for a Tarantino film... So I can guess I can see why some people wouldn't like it.
They were kill-crazy and they originally planned to die killing the Germans. They wanted to go out doing just that, and doing it as brutally and personally as possible.MajorMurray said:
First of all, it's not a revenge flick, there's merely a revenge aspect of the plot.If anything, it deconstructs revenge films. The Basterds don't care who you are, if you're a Nazi, you will die. When Stiglitz and Hicox shoot Hellstrom, it's made clear that none of them are going to walk out alive. They wanted to make sure that they took Hellstrom with them as painfully as possible. The scene humanizes several of the Nazi soldiers to show that both sides have good people, and both have complete psychopaths and that the conflict isn't as completely black-and-white as we perceive it to be.
Like I said before, the Basterds were kill-crazy. Their reason for being dropped into France was mainly to kill Nazis for the sake of killing Nazis. In their first scene, Aldo orders them all to kill at least 100 Nazis each. They also don't see any difference between the words "Nazi" and "German". Notice how Aldo says "The Germans will fear us", etc. As I said, they basically view every German as a sick Nazi bastard and will kill any and all that they can.
I won't argue this unless I get something more in-depth.
There's really no legitimate argument here. It's two hours and thirty minutes. That's pretty average length for something as character and dialogue driven as Inglourious Basterds. Also Full Metal Jacket was less than two hours long. That means it's shorter than an average movie. Maybe you just don't have the attention span to sit through movies. Try television.
It's about the only Tarantino flick I don't like if I'm honest. I loved the premise. In theory a similar story might work. Heck, I'd play a Basterds game if they were to ever make one. But the movie was definately what I consider to be his weakest effort to date.
I can't say I hate it, as that requires an effort and commitment. I nothing it. It left almost no impression on me, which is strange considering the source. But I have a deeper emotional connection to the salad I had for lunch. That's especially dissapointing considering how much I enjoyed Dogs and Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill. Those are films worth getting passionate over. Basterds, sadly, was not. At least for me.
I can't say I hate it, as that requires an effort and commitment. I nothing it. It left almost no impression on me, which is strange considering the source. But I have a deeper emotional connection to the salad I had for lunch. That's especially dissapointing considering how much I enjoyed Dogs and Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill. Those are films worth getting passionate over. Basterds, sadly, was not. At least for me.
You could not be more right. The bastards just made the whole movie bland and unwatchable.HerbertTheHamster said:
Yeah, no, didn't like it at all. Just really bored me.
I agree with your points. Really, I just thought it was meh, especially compared with Tarantino's older work. And people who like this movie and say it's his best probably haven't seen his older work. Hell, one of my top 3 favorite films by him is Jackie Brown, and no one even knows about it.
i have to agree with you on most of those points. To me, i felt quite underwhelmed by the movie, i was expecting a bit more of an action flick for such a scenario and instead was quite disappointing. The basement scene in particular was just too slow paced, i was so bored of this scene and i just wanted one of them to just shoot the damn guy already.MajorMurray said:
I thought it was good, but not as great as everyone said it was. It was still an entertaining movie overall.
1. They sacrificed themselves because they gotta make sure the man in the grey coat and his friends are all dead. Wouldn't want anyone escaping alive now, defeats the point. Also, they were locked in (to prevent the others from escaping). They knew it was probably suicide anyway.MajorMurray said:
2. He went for the balls because that's where his gun was pointed. His gun was pointed there because he could do that easily from under the table without alerting the rest of the room. The scene is long to drive you out of your mind with tension - will the charade hold up or won't it? We see regular Joes die because in war, regular Joes die.
3. We see regular Joes die because in war, regular Joes die.
4. I agree, but music is all personal taste isn't it. I'm sure somebody liked it.
5. You liked the bad guy because Quentin is a skilled director who knows how to make you like something that's evil. He's notorious for twisting and turning your opinion on characters in this way and it's a feature in all his films. Example:
Take the notorious scene from Reservior dogs:
Before this scene there's a lot of joking around about the 'pig' and so forth. When his ear is cut off, we think it's funny, we're on the gangster's side. Then later on, the cop is given a name and some background story, he's humanised. Suddenly we hate ourselves for previously finding funny what we now think is horrible. Later on when that cop gets shot without a second thought by another character, we feel bad, because of the character's humanisation we're not on the criminal's side anymore.
(Although I'm sure some of you tryhard Internet nihilist trendies will say "I was on the ear-cutter's side all along" just to keep up your facade of immature badass, but be honest with yourself. You didn't like it when that cop died, and not admitting that makes you a liar not to us, but to yourself.)
Before this scene there's a lot of joking around about the 'pig' and so forth. When his ear is cut off, we think it's funny, we're on the gangster's side. Then later on, the cop is given a name and some background story, he's humanised. Suddenly we hate ourselves for previously finding funny what we now think is horrible. Later on when that cop gets shot without a second thought by another character, we feel bad, because of the character's humanisation we're not on the criminal's side anymore.
(Although I'm sure some of you tryhard Internet nihilist trendies will say "I was on the ear-cutter's side all along" just to keep up your facade of immature badass, but be honest with yourself. You didn't like it when that cop died, and not admitting that makes you a liar not to us, but to yourself.)
This is the sort of thing that makes QT one of the smartest, most effective film directors in the history of film. Most action films wouldn't go ten miles of territory like that, the bad guys are baddy baddy evils who wear black and die, the good guys are 100% morally righteous goody two shoes maybe with a tiny flaw like a little family trouble but that's about it, you never change the way you feel about any of them and everything plays out exactly as you expect, and you pretty much know how the entire plot will turn out after the first 5 minutes of the film. QT is great because he clearly has contempt for such predictability and when you watch one of his films for the first time, you really don't know what the fuck's gonna happen, or how you're going to feel about it. If you're feeling a bit weird and not necessarily 100% cool with Inglorious Basterds, QT probably meant for you to feel that way. He's messing with you deliberately. The fact that you care about things like the good guys dying needlessly at the end and liking the bad character shows that he's sucked you so hard into the story that you can't get out. He has manipulated you into caring. And if your response is "no, I don't care", then why did you bring this stuff up? Of course you care, because QT told you to. He's that good.
I guess I really wasn't paying attention when I saw this part, it hadn't even occured to me they had bombs on their ankles. I was distracted by that Awesome gun glove, which I thought was made up for the movie, no fooling.MajorMurray said:
The scene in the basement at home (which was my 2nd viewing) is boring and long. At the theater, there is this air of suspense that moves along with the movie. In a day and age where Nazi zombies are available in whatever FPS is out today, and every video game is mostly Nazis, Tarantino basically said, "Kids, the German scum you hear about is not the ones in the video games, some Germans are bastards, some are real people", and that spoke many more dimensions that it probably could have.
I didn't really notice who or what wasn't a Nazi, really. Offensive of me, I know, but I didn't notice.
This is more of a stylish flourish from the director than a horrible music anything. Leave it to Tarantino to put a really awesome song where it needs to be, regardless of anachronisms.
I think the flame shields go up now: I love the first 45 minutes of Full Metal Jacket, I hate the rest. Editing, as far as it goes, it was vital character development, and without it, it wouldn't have been Tarantino, I don't think. It's certainly not going to be on TNT anytime soon, but if it bothers you that much, look for it on TV edit, and it might fulfill that editing issue you have.
Landa is awesome, but only in that "This Bastard" sort of way, Christoph Waltz played him so well, he made the Führer seem like a *****, honestly. The suspense of the Pie Scene, the milk drinking in the beginning, he made food scarier than hell to eat. I didn't eat pie forever after watching it, because he legitimately made me feel like eating pie was a bad thing.
The rest of the movie is fantastic, all complaints aside. It's not Tarantino's best ever, but when you compare it to Death Proof, Inglourious Basterds was an award winning movie, and it deserved the praise. Movie freakin' altered history, can't complain about that.
The only thing worse than listening to Tarantino dialog is having to read Tarantino dialog. Except for some reason I liked Kill Bill 2 better than 1 despite it having more talking, hmm.
But to be honest I didn't like anything he directed after Reservoir Dogs, including Pulp Fiction.
Anyway yes OP you are correct, this movie just wasn't any good. It should have been a fun romp and ended up taking itself way too seriously. The action wasn't good enough for an action movie, the writing was tedious as expected, and other than the main nazi guy the acting was all phone in.
Nobody was likable or compelling at all. The whole choking scene tarnished the nazi jew hunter character who before that was the only remotely interesting one. Brad Pit was generic, the rest were equally forgettable. Half the movie was just Tarantino wanking over how big of a film geek he is.
But to be honest I didn't like anything he directed after Reservoir Dogs, including Pulp Fiction.
Anyway yes OP you are correct, this movie just wasn't any good. It should have been a fun romp and ended up taking itself way too seriously. The action wasn't good enough for an action movie, the writing was tedious as expected, and other than the main nazi guy the acting was all phone in.
Nobody was likable or compelling at all. The whole choking scene tarnished the nazi jew hunter character who before that was the only remotely interesting one. Brad Pit was generic, the rest were equally forgettable. Half the movie was just Tarantino wanking over how big of a film geek he is.