# Brad Pitt in inglourious Basterds is the most enigmatic performance I've ever seen **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [April 7, 2019, 10:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165 "2019-04-07T10:27:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/21 "2019-04-08T17:47:53Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Meh. Nazis are bad, are not honorable, and deserve to be killed (in WWII). Simple? maybe. But spot on, IMHO. I’ll try to convince you at least to some extent. What’s honor? Honor is not “being a good guy.” Honor in the context we’re in here is adhering to a set of rules, or a code of conduct, even if it is to one’s disadvantage. Precisely what those rules are will differ from place to place; the honor expected of a U.S. Marine in 2019 is very different from the honor expected of a Japanese lord in 1585. Both have very different legal and moral expectations and behavior but would both behave honorably. The German sergeant beaten to death at the movie’s start absolutely acted honorably. Whether you’re American or German, it is honorable for a soldier to refuse to sell out his comrades. The German might have been on the wrong side of the war but even the Allies accepted that German soldiers who fought in accordance with the laws of war - “honorably” - were not criminals. The soldier who fights honorably is not responsible for the war being unjustified, that being the distinction between jus in bello and just ad bellum. Landa is, to borrow the role playing term, lawful evil. He is an evil son of a bitch doing evil things and would NOT have been treated mercifully by the Allies, whose code of honor would have determined him a war criminal, but he has constructed a code of conduct to which he adheres, at least for most of the movie. It’s a weird and alien code of conduct, but he sticks to it. The only time in the movie he really loses his temper is when he strangles von Hammersmark - who is, in conventional Western thinking, the most dishonorable person in the movie. She betrayed her country. Raine, to again go back the role playing well, is chaotic. Maybe chaotic good. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/22 "2019-04-08T18:25:40Z")
Hey, I never claimed that what Aldo’s crew does is honorable either. But my loathing at their actions is tempered somewhat because their targets are nazis and nazi sympathizers. Same reason why I don’t feel bad for all the people at the end of “The Dirty Dozen” ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/23 "2019-04-08T18:28:34Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Honor in the context we’re in here is adhering to a set of rules, or a code of conduct, even if it is to one’s disadvantage. I’m not familiar with this definition of “honor.” Using that definition, a case could be made that the 9/11 hijackers were “honorable” ---
**Author:** ![DCnDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dcndc/32/2842_2.png) [@DCnDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DCnDC)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/24 "2019-04-08T18:51:43Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Whereas Raine made a deal with Landa and then broke it, even though he acknowledges that Landa ended the war, which made him worthy of being allowed to live. But he murdered Landa’s associate and probably friend and then mutilated a defenseless Landa. Raine is a good guy because he’s on our side - the audience identifies with him and his cause against Nazis. And he has his own code. But he’s not honorable in the way Landa would be, who would likely go to lengths to keep his word. Ah, but it was never Raines’ deal to break, that deal was between Landa and OSS officers. Landa even mentions it at the beginning of that conversation: > [@](#): > > LANDA: If you want to win the war, tonight, we have to make a deal. > RAINES: What kinda deal? > LANDA: The kind you wouldn’t have the authority to make. However, I’m sure this mission of yours, has a commanding officer? A General, I’m betting? After Landa finishes his deal with the voice on the radio, it then addresses Raines and gives him the following orders: > [@](#): > > Colonel Landa will put you and Private Utivich in a truck as prisoners. Then he and his radio operator will get in the truck, drive to our lines. Upon crossing our lines, Colonel Landa and his man will surrender to you. You will then take over driving of the truck, a bring them straight to me for debriefing. Is that clear, Lieutenant? Then the final exchange between them after Raines shoots Hermann with Landa’s own P38 (plausible deniability?): > [@](#): > > LANDA: Are you mad? What have you done? I made a deal with your generals for that man’s life! > RAINES: Yeah, they made that deal, but they don’t give a fuck about him, they need _you_. > LANDA: You’ll be shot for this! > RAINES: Naw, I don’t think so, more like chewed out. I been chewed out before. You know, Utivich and myself, heard that deal you made with the Brass. End the war tonight? I’d make that deal. How bout you Uitivich, you make that deal? > UITIVICH: I’d make that deal. > RAINES: I don’t blame ya! Damn good deal! And that pretty little nest ya feathered for yourself. Well, if you’re willing to barbecue the whole high command, I suppose that’s worth certain considerations. But I do have one question: When you go to your little place on Nantucket Island, I imagine you gonna take off that handsome looking SS uniform of yours, _ain’t ya_? Raines’ only real mission and motivation throughout the movie is to kill Nazis. As many as he can. Hermann was a Nazi, and not an important one, so naturally, Raines killed him. I’m sure he would have had zero qualms about killing Landa, but doing so probably _would_ get him shot, so he delivers him alive, if not unmolested. So Raines’ character remains pretty consistent right through the end of the film. . ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/25 "2019-04-08T19:11:26Z")
I’m going to try to give a little history lesson. In no way is this trying to downplay what the nazis did in any way, but I believe that in hindsight and as outsiders who grew up decades later, who are exposed to non-expert level education about it, we have a distorted view of them. The Nazis absolutely made antisemitism a big part of their platform and a rallying cry. It was a big part of what got them early support. Nazis were almost all very anti-Semitic. I say almost because, as I said about Landa earlier, I’m sure plenty of people claimed to go along with Nazi ideology simply to use the party to advance their own power but didn’t really care that much about Jews or other parts of Nazi ideology. Advancement in the Nazi party was a fast track to advancement in German society as a whole, because the Nazis dominated the power structure. However, the holocaust was hidden from the average German. This is not something anyone seems to be taught. What we seem to be taught, or at least given the impression of, is that Germans happily and openly all marched Jews off to the gas chambers. But that’s not accurate. The Nazis said that they were relocating Jews. They wanted to purge Jews from their society, but weren’t openly murdering them. They tried to sell it to the German people that Jews were evil and the cause of the world’s problems, so we’re going to conquer some wide open land and force them to go live there and stay there. Yes, they may have a hard new life, and but we’re giving them a chance to thrive in a Jewish society, separate from our German society. They went to great lengths to hide that they were murdering them. So when Jews were rounded up and sent on trains, the Nazis claimed they were being sent “out east” where there were huge swaths of newly conquered land, where they could be segregated from the rest of the German population. They even went to the effort of doing stuff like sending post cards back to their old neighborhood, claiming to be from some Jews that they forced to move, and the post cards talked about how they were happy living out in the middle of the Ukraine or whatever where they could be among their own people, they got a fresh start, and not to worry about them, they’re doing alright. The original form the holocaust took was death squads called Einsatzgruppen who rounded up Jews and murdered them generally with small arms. But this didn’t work very well. While maybe there was a small core of absolute Jew haters who wanted to murder all Jews, most of the soldiers, even SS soldiers, who were already generally more fanatical and political and Nazi-ized than regular Wermacht soldiers, began to refuse to do it. The psychological toll of rounding people up and murdering them, even if they were moderately or strongly (but not extremely) anti-Semitic, was something causing them great psychological stress. Even a lot of staunch anti-Semites didn’t want to actually exterminate Jews, they bought into the idea that they should just be segregated and kept out of Germany. The plans for the holocaust as we know it, the industrial, impersonal untermenschen murdering machines, didn’t occur until the Wannsee conference of 1942, and wasn’t implemented until a while after that. Until then, some fairly limited Einsatzgruppen murdering of Jews occured, but most of them were forced into ghettos in Poland. This is still plenty evil - I’m not trying to say what they did wasn’t that bad - I’m just trying to give the correct information about it. The ghettos were very unpleasant places to be, you’d starve, you’d be mistreated, you had no recourse if the local nazis decided to rape or murder you. But the industrial murder horror that became the holocaust hadn’t yet been implemented. And when it was, it was secretive. It was run mostly by the Algemeine SS (as distinct from the Waffen SS which is what people mostly think of) who were basically screened to be a highly motivated and compliant Nazi ideological security force. The camps were hidden from everyone they could practically hide it from. Dead Jews were explained by resettlement, and some degree of supporting evidence of this was faked. So while antisemitism, and evil, virulent, horrible antisemitism played a big role in Germany in that time period, our idea that every German knew about and was cheering on the death camps is false. Dwight Eisenhower actually made a special effort to collect photographs and document other proof to prove what had happened to the German people, because it was hard to believe even though they’d supported a rise to power of evil, extremely anti-Semitic men. Additionally, the Nazi party was an actual political party. You weren’t a member of the Nazi party simply because you were German in that time period. In fact, the total membership of Germans in the Nazi Party was about 10% at its highest. Now, I’m sure there were plenty of non-party members that were generally supportive of the nazis, but the impression that Americans and British kids are generally given (I don’t know how non-English speaking countries treat it) are that all Germans in this period were nazis, and that they all knew about and enthusiastically supported the death camps. That’s just wrong. Not that the nazis weren’t evil, but this perception we have that being German from 1935-1945 means you were a nazi is wrong. Our perception that death camps were openly known and celebrated is wrong. Our perception that the average German soldier was fighting for nazism is wrong. The average German soldier was motivated by mostly the same thing that the average soldier going back through all of history was motivated by. Their country was at war and they thought it was their duty to serve that effort. Or they were drafted, and had little choice. Especially true of later recruits from mid-1943 onward, when it was clear that Germany was going to lose, and Russia was coming to invade their homes and they were bringing some real unpleasantness with them. At that point, people were just signing up to protect their own towns and families. Late in the war, the Volkstrum was created by boys too young and men too old to be in the army, again, because they felt it was their duty to give a last ditch attempt to defend their home. Your assertion that a) all Germans are nazis, and b) because of that, no Germans could have behaved honorably is just wrong by pretty much any definition. Most Germans in the Wermacht (or Luftwaffe or Kriegsmarine) served for the reasons that anyone has ever felt compelled to serve their country. There were plenty that were honorable by any reasonable definition, probably most. No one likes to correct this incorrect perception that the layman public holds, because who wants to try risk blowback for trying to humanize Nazis? We’re basically programmed all our lives to treat WW2 Germans as pure evil. And Germans themselves are so deeply shameful and regretful about it that they don’t even care to fight this fight. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/26 "2019-04-08T19:18:07Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > I’m not familiar with this definition of “honor.” Using that definition, a case could be made that the 9/11 hijackers were “honorable” I am sure they thought themselves so. Honor can be gross and twisted. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/27 "2019-04-08T19:26:42Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > You are reading too much into this. Tarantino sets up cartoon villains and then spends the rest of the movie being unnecessarily cruel to them. The cruelty is the point, he enjoys depicting it and he assumes the audience enjoys watching it. This isn’t Starship Troopers or American Sniper, there is no subtext. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/28 "2019-04-08T19:29:15Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Your assertion that a) all Germans are nazis, Can you point out where anybody said that all Germans are nazis? ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/29 "2019-04-08T19:53:06Z")
You seemed to be implicitly calling the German prisoner who refused to give up his comrades a Nazi and therefore not honorable. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/30 "2019-04-08T20:17:39Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > You seemed to be implicitly calling the German prisoner who refused to give up his comrades a Nazi and therefore not honorable. No, I said no Nazis were honorable. I don’t know if the guy at the beginning was a nazi or not. And I don’t condone what Aldo and his crew did to them. I never said that the Basterds were honorable. I said I didn’t care if they kill and/or break a deal with a nazi. You seem to be implying that “keeping your word” is something that makes a man honorable, even if that word is “I promise to shoot unarmed Jews that are hiding under the floorboards of a house” And I disagree. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/31 "2019-04-08T21:07:54Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > I’m not familiar with this definition of “honor.” Using that definition, a case could be made that the 9/11 hijackers were “honorable” By their own code, they were. Were the US air crews who dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, vaporizing thousands of civilians, “honorable”? ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/32 "2019-04-08T22:32:15Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > I…von Hammersmark - who is, in conventional Western thinking, the most dishonorable person in the movie. She betrayed her country. > … She betrayed the _current rulers_ of her country. Equating the current ruler(s) of a country with the country itself is a fairly authoritarian viewpoint (which of course you have every right to hold). But from the character’s point of view (based on her dialogue), she was acting in the _defense_ of her country. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/33 "2019-04-08T22:35:48Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > No, I said no Nazis were honorable. I don’t know if the guy at the beginning was a nazi or not. And I don’t condone what Aldo and his crew did to them. I never said that the Basterds were honorable. I said I didn’t care if they kill and/or break a deal with a nazi. > > You seem to be implying that “keeping your word” is something that makes a man honorable, even if that word is “I promise to shoot unarmed Jews that are hiding under the floorboards of a house” > > And I disagree. I’m with you. The other point of view leads to ideas such as ‘I was only following orders’ as a valid justification for … pretty much anything. ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/34 "2019-04-09T00:03:15Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > The only time in the movie he really loses his temper is when he strangles von Hammersmark - who is, in conventional Western thinking, the most dishonorable person in the movie. She betrayed her country. Like Washington, Jefferson, etc. Others have covered the Deutschland Uber Alles aspects of this thinking. To fight against an unjust government is not dishonorable, to defend an unjust government is not honorable. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/35 "2019-04-09T00:15:11Z")
> [@Zakalwe](#): > > … Seconded. He was funny as hell in that role. > > I’ve also always loved the interplay between him and Clooney in the Ocean’s movies. “They say taupe is very soothing.” & the scene where Pitt literally never says a word while Clooney (Danny) has a whole conversation that ends with “we need another guy”. > [@BeagleJesus](#): > > Danny: Ten oughta do it, don’t you think? > Rusty: [Stares away in silence] > Danny: You think we need one more? > Rusty: [remains silent with his head leaning on top of his folded arms while hunched over on the bar] > Danny: You think we need one more. > Rusty: [remains silent] > Danny: All right, we’ll get one more. > Rusty: [Blinks] > > This exchange caused me to fall in love with that movie and the interplay between Clooney and Pitt. Makes me want to see that movie again. On the topic of Pitt’s comedy chops; he did at least two _Tonight Show_ videos with Jimmy Fallon that I remember fondly–one in which they were yodeling across the Manhattan rooftops, and one in which they (supposedly) competed in break-dancing. (IMDb seems to indicate these happened in 2013 and 2014.) Good stuff. eta: I did some more searching to see if I could find the videos to link, but all the sites that came up look pretty questionable, so…no. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/36 "2019-04-09T00:20:23Z")
It seems a lot of people here are conflating “honorable” with “good,” which is an error. There absolutely were plenty of Nazis who were honorable people. This fact should not cause one to reconsider the Nazi party - it should cause them to reconsider the concept of “honor.” Landa is an honorable man - he keeps his word, he moves effortlessly and comfortably in aristocratic circles, and he is faultlessly polite even to people he is about to exterminate as vermin. Raines is not an honorable man. He lies to his enemies, he murders prisoners who have surrendered, and he gives absolutely no shits about any aspect of being a “gentleman.” People like Landa gave us the Holocaust. People like Raines ended it. That right there tells you the value of honor. > [@Zakalwe](#): > > Like Washington, Jefferson, etc. Are you suggesting these two as examples of honorable men? Because if being a Nazi disqualifies one from being honorable, it seems “owning slaves” should be equally disqualifying. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/37 "2019-04-09T00:36:25Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > It seems a lot of people here are conflating “honorable” with “good,” which is an error. There absolutely were plenty of Nazis who were honorable people. This fact should not cause one to reconsider the Nazi party - it should cause them to reconsider the concept of “honor.” > > Landa is an honorable man - he keeps his word, he moves effortlessly and comfortably in aristocratic circles, and he is faultlessly polite even to people he is about to exterminate as vermin. Raines is not an honorable man. He lies to his enemies, he murders prisoners who have surrendered, and he gives absolutely no shits about any aspect of being a “gentleman.” People like Landa gave us the Holocaust. People like Raines ended it. That right there tells you the value of honor. Could you perhaps define what you mean by honorable then? Because I’m just not seeing it. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/38 "2019-04-09T00:39:49Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Are you suggesting these two as examples of honorable men? Because if being a Nazi disqualifies one from being honorable, it seems “owning slaves” should be equally disqualifying. This seems rather disingenuous. The point had been made that > [@](#): > > …von Hammersmark - who is, in conventional Western thinking, the most dishonorable person in the movie. She betrayed her country. That point was refuted by reference to those who rebelled against their country and yet are not generally considered to have “betrayed” their country, nor to have behaved dishonorably by rebelling. So how about John Adams, Thomas Paine, and Alexander Hamilton? Did they “betray their country”? Do they fail to be “honorable men” due to their rebellion against their government? > [@Miller](#): > > It seems a lot of people here are conflating “honorable” with “good,” which is an error. There absolutely were plenty of Nazis who were honorable people. This fact should not cause one to reconsider the Nazi party - it should cause them to reconsider the concept of “honor.” > > Landa is an honorable man - he keeps his word, he moves effortlessly and comfortably in aristocratic circles, and he is faultlessly polite even to people he is about to exterminate as vermin. Raines is not an honorable man. He lies to his enemies, he murders prisoners who have surrendered, and he gives absolutely no shits about any aspect of being a “gentleman.” People like Landa gave us the Holocaust. People like Raines ended it. That right there tells you the value of honor. These definitions of ‘honor’ and ‘honorable’ seem unusual, and unlikely to receive wide acceptance. “Honorable” as a fair description of someone who murders people on the basis of their religion? Many would dispute that. But of course a language is a living thing; that could change. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/39 "2019-04-09T00:43:42Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Landa is an honorable man - he keeps his word, he moves effortlessly and comfortably in aristocratic circles, and he is faultlessly polite even to people he is about to exterminate as vermin. Raines is not an honorable man. He lies to his enemies, he murders prisoners who have surrendered, and he gives absolutely no shits about any aspect of being a “gentleman.” People like Landa gave us the Holocaust. People like Raines ended it. That right there tells you the value of honor. Then again, people exactly like Raines gave us Jim Crow and the Ku Klux Klan. Or, to translate: people ain’t no good in general, only in specific. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165/40 "2019-04-09T00:48:46Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Could you perhaps define what you mean by honorable then? Because I’m just not seeing it. I’m not Miller but I see the obvious disconnect. “Honour” has meant many things in different cultures but it’s generally following a code that sets the functioning of a righteous society above personal desires. You are clearly baffled that someone who is not following your modern western code of honor would be called honorable. They are following the code from their culture and time. Honorable sounds good but it’s not necessarily. It’s just following a code which may or not be good. “Honor killings” aren’t named ironically. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brad-pitt-in-inglourious-basterds-is-the-most-enigmatic-performance-ive-ever-seen/832165.md?page=3)