I heard Hitler was furious when they told him about the movie too. There used to be a video of it, but I can’t seem to find it.
Apart from IB - what do these days the recognition and understanding of genre conventions in literature, film or on stage seem dying or dead?
Many genres have unrealistic conventions. There are no dragons, fairies or magical fireballs; police officers don’t freely share their knowledge with their PI buddies, vampires do not exist, humanoid aliens with bumpy foreheads probably don`t exist, and people generally don’t start to have sex the very moment the lift door has closed or the Pizza arrived. And they especially do not sing for half an hour while dying of tuberculosis.
For all these genres, I have seen people claiming that this lack of realism killed any enjoyment of the work in question. I have read the claim that no planatery romance set on steamy, swampy, dinosaur-y Venus could be written anymore since we now know that Venus is not like that.
I don’t imply that any poster here has said or implied these things.
But I get the feeling that suspending ones own disbelief is an art slowly lost. In a certain way, that might have its positive side, since in general life critical thinking and scepticism towards euphonious fluff is good - we are on the Straight Dope MB, after all. But uncritical scepticism towards stories that mainly aim to entertain seems rather self-defeating.
I’ve been searching for it too, for hours and hours! I’m sure this quest will be my downfall.
Especially if they want to win awards in an industry historically dominated by one religious group?
A very cogent and interesting analysis, Uther Penguin. I doubt you shall last long here. 
Oh, and I love your username. Welcome aboard!
Let’s leave Scientology out of this.
I’m probably just shallow, but the deliberately illiterate title put me off.
This is a cop out, a fantasy movie must follow its own rules, if the hobbits sprouted wings and flew to mordor that would have been awful because it does not follow the rules set out. IB took place in WW2, in a war zone, therefore its characters need to act like people act in a war zone. it is therefore and insult to the audiences intelligence to have a group of american soldiers screaming and clapping in the french countryside. It is stupid to say someone is a famous criminal and then have no one recognize him. There were numerous other times where people acted in an implausible way. That is just bad writing.
I liked the movie mainly for one reason.
Cat People.
OP, I think you kinda missed the point of the movie. It’s not meant to be taken seriously. (If you think that Best Pictures, by their definition, should be “serious” movies, then blame the nominating committee, not the film).
I’m not saying it’s perfect by any means - I agree with well he’s back’s point that the pacing is horrible (a common problem with Tarantino films), for example. And I only liked a few scenes in the movie overall, whereas others love them all. But given that you think the movie is supposed to be a “taut thriller” I think you got a bit wooshed.
This made me laugh out loud. I HOPE you are kidding, but i would not be surprised if someone DID report it for this reason. Which is sad.
I dispute this statement vehemently. In LOTR, wing-sprouting hobbits would be awful nonsense, but a generic “fantasy movie” can indeed have its own rules, so if a species is stated to magically grow wings there, the plot can show it doing so.
Likewise, there a no binding laws for “WW2 movies”. Do you seriously think that Schindler’ List or Saving Private Ryan follow the same set of narrative rules as Hogan’s Heroes, Kelly’s Heroes or as Catch-22? Each of these has its own rules, as they belong to different narrative styles. IB is a mixture of revenge fantasy and comedy, and does not in the slightest have to follow the rules of serious WW2 documentaries.
Should I open a thread how awful The Court Jester was, since there never was an usurper called Roderick in England and the characters’ garments and teeth were much too clean and a lot of the rhymes would not even work in medieval English?
In general, I think the current concept of genres is less than useful. It muddles a type of setting with a type of story. Once upon a time there was a strong correlation - fantasy often combined a magical-medieval setting with a epic quest story. WW2 implied a rather heroic fighting tale. Horror usually run “man meets monster, man fights monster, man kills monster”.
But today, the connection of setting and plot is much looser - a vampire setting can contain a story of romance, a wild west setting can have a plot about a heroic quest, a grimdark heist or even an alien invasion. But for some reviewers and a lot of readers and moviegoers there still seems to be the one true plot type for a given setting.
There are artists where an utter disregard for logic is quite all right. I don’t look to Tarantino for logic. Same with David Lynch. Other directors or genres? Sure. I don’t read Lewis Carrol for his logic. Nor Douglas Adams.
You didn’t like IG. That’s OK. Not like IG for its lack of logic? Harder to defend. But why bother defending? It just didn’t appeal to you. Nothing wrong with that.
You mean the vassal with the paisan doesn’t flog on the dragoon?
nitpick Hitler would not have been residing in his bunker during the time when France was still occupied.
In this movie, he probably would.
Fine. Be it resolved that this movie has the right to exist. I never said it didn’t.
But I did not enjoy it because it was incredibly stupid.
If it had been entertaining, I could’ve forgiven the stupidity. I loved The Blue Brothers, which was also incredibly stupid, but had the virtue of being entertaining.
But this incredibly stupid movie did not entertain me. End of story.
Stupid is great if it doesn’t take itself so seriously. Tarantino takes film too seriously to really do any kidding.
In what way was this a film tailored to the tastes of Jews?
It portrayed a brutal Jewish deathsquad attacking sympathetic Germans.
I am sure some Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe may have fantasised about latter-day maccabies dealing out payback to their oppressors, but I doubt twenty-first century film bigwigs would feel the same.
For years they couldn’t make movies about their own people. Here, they’re more or less the gimmick. And they’re physical action heroes, which is still kind of a taboo. I can;t help thinking think there were some high fives amongst the more self-conscious members of the tribe.
It’s a regular Ruffian’s Agreement.