RSS
Home
Movie review: 'Inglorious Basterds' (avoid this movie too)
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
Inglorious Basterds/2009 - Directed by: Quentin Tarantino
Starring: Brad Pitt and a cast of thousands...
The Plot: This being a Quentin Tarantino movie the plot is thick. Thick as a five dollar milkshake? Just maybe...
Set in German occupied France Inglorious Basterds is a revenge flick dolled up from hundreds of different film and pop culture influences. An American Nazi-killing task force under Lt. Aldo Rain, (Brad Pitt) becomes a major thorn in the side of the German war machine. Another threat, a fair-haired Jewish girl (Melanie Laurent) who escaped the clutches of an evil Nazi Jew hunter, (Christopher Waltz) has discovered that the cold hands of fate have delivered the entire top brass of the Aryan empire into her Parisian theater for a premiere showing of a film that might just change the history of the Nazi party forever....
The Good: I'm a Tarantino fan. I couldn't wait to see this film and was pretty much basking in the warm glow of the ten minute opening sequence. Yes it's a venerable tip of the hat to the opening of the The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. And yes it's a terrific scene all on it's own merit. It held the promise of a solid WWII movie to come after its conclusion.
When the "Jew Hunter" settles down for a glass of milk with a poor French dairy farmer to discuss life in the French countryside, the social differences between rats and squirrels, whether or not the man may be hiding Jews on his property - it's some of the best stuff Tarantino's ever evoked. It's only topped later by a longer table scene in a rowdy basement tavern as a British undercover agent and a dangerously sharp SS agent square off over a round of drinks and card games.
The film's big finale is a fevered vision of revenge and hell best seen to be believed. Even as I sit here, fingers keyed to berate every part of this movie that didn't work, Tarantino's grossly excessive finale brings a big smile to my face. If the guy's got balls he put both of them to work turning Basterds' climax into the most stunning slaughterhouse ever designed in film creation. This is film-making at its most undomesticated perfection. It is graphic. It is brazen. It is formidable. And it is positively delicious.
Make no mistake Tarantino apologists, whatever bad things I have to say about Inglorious Basterds none of it involves these moments in the film. Tarantino's brilliance with pacing and dialog come scorching through the theater screen in a four alarm fire of photography, acting prowess, verbal parlaying and strong bloody violence. If he could have kept the magic up for the other two hours of this movie he just may have topped his best work ever. Tragically he resigns the rest of this film to wander and spin completely out of control. Which I'm sure pleases himself and his loyal fan base to no foreseeable end...
The Bad: It's a boring movie man. There are little islands of fertile ground on this open plain - but they are very few and so very far between. Tarantino's always been a bit of an attention whore, with Inglorious Basterds he's pretty much openly reminding you that this is a QUENTIN TARANTINO movie every other minute of the film. These are his words. These are his influences. These cool actors are his buddies. This cool music is from his collection. This is the extent of his cinemaphile credentials. To which I say - whatever, it's your movie do what the hell you want in it. But as far as the general audience is concerned we just like a good time. And Inglorious Basterds is nowhere near a good time.
In fact it's also nowhere near the movie you sold it as. This isn't a Nazi-scalp hunt, - it's a backyard snipe hunt. And Tarantino's the guy leading us all over the property, in and out of every bush, turning over every available stone, and having the very best time possible leading us tag-alongs on a journey that will end with zero results for time spent in the activity.
I know from QT experience that the guy likes to meander a bit while telling his story - and that's usually been a good thing - maybe even the very best thing about his work. But I can't shake the feeling that whatever skills he honed 15 years ago that could keep an audience riveted and absolutely in his pocket for the run of a movie are completely, irrevocably gone now. Now he's compensating by upping the flash, the dazzle, the daring (hey I even dug the David Bowie song in a WWII flick - that kind of daring I can respect) and turning up the soundtrack volume to hide the fact that we're pretty much watching a dud movie. Cinema intellects and fervent fans will call this audacious, I'm thinking the rest of us will spot it as a sidewalk clown putting far too many balls in the air for his dwindling juggling skills to properly take care of...
But even that analogy is a bit more enthralling than what we get here. Inglorious Basterds, save a few really inspired scenes, is an epic drag.
The Ugly: I could pick on Eli Roth here but I won't. Eli knows how to swing a baseball bat - and that's pretty much all the color his character required. Brad Pitt did what he could with Aldo Rain. Though after two hours the accent took on a Karl Childers edge that he probably had little control of.
No, the real "Ugly" part of Inglorious Basterds was how much I was looking forward to this film, (need proof fans? look here) and how much I wanted this to be a return to excellence for a guy that really loves movies and loves making them. I wasn't expecting to hate 90% of the flick. Nor was I expecting this film to be the most overly self-indulgent film project in recent memory. Quentin made this movie for Quentin and Friends of Quentin, the rest of us tragic suckers just put up the cash to fund the project.
The Verdict: Quentin Tarantino went "full retard" on this one. There are flashes of genius and craftsmanship but they are quickly and commandingly snuffed out by a long, hopeless film that wanders in and out of dry conversations and illogical plot devices.
If I had to tell Lt. Aldo Rain what to scalp with his 15" Bowie knife I'd probably point to a sixty-minute section of this film that didn't need to be there. The bloody work he produced just might have been a better alternative than this dud.
Related Articles:
Comments
