Started By
Message

re: Inglourious Basterds question

Posted on 8/3/22 at 12:35 pm to
Posted by TigerDeacon
West Monroe, LA
Member since Sep 2003
29897 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 12:35 pm to
quote:

crème: it’s not kosher.


This is incorrect.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
120445 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 12:40 pm to
quote:

This is incorrect.


I’ve looked it up, and it might or might not be kosher. Just depends on the batch. The strudel though may have been the bigger factor actually since they apparently were baked with pork lard.
Posted by Tangineck
Mandeville
Member since Nov 2017
2941 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 12:41 pm to
He absolutely did not kill the dairy farmer. Landa would've gotten far more sick pleasure from leaving the man to contemplate selling the family under his floorboards out for the rest of his life. If he wanted to kill him and his family he'd have burned the house down with them all inside.
Posted by GeauxTigerTM
Member since Sep 2006
30596 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 12:53 pm to
I always assumed he let him live. Landa was a psychopath, but once the guy told him what he wanted there was no need to kill him.
Posted by TigerDeacon
West Monroe, LA
Member since Sep 2003
29897 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 12:56 pm to
quote:

I’ve looked it up, and it might or might not be kosher. Just depends on the batch. The strudel though may have been the bigger factor actually since they apparently were baked with pork lard.


Strudel may not have been kosher since it may have had pork lard but that was an establishment serving German officers so they probably could obtain butter. In any event, she was going to eat the strudel before he ordered the creme. The kosher rules are suspended in life or death situations and she is hiding in occupied territory. The most obvious way to give yourself away would be to refuse food based upon kosher rules.

Edit to add: I would bet that there were no non-jewish restaurants in Europe that were fully kosher. They would have to keep separate plates and dishwashing areas. We don't show if she even kept kosher before the war. She could have been secularized.
This post was edited on 8/3/22 at 1:01 pm
Posted by Mstate
Birmingham
Member since Nov 2009
10524 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 1:01 pm to
What a great fricking movie. I’ll rewatch the bar scene from time to time on YouTube and catch it anytime I see it on TV
Posted by Pandy Fackler
Member since Jun 2018
21114 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 1:13 pm to
Yeah he killed him and that scene went on way too fricking long.

Just get on with it already, shite.
Posted by skrayper
21-0 Asterisk Drive
Member since Nov 2012
35310 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 1:24 pm to
Nazis randomly killed children for crying too loud before being deported to concentration camps.

So I think Landa could easily have murdered the farmer without thinking much about it.
This post was edited on 8/3/22 at 1:25 pm
Posted by TigerDeacon
West Monroe, LA
Member since Sep 2003
29897 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 2:09 pm to
quote:

Nazis randomly killed children for crying too loud before being deported to concentration camps.

So I think Landa could easily have murdered the farmer without thinking much about it.


Landa wasn't a mindless thug. He was cool and calculating. That's why he was so scary. It doesn't help his job to kill people who willing give up people that are hiding.
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 2:12 pm to
quote:

You’re wrong for a very simple reason: photographs. He sure as shite saw one of those.
quote:

Yea he knew her name, he absolutely had seen a picture of her before going to the cabin.

I suspect that family photos were not as common as you may think for poor French dairy farmers who did not have either electricity or running water.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
120445 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 2:23 pm to
quote:

I suspect that family photos were not as common as you may think for poor French dairy farmers who did not have either electricity or running water.


By the 1930s, they could have easily gotten a picture made. Maybe just as simple as a family portrait. Why wouldn’t you get that unless you suspected Nazis would be in your country in a few short years hunting you down for sport? Can’t be that expensive. Plus the Farmer has a black and white picture of his daughters on the mantlepiece which is over Hans’ shoulder.

You’re acting like this is the 1860s and not the 1930s/40s. Keep in mind the Wizard of Oz was filmed at this time. Also Shoshana was a film buff and film collector, so this makes it hard for me to believe that there wasn’t a photo of her out there somewhere.
This post was edited on 8/3/22 at 2:38 pm
Posted by AbitaFan08
Boston, MA
Member since Apr 2008
27902 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 2:40 pm to
I just recently rewatched this movie on a flight. Such a great film.

I would think no. He told the farmer that if he fessed up he and his family would be left alone, and though he’s (obviously) a monster, he doesn’t view himself as one and seems to take his word as oath, as shown at the closing scene when brad Pitt shoots his assistant and he’s shocked because “we had a deal. I made a deal for that man’s life.”
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 5:06 pm to
quote:

Shoshana was a film buff and film collector, so this makes it hard for me to believe that there wasn’t a photo of her out there somewhere.
We know that she was a film buff in late 1944, when most of the film is set. Was she a film buff at the start of the film three years earlier (1941), when she was a barefoot dairy farmer's daughter? Who knows?

I just don't think it is a "given" that Landa would have had a photo of her.
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
65206 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 5:16 pm to
quote:

If he was known to kill the people who harbored Jews, they’d never give them up
Good point, but that wouldn't discourage people from harboring them.
quote:

The bigger question is did he know who Shoshana was at the lunch/strudel scene. I believe he did
No. He'd never seen her face and years had passed. The dude was smart but not psychic.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
120445 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 5:22 pm to
quote:

We know that she was a film buff in late 1944, when most of the film is set. Was she a film buff at the start of the film three years earlier (1941), when she was a barefoot dairy farmer's daughter? Who knows?

I just don't think it is a "given" that Landa would have had a photo of her.


Dude, everyone had photos back then. Parents had a vested interest in photographing their kids and it wasn’t all that expensive or time consuming to do that. I think it’s extremely unlikely, whether it be for schooling or whatever that there was not a picture of her somewhere. You’re acting like this is the 1860s, where you had to stand still for like a minute. Reminder of what the most advanced cameras could do at the time and it’s aged just fine: Dorothy lands in Oz

Plus the farmer had a few pictures of his daughters in the scene, so not likely the Dreyfuses wouldn’t have photographed their kids as well.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
120445 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 5:27 pm to
quote:

No. He'd never seen her face and years had passed. The dude was smart but not psychic.


Well he wanted a long hunt with her. And do you know what “au revoir” means? It does not actually mean “goodbye,” that would be “adieu.” Au revior means “goodbye until we meet again.” Keep in mind he says to the Farmer and Shoshana’s family adieu; he says to Shoshana “au revoir, Shoshana.” No, he was counting on capturing her one of these days. That is very specifically worded in a way that Tarantino would perfectly write and intend. He was actively hunting her for years. Again, Landa likes the hunt more than the kill.
This post was edited on 8/3/22 at 5:33 pm
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 5:35 pm to
You seem to be REALLY invested in this issue.

I did not say that there was definitely no photo. I just said that there is no reason to assume that there WAS one, either.

My dad would have been about Shoshanna's age, and he grew up in rural Texas. I have seen maybe a dozen photos of him prior to college. Would there have been more or fewer photos of a child in rural France at about the same time? I don't know, and neither do you.

Chill out.
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
65206 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 5:39 pm to
Sure, I guess. I think most people just take him to be a sadist in general.

Still, that doesn't mean he knew who she was in that scene.
Posted by CocomoLSU
Inside your dome.
Member since Feb 2004
156401 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 5:39 pm to
quote:

He at least suspected.

Which is why he made a big deal about the crème: it’s not kosher.

That’s a solid point. I personally don’t think he suspected anything really. He’s always teetering on the edge of insanity while also being completely rational and collected. That’s the beauty of his character.

The dessert scene is a great scene, and I love that you can’t really tell one way or the other. But I do think he didn’t recognize her, which makes her reaction at the end all the more real.



She was “this close” to being exposed (and likely death) and made it out the other side with not being recognized. If he recognizes her and let’s her go anyway, her reaction doesn’t mean as much IMO.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
120445 posts
Posted on 8/3/22 at 5:45 pm to
quote:

You seem to be REALLY invested in this issue.


Because it’s nonsense that someone in France in the 30s and 40s shouldn’t have pictures of their kids. Save for tribesmen who are convinced cameras and pictures absorb their souls, pretty much every mother and father would want pictures of their kids. It was not all that expensive to get a picture shot and developed at that time.

Plus what about the schools? I’ve seen yearbook photos of my grandparents who were around Shoshana’s age, and one of them literally grew up in a dirt floor shack as a hillbilly. If he has photos from his youth, yeah Shoshana does as well. There are pictures of her somewhere, and Landa would find them and probably did even before visiting the farm.

quote:

My dad would have been about Shoshanna's age, and he grew up in rural Texas. I have seen maybe a dozen photos of him prior to college.


You just proved my point then. Photographs are pretty much something that literally everyone seeks out since their creation. And in 30s and 40s France they were very easy to come by. Given how important film is within the context of the movie, it’s retarded to assume that there isn’t film anywhere without her face on it.

EDIT: Also Tarantino actually confirms this one, but Hans doesn’t actually smoke a pipe. He brought that absurdly large pipe in to intimidate the Farmer, which is why he breaks that out last before asking him if he’s hiding the family beneath his floorboard. Now if he knew that he was a big pipe smoker, then that means he knows everything and was his final chance to surrender to Landa. I’m a big time cigar smoker and have like two or three a week, and it’d be the equivalent of some officer came to my house and then pulling out a cigar this size after minutes of questioning.

This post was edited on 8/3/22 at 6:04 pm
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram