When the film was screened in Israel, Tarantino reported that the crowd cheered so loudly and vigorously during the scenes in question that it almost made him uncomfortable. Whether the Israeli reaction indicates that there was a similar response from Jewish producers and critics in Hollywood, I couldn’t say. But I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the case, at least for some.
But it’s all meta. All.
I agree that using WWII as the background for a random, incongruous story (such as a musical romance) would make for an awful film. But to me the fact that Inglorious Basterds takes place in a fantasy world doesn’t automatically make it such. My take on it is this:
The opening scene establishes that the Nazis in the movie commit the same atrocities as those who actually lived did. What follows is a story where all evil men are punished and heroic sacrifices actually mean something. That looks nothing like the real world? That’s the point. Sure, that doesn’t make it the most profound movie ever made but I’ll take it over any “historical” movie using WWII as background that’s trying to uplift me/show me the triumph of the human spirit in the face of adversity.
Better skip the last reel of The Sound of Music, then.
My main issue with the film is that my suspension of disbelief never really got suspended. Instead I got treated to an endless supply of “Look how clever I am!” crap from Tarantino, which constantly took me out of the film. He’s probably the most pretentious filmmaker extant, and this film is a shining example of why, from end to end.
I fully agree with this, though I quite enjoyed the movie as well. It felt like Tarantino was saying “All you jerks who think you can make a Tarantino film - I’LL show you how to make a Tarantino film!”
You saved me some typing. I liked it well enough the first time. When I tried to watch it again I just couldn’t be bothered.
Just because everyone in the German army knows about him doesn’t mean that they’ll recognize him on sight. I’m a big fan of Elmer Bernstein but I wouldn’t recognize him if he walked into this room right now.
I found the movie, esp the pacing as I mentioned before, to be irritating. Therefore I didn’t watch closely. Was it ever explained in movie or by Tarantino why the title has the weird spelling?
So the grunt in the woods that did recognize him on sight was just really good at recognizing people? Also, did Elmer Bernstein murder a bunch of your coworkers? I think if he did you’d probably recognize him, especially if it was part of your your job to be looking for him.
Him being dead and all, he’s probably fairly unrecognizable now.
I imagine he “recogized” him because he was hanging out with the Basterds. A random German soldier in a bar who kinda looks like Stiglitz wouldn’t elicit the same reaction, I imagine.
When asked about the misspelled title, director Quentin Tarantino gave the following answer: “Here’s the thing. I’m never going to explain that. You do an artistic flourish like that, and to explain it would just take the piss out of it and invalidate the whole stroke in the first place.”
Eh. I doubt I’d recognize any of the recent mass shooting perpetrators, despite the fact that their pictures have been widely circulated. Maybe the Batman theater guy if his hair was still orange.
Furthermore, “it was part of your your job to be looking for him” seems nitpicky. I mean, it’s World War II; a German soldier has a lot on his plate to be charged with looking for one specific guy.
But he didn’t recognize him on sight.
Lt. Aldo Raine: And another one over there, you might be familiar with: Sgt. Hugo Stiglitz. Heard of 'em?
Sgt. Werner Rachtman: Everybody in the German army’s heard of Hugo Stiglitz.
Heard of. Not seen. And his back was to Stiglitz at the time.
He didn’t say “Hey, Stiglitz! I recognize you from your pictures!”
Hampshire - thanks for that quote.
I think Tarantino is a little too full of himself for my taste.
Well then I guess that wasn’t him that walked by just now.
Agreed. Like the rest of Quentin’s work, it will only age poorly.
Extremely overrated.
My meaning of it is that it’s a reflection that it’s a parallel universe. The spelling is correct for them, a world where the Basterds kill Hiter and co. in a theater. Language is super important in the film, from the opening scene where a translation convention is a surprising plot point, to the end where the Basterd’s horrible Italian brings suspicion upon themselves.
Thumbs up. From my perspective that’s about the best description I’ve ever heard of Tarantino; and it fits so nicely across just about everything he’s ever done.