| Page 1 of 135: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] |
| Index | 1345 reviews in total |
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
After watching Inglorious Basterds i was really surprised when i saw
ratings on IMDb. Didn't expected high ratings and top 250 place. If we
can only isolate and rate Christoph Waltz's acting performance i would
agree that this movie deserves 10. But he is not alone, and his
performance can't cover horrible plot, boring conversations, unfunny
characters, alternative QT WW2 fantasy and Eli Roth as Jew bear.
The opening scene with Denis Menochet as farmer and Christoph Waltz as
SS officer is best part of the movie. Only part that have same quality
and connects tension from that scene with the rest of the movie is a
basement scene. Basement scene was crossroad for me. Michael Fassbender
was great in role of British spy and his character adds some new layer
of logic and realism in movie. In moments you can actually see some
plot finally breaking through the rubbish you watched after the farm
scene. After the basement chapter, movie is going nowhere.
Empty space. A lot of empty space for movie that last 153 minutes. Long
and boring scenes with boring characters and conversations. Childish
fantasy mixed up with Spaghetti western movies and some atmosphere that
don't belong to WW2 period. Thats why we have basterds to fill
everything else and patch the rest of movie. They failed. Basterds are
weakest/undeveloped and most boring part of movie. Movie is named by
them, yes - Brad is on Movie poster ... but they are horrible. Worst
role of Mr Pitt and i hope last one from Eli Roth.
Cinema/Shosanna story with David Bowie music was just another QT patch
v1.1 to fill huge empty space between farm and basement. Extremely
boring scenes with Mélanie Laurent (taking off cinema letters, red
dresses, secret love Marcel...) will blast your brain. Yes - headache
is a must.
Beside 2 good scenes, i really enjoyed listening smooth gradient of
German, French and English language. But again, this is connected to
Waltz and Fassbender and their personal knowledge that Tarantino used
for his fantasy.
Inglorious Basterds is Hybrid movie where gangsters are replaced with
Nazis adding them wild west background layer with Brad Pitt on movie
poster just to sell tickets. It doesn't work in this case.
5/10 - only for Christoph Waltz and Michael Fassbender.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I will just start with some quotes from other reviewers that describes
it the best.
"This is easily one of the most overrated films of the year and
probably the worst film Tarantino has ever done." "The ONLY good thing
in this movie was the performance of Mr. Waltz".
"So I was really disappointed, and seeing this movie on place #40 of
the greatest movies of all time is the only thing about this, that
leaves me with my mouth opened" Now for more details go and read "Hated
it" reviews.
One thing I hate about a movie is when it treats audience as bunch of
dumb people. (Spoiler ahead). Now I know Tarantino's style is based on
fantasy and fictitious plots, but come on, Adolf Hitler and 200 top
Nazis Officers will be in attendance of a movie premier in occupied
France and you have only two guards in the whole theater and the
surroundings? Where also an American-African walks around freely with
steel pipes locking doors and setting fire. These 2 guards are then
executed in seconds opening the door for our 2 "heroes" to slay Hitler
at point blank with around 100 rounds... very dumb. At least, challenge
our intelligence and create a smarter plot to kill one of the most
feared tyrants of all time (Go watch Valkyrie). Besides, Mike Myers
impersonation of a British general is more realistic and authentic than
the guy doing Hitler, just picture that.
What ruined it further, is that the only smart and powerful character,
which nailed everyone in the movie, with his psychological and mind
bending interrogations, ends up to be effortlessly tricked by the most
mindless character in the movie.
After watching the movie, I was sympathizing with Nazis, who were
portrayed to have more bravery and humanity than our Basterds!!!
Imagine that.
My recommendations, if you have insomnia, 2hrs 33 min to waste or you
want to give your mind a break, go watch this movie.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This usually all sounds a lot better in my head (so forgive me for
rambling) I'm hardly Tarantino's biggest fan (and will *try* not to
stoop to calling him a 'hack'....which is quite hard) I don't like to
mock or critique a movie before seeing it. So with cautious hesitation,
i walked to the cinema today to watch 'Inglorious Basterds'
Now, to call it a 'rip-off of a rip-off' would be unfair here.
Tarantino is happy enough to take the title from Enzo Castellari's
(less than spectacular) Dirty Dozen clone, but not it's plot points
(that, he takes from all other genre of movies) 'Inglorious' opens with
a Nazi officer and his lengthy interrogation against a farmer who is
hiding Jews in his basement. This is such an anti-climax, in that, it's
dialogue is stale, and outcome signposted a mile off. Of course, one of
the hidden Jews makes her escape (but more of her later) We (the
obviously, easily pleased) audience are treated to the introduction of
Lt. Aldo Raine (ha-ha, that name almost sounds like B-movie king ALDO
RAY....ha-ha Quentin...keep those 'tributes' coming) and this character
is played by none other than Brad (DALLAS) Pitt (sorry, DALLAS was
about the only good thing he's ever starred in) and with jaw-jutting,
Mr Jolie treats us to a hound-dogged, southern drawled, smirking
Nazi-killer. Meanwhile Mr Tarantino forgets that actual grown-ups may
be in attendance, so assumes that the teenyboppers won't have heard of
the 'Dirty Dozen'?
Raines 'platoon' consists of (John Cassavettes looking) blood-thirsty
Jewish soldiers, all looking to get the big payback on Adolf Hitler.
Tarantino in all his superior knowledge, pays special attention to two
of these men, by casting his long time best buddy (and fellow
homage-sycophant) Eli Roth (as the baseball bat wielding 'Bear Jew')
The other man is called Hugo Stiglitz (and i'll wager more than half
the QT fan-boys had never heard this name before this movie) Keep up
the good work Tarantino, you've managed about 6 or 7 'hommages' so far
(in the first 15 minutes) keep adding them, and it may detract from the
plot (or lack of?)
Anyhow, cutting a long (and extremely boring and protracted) story
short, both Raine and his men (the 'Inglorious Basterds') and the sole
survivor from chapter one, both have separate plots to kill Hitler at
the showing of a Nazi-propaganda movie, in a french cinema (owned by
the fore-mentioned survivor, now grown up)
More boring (and pointless) conversations follow two and fro, as Pitt
mugs away at an audience past caring. And any genuine suspense, leading
to the assassination of the most deadly tyrant of all time, is
thrown-away by the directors insistence of placing a 1980's David Bowie
song in a WWII movie.
My problems (and there are many) with this movie, is the re-occurring
problem i have with most Tarantino product.....he rarely knows when to
either start or stop. I don't need 'homage' after 'homage' to get the
*joke* (whatever it may be) I knew of Inglorious Bastards, Enzo
Castellari, Aldo Ray, Hugo Stiglitz (and the ultimate crime of the
entire movie) Ennio Morricone's haunting score from REVOLVER. I go to
the cinema to see the stars.....if the best you can do is the dire
Barad Pitt, i'll assume You (Mr Tarantino) are the main draw here? I
don't want the audience directing the movie. I pay to see YOUR vision,
your ideas, your creativity....NOT how you can patchwork (time and time
again) endless scenes from endless movies. It's high time the fan-boys
(on IMDb) employed some 'tough love' on your 'idol' (god knows, if you
don't....the studios should?)
The tired old argument with Tarantino worshippers is "well, if you can
do better...do so" Let me tell you, if i was a 46 year old director,
with the (unfortunate) pull QT has.....i'd want to offer YOU a lot more
than a warmed up muddled re-hash of better WWII movies than this tripe.
The directors he attempts to emulate, made movies so bad by accident,
or due to budgetary constraints. It's a cop out, time and time again,
to hear his fans campaign his lack of imagination as 'art'. I'm sure
he's capable of better (but after giving him the benefit of the doubt,
once more....and not to mention 2 and a half hours of my life.....)
maybe he isn't?
It just goes to show how wrong you can be. I had not expected to like
this film. I was disappointed by both the Kill Bill films (although i
preferred the second) and Death Proof (although it was better in the
shorter cut of the double-bill release). I love Reservoir Dogs, admire
Pulp Fiction and think that Jackie Brown is Tarantino's most mature
piece of film-making - technically his most superior - including the
last great performance elicited from Robert De Niro. Since then it
seems to me while his films have been okay (i haven't hated them) he
has been treading water in referential, reverential, self-indulgent
juvenilia.
Then i read the script last year for Inglourious Basterds - and i hated
it! Sure it had some typical QT flourishes and the opening scene was
undeniably powerful. There were a couple of great characters. But on
page it was more juvenile rubbish, largely ruined by the largess of the
uninteresting Basterds of the title. It made me seriously contemplate
not seeing the film. The trailers did nothing to convince me. I only
changed by mind when i had the opportunity to see the film with a
Tarantino Q&A following in London. I figured it would be worth enduring
to hear him in Q&A as i know from interviews how entertaining he can be
in person.
So little was i prepared for the sheer exuberant fun and brilliance of
Inglourious Basterds.
Easily Mr Tarantino's best work since Jackie Brown it is a triumph.
Yes the references are there but they do not interfere with the story,
they are not the driving force. Yes Eli Roth is stunt casting but he
works fine, with little to do but look aggressive, and does nothing to
hurt the film as i had feared. While i admired Mr Tarantino for using
stuntwoman Zoe Bell as herself in Death Proof in order to amp-up the
exhilaration of the major stunt scene her lack of any acting ability in
a key role was a problem for the film. The same could be said of
Tarantino's own appearances in several films, especially Robert
Rodriguez's From Dusk Till Dawn, which Tarantino wrote.
What really makes this work is how BIG it is. The spaghetti western
vibe to much of the style, dialogue and performances is wonderfully
over the top without descending too far into the cartoon quality of
Kill Bill. The violence is so big. The audacity so big. Brad Pitt is so
big! In the trailers the Hitler moment and Pitt's performance bothered
me but in the context of the film they are hilarious. Pitt is actually
brilliant here, exactly what he needs to be. He is Mifune's blustering
samurai in Yojimbo, he is Robards Cheyenne from Once Upon a Time in the
West, there is a very James Coburn vibe to him, and of course a
suitably Lee Marvin edge.
Christoph Waltz (who i did not previously known) and Melanie Laurent
(who i first noticed in a brilliant French-language British short film
by Sean Ellis) are sensational and i expect to see both used a lot more
in the future. Tarantino has clearly not lost his eye for casting,
which seemed to desert him in Death Proof. Waltz is equally large in
his performance. Chilling, yet theatrical. He is Fonda from OUATITW,
Van Cleef from Good, The Bad & the Ugly. And Laurent is suitably
Cardinale innocence but tough, a fighter. They both dazzle here.
That every member of the cast gets the fun to be had from what they are
doing while not indulging themselves in just having fun and trying to
get laughs helps tremendously. The laughs - and there are loads - come
organically. Only Mike Myers comes close to tipping the wink and
pushing it too far but his scene is reigned in just enough - with the
help of a fantastic Michael Fassbender who seems pulled directly from
the mold of Attenborough's Great Escape leader.
All the actors shine and Tarantino throws in wonderful flourishes, but
ones that work with the story. The introduction of Schweiger's Hugo
Stiglitz is a riot. After a sensational slow-burn opening and a
glorious intro to those inglourious Basterds the pace never lets up and
over two and half hours flies by.
It also looks beautiful, marking this as a return to real film-making
rather than just self-indulgent silliness. The musical choices, as
always, are inspired from Morricone on.
The film is audacious and hilarious. After a summer when nearly every
film has disappointed me it came as a huge surprise that the real fun
and entertaining, but also involving and impressive film should be this
one, when i would never have believed it from script form. Welcome back
QT.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Chapter One: Once Upon a Time
At A Table (1941)
In which a German Nazi and a French Dairy Farmer talk at a table for 20
minutes; first in French, then in English.
Chapter Two: Three Years Of Inglorious Basterds In Sixteen Minutes...
Without Tables (Mostly)
In which an American Lieutenant talks to his newly formed 8 man Jewish-
American commando unit. There are no tables present. Cut to Adolf
Hitler, three years later. He is angry at his men's inability to deal
with the Basterds. Hitler does have a table. We return to the Basterds
in a flashback. Again, distinct lack of table-based content.
Chapter Three: German Night in Paris... At A Table... Talking
In which a Jewish woman who escaped from under the table in Chapter One
has somehow managed to become the proprietress of a cinema. The Jewish
woman talks to an Actor at a table in a bar. Later, the Jewish woman,
the Actor, Joseph Goebbels and a Translator talk at a table in a
Restaurant. The Actor and Goebbels talk in German. The Translator
translates the German into French. The Jewish woman replies in French.
The Translator translates the French into German. Goebbels decides to
hold a film premiere at the Jewish woman's cinema. The Actor and
Goebbels leave. The Nazi (who talked with the Dairy Farmer at a table
for twenty minutes back in Chapter One) arrives. He talks with the
Jewish woman at the table. He leaves. The Jewish woman breaks down;
overcome with emotion at having spent so long talking at a table.
Chapter Four: Operation Table Talking
In which Austin Powers sends a British Officer to join the Basterds and
an Actress on a mission to talk in German at a table in a Tavern. After
21 minutes of talking at a table they all shoot each other. The actress
survives but spends the next 5 minutes lying on a table talking.
Chapter Five: Revenge of the Giant Table
In which, The Basterds decide to continue the operation by talking in
Italian and suicide bombing the cinema. The Nazi takes the Actress into
a small room where they sit next to a table. A hoe that he found under
the table in the Tavern fits her so he kills her. Then he takes two of
the Basterds to a big room, where they sit and talk at a table.
Meanwhile, the cinema burns down, Hitler is riddled with bullets and
the two Basterds blow themselves up for no good reason at all.
The End
Inglorious Basterds makes no apologies, asks for no forgiveness, it's a no holds barred assault on the senses. Tarantino doesn't care if he offends, if he steps all over stereotypes and clichés, this is film making at it purest. It's great to see a film maker whose work clearly isn't interfeared with by the powers that be. Tarantino is a master of effortlessly cranking up immense tension and suddenly mixing it with laugh out loud moments; you're not sure if you should be looking away in disgust or rolling around laughing, either way it's a roller coaster and one not to be missed! It's not for everyone, certainly if you're not a fan of Tarantino's style, this may be a little hard to swallow, but never-the-less, it is a film which simply has to be seen. No self respecting film fan should miss this. And the performance of Christoph Waltz... Oscar don't you dare ignore him!!
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Seriously disappointing performance by Brad Pitt and Q T, the plot is very superficial and lame, and, unless indirectly intended, this film actually glorify the Nazis and portrays them as men of honor, and show that the Jewish people are deceiving, cant keep promises and bloody vicious. ((THE FOLLOWING CONTAINS SPOILER)) Hitler together with the most notorious Nazis are attending a stupid plot less movie about the killing of 300 Italian soldiers in a small cinema theater in Paris is unbelievably ridiculous. the Nazis laughing and hooraying each killing in the movie as if watching a basketball game STUPID, the deal at the end is lame. whats really appalling is that the movie earned great reviews and is ranked here in the 40s amongst the greatest 250 films. will not be surprised if it harvested many awards, including Oscars, as well. the movie is simply a kissing ass to the Jewish people, but hey reconsider, its not even doing a great job doing that. it truly dwarfed the whole Nazi - Jews conflict and a pure insult to all who fought and suffered from the tyranny of the Nazis.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Inglorious Basterds is a dark and violent comic fantasy, gloriously so.
Built on the framework of The Dirty Dozen, Inglorious Basterds ditches
the elongated training sequences of The Dirty Dozen to plunge into the
action right away. In the process, Tarantino fixes one of The Dirty
Dozen's major flaws by giving the bad guys screen time to remind us
just how bad the Nazis were. The Nazis with the most screen time end up
becoming the most completely human characters in the film, which
ironically makes them even worse monsters.
Bu ditching the training sequences, Tarantino is also able to give us a
picture of the entire war, showing us not only British, American and
German soldiers, but also giving us glimpses into the world of French
and German civilians, both collaborators and Resistance.
It goes without saying that any Tarantino film is going to have
fantastic dialogue, but when Tarantino made the decision to have the
French characters speak French and the Germans speak German, beyond
adding a level of authenticity, Tarantino also somehow ensured that his
dialogue in French was as sharp and funny and clever as his English
dialogue.
Case in point, during the opening sequence the Nazi "Jew Hunter" SS
Colonel Hans Landa (Christian Waltz) is interrogating French dairy
farmer Perrier LaPadite (Denis Menochet). Landa suspects that LaPadite
is hiding a family of Jews. While subtly pressuring LaPadite, Landa
asks for a glass of milk. After greedily gulping it down, Landa
compliments LaPadite on his daughters and his cows, "à votre famille et
à vos vaches, je dis bravo." The thing of it is, in French "vache"
means cow, but it is also a vulgar name for the vagina. If reprimanded
for this vulgar pun, Landa could quite convincingly claim not to
understand French well enough to have meant it that way, but Landa does
mean it that way and he means it as a threat. And LaPadite understands
his meaning all too well.
That is a really subtle piece of acting and word-play that many
audiences would never catch, or at least they might understand the
subtext without knowing the exact nature of the threat. The film is
rich with that kind of detail. All of the French and English dialogue
is chosen with that same attention to detail and while I can't swear to
the German, I would suspect that it shows a similar level of craft.
Inglorious Basterds opens with the phrase, "Once Upon a Time... in
Nazi-Occupied France." Personally, this reminds me of the opening of
every Asterix book and movie, another comic fantasy in a war-torn
occupied France. Like Asterix, Inglorious Basterds is howlingly funny
in places, although the film also turns darkly serious.
In its more serious moments, Inglorious Basterds reminds us that the
first casualties of war are compassion and the ability to relax, as in
almost every elongated sequence of the film, Tarantino finds a new way
to build cruel tension to almost unbearable levels.
Tarantino also reminds us that film is dangerous, even inflammable and
that its power deserves respect.
If you can see this film as I did in a packed theatre filled with
knowledgeable fans who get every joke, that you will see this masterful
film the way that it was meant to be seen. If you are not that lucky,
all that you will see is a great, great film that delivers a darkly
funny punch.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen.
What is the purpose of this movie? A bunch of Americans enters
Nazi-occupied France and starts slaughtering Germans. You see them
scalping their enemies and beating them to death with baseball bats.
While making jokes, of course.
Some will say that this movie is a parody of a certain genre. For a
parody, it is neither witty nor funny. The contents is zero. It is
exceptionally brutal and disgusting. Underneath lies a subtle political
message, because it is again "the good guys" killing "bad Nazis". The
whole plot is unthinkable if you turn it around. Could you imagine a
storyline where Nazis (while making jokes) kill everybody in the Warsaw
ghetto with flamethrowers? Probably not, but this movie is exactly
about that, with the exception that is satisfies the weird moral
expectations of a certain audience: slaughtering people is so cool when
done by the right people.
This movie only works because of the hidden Nazi-ideology underneath.
It does not regard the enemy as people. And if the latter is supposed
to be an element of the fun, I am happy to say that this kind of fun
will always remain a mystery to me.
Another mystery is how such violence can fascinate the American crowd
while a bit of nudity will freak them out. But if a naked body is
pornography, this movie with all its brutality is pure pornography at
its very worst.
Inglorious Basterds is a pointless, boring and tasteless waste of time
and money.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Previous Tarantino movies were from a guy in love with other movies.
This one is from a guy in love with his own writing. It isn't
Inglorious, its disgusting.
I absolutely hated Inglorious Basterds. The entire point of a film is
to entertain - if u call bashing people's heads and removing their
scalps entertaining!!!! - and if there is one unforgivable sin a movie
can commit, it is extreme boredom or disgust.
The movie is just a collection of endless and excruciatingly boring and
disgusting scenes of people talking at tables in various languages.
There is even one scene where 3 people talk for nearly 45 minutes at
the same table, before, thankfully they are all shot. I wished they
would have been killed off after 5 minutes. Even Woody Allen knows when
to shut the F**K up.
This table talk style is a Tarantino hallmark, but in other films, I
actually cared about what they were saying and the people who were
talking. Here, I couldn't care less. All of Quentin's films display an
enormous confidence, particularly Jackie Brown. But here there is a
pervasive feeling in every scene, Tarantino had no idea where he was
going with the film.
Is it violent? Sure there's torture and scalping galore, but you'd have
to remind me. Thankfully, the film was so thin, I didn't even remember
I had seen it earlier in the day when until I saw a review headline on
MSNBC.
He's out of gimmicks and apparently dying to write a novel. But do us a
favor QT and spare us the movie.
I walked out of this movie halfway through and I would never recommend
anyone seeing it no matter what a die-hard quarantino fan he or she is.
I give it 0 / 10.
| Page 1 of 135: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] |
| Plot summary | Plot synopsis | Ratings |
| Awards | Newsgroup reviews | External reviews |
| Parents Guide | Official site | Plot keywords |
| Main details | Your user reviews | Your vote history |