*** Official "INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS" Discussion Thread

Thanks for the review.  Are you a fan of the original film?  I see you said it wasn't a direct remake (they never are anyways) but I'm interested in seeing how close it is to Tarantino's "original" idea of the remake.  He talked about some of it on the original film's DVD.

I have never seen Castellari's Inglorious Bastards.  I have reviewed a synopsis of the plot from the 1978 film and it is apparent that Tarantino's screenplay is entirely original.  I cannot say whether Tarantino placed any "easter eggs" in his film other than the cameo roles by Castellari and Bo Svenson.  I hear that Castellari's film is being released soon on Blu-ray to coincide with the release of the new film.

Thanks.  I'm looking forward to seeing how much Tarantino "borrows" as this is always added fun to his movies.  It seems a lot of people are objecting to this all of the sudden but I don't have a problem with it.

You gotta hate everything, it's the internet.

To a certain level I think they have a point though.  The "My name is Buck..." line from KILL BILL is often used as "showing how great of a writing Tarantino is" but that line is from someone else.  That other person should technically get credit and there have been hundreds of other items in his movies that were "borrowed" yet he gets credit for them.  Some use this as a negative and perhaps it is but I've always find the little winks at other films to be funny.  For the most part Tarantino says where they come from and he certainly doesn't try to hide the fact that he does this unlike so many other directors. 

I'm hoping to be off work the day this opens so I can check out the first screening.  I'm not a huge EuroWar fan but I'm still looking forward to this.

Ebert's review is up and is also incredibly positive.  I'm now pumped.  I'm there at 12:01 tonight..

I was fortunate enough to attend an advance screening of Inglourious Basterds on July 25 in San Diego.  My opinion is that it is Tarantino's best film since Pulp Fiction.  My review is up on the Official Inglourious Basterds Review thread in this forum:  http://www.hometheaterforum.com/forum/thread/290984/official-inglourious-basterds-review-thread

James B says its QTs best film since Pulp Fiction (Im partial to Jackie Brown myself)

http://www.reelviews.net/php_review_template.php?identifier=1774

My anticipation for this was very low, guess Ill have to reconsider and check it out.

I'll be seeing it at 12:40 tomorrow if all goes well.  I'm wondering if the disaster (box office wise) known as GRINDHOUSE is the real reason Pitt is in this movie.  I'm curious if Tarantino felt he needed a hit and what might happen if this film doesn't go over well.  I'm interested to see the numbers but from talking to people at work, more "mainstream" people, it seems none of them are interested and that includes some die-hard Pitt fans.

^ Not like I know but I think the "Let's kick some Nazi ass!" aspect of the movie is more of an attempt at a box office hit than Brad Pitt. Not that he hurts but he's a legitimately good actor so it's not like Zac Efron or Megan Fox or one of the Twilight vampires is in the movie.

I'm going tomorrow morning at 11 AM.
Edited by TravisR - 8/21/09 at 12:37am

My theater had about 30+ people at the first showing.  I was shocked to see how "aware" the group was as there was a lot of discussion going on about the original movie.  A group of five where in there saying they bought and watched it last night. 

After the movie was over it seemed everyone was very disappointed.  From the comments leaving the theater it didn't appear that anyone enjoyed the film.  I found it to be a major dud and if you're going to change history why not have the Basterds really rip Hitler apart?

In the box office thread Adam asked how disasterous the Friday to Saturday numbers are going to be and now I'm curious about this.  I think the word of mouth is going to kill this movie and it's not because of the 70% subtitles.  I think the misleading ads are going to have people killing this movie and with two bombs in a row, Tarantino might be in trouble (if this one does bomb).

I'm going to see it again just to make sure I didn't lose my mind for 152-minutes but as of now I'm very disappointed.  And yes, the 1978 version was better as it was at least fun to watch.

How is the violence in this one?  From the previews it looks like there could be ample amounts of it!

There is a good deal of it, but not nearly as much as you'd think.  But the violence that is there, especially what gets inflicted by the bastards, is surprisingly rewarding :)

If you saw the trailers and the commercials, you've seen most of the action in the entire movie. Obviously, it's more graphic in the movie though.

Hi Michael, interesting to see your people could have had such opposite reactions to the crowd I saw it with. As I said I think its important to go into QT's movies post-Jackie Brown not expecting them to be a certain way, because they'll undoubtedly disappoint. Not to take away from the validity of your experience, but is it possible that comparisons to the original more action-filled Inglorious Bastards, of which this movie is not meant to be an exact remake of, made it seem slow and ponderous, when if taken as its own experience, it might not have disappointed?

Having a very, very hard time placing this in QT's filmography.  For me, Pulp Fiction is the standard setter.  I know some believe that Jackie Brown is that film(I actually have Jackie Brown last on the list but that's because it's probably been 9 years since I've seen it and I just can't recall much of it, compared to his other films, which have stayed with me).  Either way, after those two films, for me, it's a toss up at to which film I'd place next in line.

I can make serious arguments for the Kill Bill Saga, Death Proof, and now this.  I just don't know.  I do know that it's one of the best films of the year, by far.  It'll take another viewing before I can really place this film. 

From my gut, I think I enjoyed Kill Bill and Death Proof(especially the Unrated Cut) more than this but there is something unique about this film...something I felt after watching Pulp Fiction, which did take me three viewings before I fell hard for it.  With Kill Bill and Death Proof, it was immediate.  I knew I was in love.  Here, I was jazzed as I left the theatre, grinning from ear to ear.  But, it was different from his two previous films.

I will say one thing.  This is easily my favorite performance by Brad Pitt.  He just nailed everything in this film.  Pitch freaking perfect.  I wouldn't say he's the best performance of the film.  He's just my favorite. 

And the balls on QT to have Pitt's character say that last line in the film.  Just brilliant.

By the way, if you get a chance to catch the absolutely ridiculous teaser trailer for Christopher Nolan's Inception, you're in for a real, real treat.  My man is now a brand name. 

That is certainly what I'm hoping happened to me.  It didn't have so much to do with the original movie but more as to what the ads were making it out to be.  I'm not one of those who will read a screenplay before the movie is out and I know several versions of this movie leaked out way back when.  I'm hoping I'll get more out of the movie on a second viewing and I was prepared to go back today but last night I watched Tarantino on Charlie Rose and I've decided to put off the second viewing for now.

I first heard about this film back when he was promoting JACKIE BROWN (his best film since we're now on that subject) and I believe he was on Dateline or one of those types of shows.  I remember him talking about this movie and the various ideas he had about it.  On the original films DVD (and Blu-ray) he does a one hour interview/discussion with the original director where the two talk about what they should/would do with this "reworking".  The thing that caught me off guard after watching the movie is that not many of these great ideas ended up in the finished film.  Perhaps this ruined something for me.

However, to back up my original thoughts of the lazy writing, on Rose last night Tarantino was talking that his script was done but he put it to the side and instead started writing KILL BILL.  The theater owner in IG was apparently going to have a lot of "character development" behind her actions as was the German actress.  All of this was cut out of the movie and something I complained about since we never were really told much about them.  According to Tarantino, the theater owner was suppose to be the "revenge" aspect of the film but he took all of that out of the current screenplay and instead gave it to Thurman's character in KILL BILL.  I found it interesting that a lot of the original ideas for this movie ended up going into KILL BILL. 

As I was watching the interview I couldn't help but get a little disappointed in some of the things Tarantino did here.  He talked about some of the negative reviews out there for IB and I think he made a few good points but overall I still think he missed the boat.  I'm hoping to be proving wrong though.  For the record, I didn't care for KILL BILL VOL 1 either but loved the second one.  Even sitting back and looking at my own thoughts, it's rather strange that I would love and defend DEATH PROOF, his most hated film, and yet sit here and think he missed the boat so badly here. 

The one thing Tarantino said that I thought was funny goes back to the mystery of the briefcase in PULP FICTION but here it's the rope burn around Pitt's neck.  Rose wanted to know how he got it but Tarantino said it was up to the viewer, something he liked because each member of the crowd could be seeing a different movie just by the thoughts in their mind as to why and how Pitt got that burn. 

I saw this for the second time this morning. I liked the movie more on the second viewing and had fun re-watching the story unfold.

I'd had the script since it leaked, but resisted the temptation to read it until I'd seen the movie. I was surprised to see how similar the final movie is since some reviews & news items mentioned how much was cut/changed. We lose a handful of scenes and a few lines here and there, but nothing too significant. Many scenes play out nearly word for word as scripted (though I imagine much of the movie being subtitled helps).

As far as how it ranks with Tarantino's other films, I consider Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, and Kill Bill to all be excellent movies of about equal quality. I didn't like this movie as much as those three, but that doesn't mean it isn't great.

I think what I admired the most about the movie was the performances. Brad Pitt didn't necessarily impress, but he did a good job and the audience ate up his performance in both screenings. The more impressive performers were the movie's international cast - namely Christoph Waltz, Melanie Laurent, Daniel Bruhl, Michael Fassbender, and August Diehl. Many of these actors are able to shine with very few scenes. On my first viewing and prior to reading the script, I was surprised by how quirky and how much of a dandy the Landa character was, but Waltz expertly played scenes of absurd humor without losing any of his menace. Both Bruhl and Diehl bring a lot of humanity to their characters despite playing Nazis.

Unfortunately, I felt the Shosanna character wasn't very well developed. We basically learn enough about her just to care for the character, but not much by any means. Actually, I think this is true for many of the movie's characters. We don't learn much about them nor do they have much to do, but for the most part the actors shine and do a great job with the little they're given.

Edited by Ray H - 8/22/09 at 1:35pm

I'm surprised that you dug Kill Bill Volume Two (what I would argue is people's second most hated QT movie) and Death Proof but didn't get into this one. Maybe if you give it another shot when it hits video, you'll like it more.

As much as I like most of Quentin's output, I can't stand listening to him talking about his own work anymore. As much as I enjoyed IB, I think a single interview from him could ruin it for me. I guess I used to enjoy his enthusiasm, but for chris'sake have a bit of modesty.

I saw it here in Melbourne last night didn't start until 11:30pm and it was almost full, when it was over the audience applauded, so I guess they enjoyed it. I was surprised by how measured this film is, the trailer makes it look like a completely different film, all action and violence and over the top. QT did a great job, as soon as I saw the old universal logo and the opening credits I knew I was going to like it, and the cinematography was perfect.

"However, to back up my original thoughts of the lazy writing, on Rose last night Tarantino was talking that his script was done but he put it to the side and instead started writing KILL BILL."


I remember reading a interview with QT WAY back in the late 90s when he said that he had to put Basterds aside unfinished, because the script had gotten so long and he simply couldnt stop writing it. I think he even said the script might end up being unfilmable the way it was because at the time there wasnt a ending and he felt it was so long.

Which is funny, because thats what happened with Kill Bill - it ended up having to be split into 2 parts.


Edited by JonZ - 8/23/09 at 8:07pm

And boy am I glad it wasn't repeated; I think both Kill Bill and Grindhouse were way too long. Grindhouse had no chance as a 5-hour double-feature. Did you hear that many people left cinemas after Planet Terror, with no clue that it was a double feature, and that fueled the decision to split it up? Luckily, Planet Terror is an incredible movie, and Kill Bill is quite a remarkable movie too; I just think Bill could have been a lot shorter.

 

Also have to agree with the point about restraint; I was surprised it was such a feature of the film, given the title, the expectations set for some by the source it was inspired by; and of course the trailer. Still, when I saw that trailer, there were few laugh-out-loud moments, so I knew only that I didn't know what to expect. I only hope that now I do know what to expect, I am as impressed a second time on blu ray!

Edited by Ben Parker - 8/24/09 at 5:39am

My wife and I screened this yesterday along with our 18 year old daughter and her 19 year old friend (male). 

My wife and I LOVED it, thought it brilliant, the kids were bored by it, quite simply lol.

I think this movie shot right into my top 15 or so...it's amazing.  I loved every moment of every scene, and Waltz was as impossible to take your eyes off of as Heath was in TDK.  Heath was scarier, but not by much...and both Heath in TDK and Waltz in IB were 100% unpredictable and mesmerizing.

The theater scenes I will NEVER forget, OMG!

Pitt actually added some great levity to the film with his dialog and smirky presence, but also delivered some gravity at the same time with his cruelty/revenge.  Very cool.  Great performances by everyone, all around.

My wife was distracted by the Mike Myers cameo; she said she kept waiting for him to deliver a punchline. lol.   I thought he was fine.

I think this film is being mis-marketed, as others have pointed out here, and this could be it's box--office demise.  It's a turnoff for many of those expecting an action-packed Nazi killfest. 

I went in expecting what I got; dialog-based QT movie with some noir and brilliant scenes, buildups and sudden punctuations of violence, and this movie had briliant (IMO) payoffs.  I haven't been able to stop thinking about it.

I still rank Pulp above it, but IB is right up there!

Based on the BO returns, I think it has been marketed perfectly.  Much bigger than expected.  Might it drop off a bit due to the divergent marketing?  Maybe a little, but it was worth it for the opening weekend returns.

I'm happy if it's doing well out of it's first weekend.  I'm doing my part to spread the word to my friends that I loved it and why.  But word of mouth seems pretty split, so I don't know what to expect for the BO returns this weekend.

I was one of those people expecting a "Where Eagles Dare" or Dirty Dozen kind of movie but I enjoyed the film anyway. I think I'll end up appreciating it more with repeat home viewings. What was Rod Taylor doing in this movie besides observing two people have a conversation in the background? And Mike Myers? I think these kinds of casting decisions are a little bizarre and they certainly distract from the viewing experience; for me, anyway. I guess my favorite WWII movie is still and will remain Von Ryan's Express for sheer entertainment.