- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Inglorious Basterds
Posted on 8/25/09 at 12:42 pm to Baloo
Posted on 8/25/09 at 12:42 pm to Baloo
quote:
When she kills him, she feels regret. Because she has killed a person. Note she is planning to kill HUNDREDS of people (while laughing at them – great shot). But once she has to personalize the act, it becomes difficult. It’s easy to light a bunch of Nazis on fire. It’s hard to shoot Frederick. There’s a lot going on about the contextual nature of violence. We cheer the Basterds indiscriminately shooting everyone in the threatre, but we feel at least some sympathy for Frederick because we know him as a person.
It was a great juxtaposition of the intimacy of murder, one in which the audience was very silent and surprised, and the chaotic celebration of murder, when people laughed and cheered as the Bear Jew plugged Hitler and other Nazis full of holes.
Also, it was interesting to see that Tarantino had to have the Bear Jew and "Decocco" actively killing Nazis to get the intended effect. Would there have been as uproarious applause if we would have watched them burn instead? I doubt it. I think the intervention of the two Basterds piled violence on top of violence, and Tarantino wanted the grinning faces of the Basterds to be the grinning faces of an unrelenting audience.
If we remember, theater was about a release, an expression of emotion. It was supposed to be cathartic. And killing Hitler in this manner was Tarantino's way of giving some people what they have wanted to watch since 1945.
1
Posted on 8/25/09 at 12:44 pm to ccla
quote:
I dont think he knew who she was.........right?
I had this discussion with my friends on Saturday, and I don't think we ever reached a conclusion.
I was on the No side because he had zero evidence. He was good at deducing, but not that good.
Side note: Wow, I think we have kept most of the discussion to one thread.
Posted on 8/25/09 at 2:09 pm to Baloo
quote:also figured that thats what he "forgot" at the end of the conversation. he wanted to ask her something but couldn't remember what it was. it's possible he did have some alterior motive to do something to her after the showing but that never came to pass for him for obvious reasons.
I think he suspected but didn't know. Hence the glass of milk.
Posted on 8/25/09 at 7:41 pm to LSUROCKS52
didn't like it one bit, and I'm usually a Tarantino fan.
This post was edited on 8/25/09 at 7:42 pm
Posted on 8/25/09 at 9:39 pm to Volvagia
agreed, It sucked. couldn't wait for it to be over.
Posted on 8/25/09 at 9:40 pm to shawshank39
quote:
agreed, It sucked. couldn't wait for it to be over.
Really? I thought it was the best movie I've seen this year. Easy. I haven't enjoyed a movie I saw in theaters like this in a long time.
I'm going to see it again.
Posted on 8/25/09 at 9:42 pm to Duke
Yes, I thought it was horrible although I respect your opinion.
Posted on 8/25/09 at 9:44 pm to shawshank39
quote:
Yes, I thought it was horrible although I respect your opinion.
What didn't you like? Just curious.
Posted on 8/25/09 at 9:50 pm to Duke
The way Tarantino went out of his way to compare blacks to King Kong. The fact that they had Hitler die (and get shot) in a fire which wasn't true. Pitt talked liked Benjamin Button, the plot sucked, acting was mediocre... bad, long, movie.
Posted on 8/25/09 at 9:53 pm to shawshank39
quote:
The way Tarantino went out of his way to compare blacks to King Kong.
I thought it was rather clever, and you know, proves we shouldn't be on such a high horse about Nazi racism when we're racist ourselves.
quote:
The fact that they had Hitler die (and get shot) in a fire which wasn't true.
That was the point. It was him dropping these characters into the story and they changed history. It wasn't suppose to be factual.
quote:
acting was mediocre
Waltz was phenomenal. Surely you jest.
Posted on 8/25/09 at 9:53 pm to shawshank39
quote:
The way Tarantino went out of his way to compare blacks to King Kong.
..........
quote:
The fact that they had Hitler die (and get shot) in a fire which wasn't true
You can't be fricking serious.
quote:
Pitt talked liked Benjamin Button, the plot sucked, acting was mediocre... bad, long, movie.
Wow.
Posted on 8/25/09 at 10:08 pm to Fun Bunch
I finally realized who Pitt sounded like in the movie..Johnny Knoxville. Seriously, did he watch Jackass for a few weeks? 
This post was edited on 8/25/09 at 10:09 pm
Posted on 8/26/09 at 8:14 am to UnluckyTiger
The only redeeming thing about this movie was the performance of Waltz. Tarantino's wacky, spaghetti western style just didn't translate to Nazi occupied Europe. The dialogue was very weak, by Tarantino standards. I'm just going to assume that Pitt's character was somewhat of a caricature, but even assuming that, it stil seemed out of place and uninteresting. And, is it just me, or does Tarantino have some sort of foot fetish?
Posted on 8/26/09 at 8:58 am to Duke
quote:Waltz=Oscar
Waltz was phenomenal. Surely you jest.
quote:you didnt watch the same movie
The dialogue was very weak, by Tarantino standards.
This post was edited on 8/26/09 at 9:00 am
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:39 am to Acreboy
I personally think this is Brad Pitt's best performance. It is the most out of character work he has ever done. I thought He was great. I'll even go as far to say that this was "ledger-like" in the way he stole this movie back from the Col. Landa character. Pitt, in my opinion, saved this movie....
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:05 am to BEAUXREGARD
quote:
Tarantino's wacky, spaghetti western style just didn't translate to Nazi occupied Europe.
He wasn't going for "spaghetti western" this time around. The only film that he did in that style was Kill Bill 1 & 2
quote:
The dialogue was very weak, by Tarantino standards.
Maybe compared to Pulp Fiction. Other than that it seemed perfectly tailored to harbor suspense and the drive the plot.
quote:
Pitt's character ... stil seemed out of place and uninteresting
I believe that was the whole point (to have an appearance of being "out of place"). And for that reason I loved it. Uninteresting?? Fair enough. All I know is the Coen Bros. have made a living off of quirky, colloquial characters. Always worked for them, worked for QT and Pitt in this movie.
quote:
And, is it just me, or does Tarantino have some sort of foot fetish?
Jup, he's admitted it before.
Posted on 8/26/09 at 11:03 am to BEAUXREGARD
quote:
And, is it just me, or does Tarantino have some sort of foot fetish?
You just noticed that?
Anyway, I disagree that this was his weakest dialogue. I think it was his strongest. The three scenes which were so dialogue heavy - the opener, the bar scene with the Major, and the meeting of Shoshanna and Goebbels and the Nazis are so fraught with tension in almost every line. It's really unbelievable. Every line is a subtle trap or evasion. It was not overdone, and it showed off Tarantino's gift for language in making those scenes so incredibly suspenseful.
The Basterds are just comic relief, really.
Posted on 8/26/09 at 3:37 pm to Roofdog
quote:
I'll even go as far to say that this was "ledger-like" in the way he stole this movie back from the Col. Landa character. Pitt, in my opinion, saved this movie....
I disagree. Col. Landa is the best character I've seen on screen since Anton Chigurh and well, the aforementioned Ledger Joker.
Posted on 8/26/09 at 3:46 pm to Baloo
Yep, the opening scene of the movie is fantastic as well as the bar scene. When a scene was centered around intense dialogue, it definitely disappoint.
Posted on 8/29/09 at 9:17 pm to UnluckyTiger
quote:
Col. Landa is the best character I've seen on screen since Anton Chigurh and well, the aforementioned Ledger Joker.
Definitely, he was an awesome villain....smart, charming, and evil.
I thought the movie was vintage Tarantino. Fantastic dialogue that just kept putting the screws to you with tension. The movie was long, but it never dragged, I was actually hoping for more when it ended. I'll never understand when people go into a QT movie, and complain about too much dialogue, and not enough "action." QT has never made an "action" movie. His movies are all about character, and you learn his characters thru their dialogue, and the "everyday" conversations they have...yet it all builds to something.
I also thought it was awesome how both stories tied together at the climax. I was really impressed by how that was done.
And for those of ya'll complaining about subtitles, that's just lazy. You sound like Rainier Wolfcastle in the Simpsons movie when he complains about reading. Some people go into every movie wanting Transformers, and others want to see a quality show.
Page 6 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News