dollar_binI heartily endorse this product and/or event 2,326 Posts
So far Samm Levine is the only thing that makes me want to see this movie. Brad Pitt's accents sounds like it will rank with Nick Cage's in Peggy Sue Got Married for unfortunate voice performances.
[color:white] I'll probably see it anyway [/color]
i want this to be good, but this trailer..i don't know.brad pitt's accent sounds awful.
I'll always root for QT but he hasn't done anything I've liked since Pulp Fiction. Output has been pretty tepid. Unique but tepid.
A 2009 remake of a late 70s Italian Dirty Dozen rip = .
I'm no movie snob and I love a good shoot-em-up, but the whole "Can't go wrong with Nazis getting killed" mentality by film makers too lazy to create an original "good vs. evil" storyline is so tired. And then there are directors who bite Quentin's (or Russ Meyer's, for that matter) style....lame.
I'm not sure what to think after seeing this,on one hand it looks lame the choice of actors are so wrong for the parts(Mike Myers is in it also) but the premise of the story makes for great exploitation which is right up my alley.
The more i think about it this could be one that kills Tarantino's career Eli Roth isn't a actor why is this the 2nd picture of Quentin's that he's been cast in? I think they should come public with their "relationship" it's really obvious now.
from reading the replies so far, i'd say im probably the biggest QT fan on here so far, and i must say this trailer doesnt do much for me
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,917 Posts
I dunno if the title is meant to be mis-spelt for a particular reason ('Inglourious Basterds'?), but it just looks stupid and sloppy if not.
"My name is Lootenant Aldo Ray"? OK, Quentin, I think everyone gets what an alpha movie-geek you are by now.
Brad Pitt's accent? Man, that's nothing. It's about time you Americans got to hear an American actor doing a shitty American accent. Don Cheadle's Dick-Van-Dyke-English accent in the Oceans movies is without any doubt the worst in the modern era. I might sometimes cap on Meryl Streep for her habit of choosing one "I'd like to dedicate this award to my dialogue coach" role after another, but at least she usually manages to get it right.
"Death Proof" aside, which was self-indulgent nonsense, I like Tarantino's movies. The "sampling" argument doesn't really stand up imo. I don't see anybody criticising Spielberg for his consistent stylistic cribs or wholesale bites from Kurosawa, Capra, Altman and Hawks, or De Palma for jacking Hitchcock or Eisenstein. If anything, those cats get a pass for that shit, yet all they are (on one level, at least) is just an earlier generation of movie-geek. And sure, Tarantino may cram his pictures with obscure movie/pop culture references, but rarely, if ever, is it done in a way that interferes with the less-savvy viewer's enjoyment. That said, it's beginning to seem a little tired now. I think what boils the piss of a lot of movie critics about Tarantino's habit of doing this is that he's clearly much more cine-literate than they are.
I'll probably go see this, but I can't say I'm especially excited about it. I keep hoping he'll make another movie as good as Jackie Brown (his best picture by miles, for me), but on the strength of this, it's beginning to look a lot less likely.
I'm a fan of Tarantino movies apart from Death Proof and pretty much anything he's collaborated on with Rodriguez. When he's on form his mixture of pastiche and energy offer up real enjoyment.
Having said that, as Doc mentions, it seems that his most grown up film Jackie Brown - where he seemed to be making strides towards offering up more rounded and emotionally mature characters - has in fact scared him off from trying anything similar since with perhaps only a fleeting moment between Uma and Carradine in Kill Bill Pt 2 offering anything near since.
This latest film (what the F*ck is with the terd title?) again seems to be him making a film that's deliberately trying to be a B-Movie on an A-Grade budget and thus more a cynical calculated movie rather than one done with real passion. Pitt's involvement also suggests this as he's made much of his career making "alternative" movies designed for the mainstream.
I've always been happy to separate Tarantino the obnoxious childman from his films but this is another indication that his love of movies is being swamped by the ego.
I look at that trailer and it's apparent that Tarantino isn't sure anymore whether or not he's kidding. Aldo Ray? Seriously? If only Aldo Ray were still alive to kick his ass.
Cannes review: Tarantino's Basterds is an armour-plated turkey
Quentin Tarantino's wartime spaghetti western about a bunch of Nazi-hunting Americans is just Gott-awful 1 out of 5
Like the loyal German bourgeoisie in 1945, trying to keep patriotically cheerful despite the distant ominous rumblings of Russian tanks, we Tarantino fans have kept loyally optimistic on the Croisette this week. We ignored the rumourmongers, the alarmists and defeatists, and insisted that the Master would at the last moment fire a devastating V1 rocket of a movie which would lay waste to his, and our, detractors. But today the full catastrophe of his new film arrived like some colossal armour-plated turkey from hell. The city of our hopes is in flames.
Quentin Tarantino's cod-WW2 shlocker about a Jewish-American revenge squad intent on killing Nazis in German-occupied France is awful. It is achtung-achtung-ach-mein-Gott atrocious. It isn't funny; it isn't exciting; it isn't a realistic war movie, yet neither is it an entertaining genre spoof or a clever counterfactual wartime yarn. It isn't emotionally involving or deliciously ironic or a brilliant tissue of trash-pop references. Nothing like that. Brad Pitt gives the worst performance of his life, with a permanent smirk as if he's had the left side of his jaw injected with cement, and which he must uncomfortably maintain for long scenes on camera without dialogue.
And those all-important movie allusions are entirely without zing, being to stately stuff such as the wartime German UFA studio, GW Pabst etc, for which Tarantino has no feeling, displaying just a solemn Euro-cinephilia that his heart isn't in. The expression on my face in the auditorium as the lights finally went up was like that of the first-night's audience at Springtime for Hitler. Except that there is no one from Dusseldorf called Rolf to cheer us up.
Pitt plays Lt Aldo Raine, the leader of an anti-Nazi commando unit whose avowed mission is to get 100 Kraut scalps apiece; we see the scalpings in full, gruesome detail, yet that figure is entirely forgotten about by the end. M??lanie Laurent plays Shosanna Dreyfus, a beautiful young Jewish woman whose family were slaughtered by SS Col Hans Landa, played by Christoph Waltz. She got away and (somehow) attained not only a new identity, but also ownership of a Paris cinema which is to play host to the premiere of Dr Goebbels's latest propaganda movie, in the presence of the F??hrer himself. Her plan is to incinerate the entire first-night audience by bolting the doors and igniting her vast inflammable stock of nitrate film. Meanwhile Lt Raine has his own plans for killing Hitler at the movie theatre and the Brits get involved too, in the form of suave Michael Fassbender as Archie Hicox, a crack commando making contact with exotic spy Bridget von Hammersmark, played by Diane Kruger.
There are some nice-ish performances, particularly from Fassbender and Waltz, but everything is just so boring. I was hoping for Shosanna at least to get a satisfying revenge on the unspeakable Col Landa. But no. The two Hitler-assassination plots cancel each other out dramatically and the director's moderate reserves of narrative interest are exhausted way before the end. He should perhaps go back to making cheerfully inventive outrageous films like Kill Bill. Because Kill Adolf hasn't worked out.
Comments
What? No way.
Brad Pitt is pretty hit or miss.
cool!
am i dreaming or is one of the soldiers from the office (us)?
I'll always root for QT but he hasn't done anything I've liked since Pulp Fiction. Output has been pretty tepid. Unique but tepid.
[color:white] I'll probably see it anyway [/color]
A 2009 remake of a late 70s Italian Dirty Dozen rip = .
I'm no movie snob and I love a good shoot-em-up, but the whole "Can't go wrong with Nazis getting killed" mentality by film makers too lazy to create an original "good vs. evil" storyline is so tired. And then there are directors who bite Quentin's (or Russ Meyer's, for that matter) style....lame.
Maybe we can cross this with the Shep Fairey thread since Tarantino has spent his entire professional career "sampling" the works of others???
Glad to see a Freaks and Geeks alum who doesn't seem to get nearly enough work in a big movie.
Maaaaaannnnnnnnn....that's a whole lotta stupid.
Eli Roth isn't a actor why is this the 2nd picture of Quentin's that he's been cast in?
I think they should come public with their "relationship" it's really obvious now.
Yes it's supposed to be a reimagining not a remake.
"My name is Lootenant Aldo Ray"? OK, Quentin, I think everyone gets what an alpha movie-geek you are by now.
Brad Pitt's accent? Man, that's nothing. It's about time you Americans got to hear an American actor doing a shitty American accent. Don Cheadle's Dick-Van-Dyke-English accent in the Oceans movies is without any doubt the worst in the modern era. I might sometimes cap on Meryl Streep for her habit of choosing one "I'd like to dedicate this award to my dialogue coach" role after another, but at least she usually manages to get it right.
"Death Proof" aside, which was self-indulgent nonsense, I like Tarantino's movies. The "sampling" argument doesn't really stand up imo. I don't see anybody criticising Spielberg for his consistent stylistic cribs or wholesale bites from Kurosawa, Capra, Altman and Hawks, or De Palma for jacking Hitchcock or Eisenstein. If anything, those cats get a pass for that shit, yet all they are (on one level, at least) is just an earlier generation of movie-geek. And sure, Tarantino may cram his pictures with obscure movie/pop culture references, but rarely, if ever, is it done in a way that interferes with the less-savvy viewer's enjoyment. That said, it's beginning to seem a little tired now. I think what boils the piss of a lot of movie critics about Tarantino's habit of doing this is that he's clearly much more cine-literate than they are.
I'll probably go see this, but I can't say I'm especially excited about it. I keep hoping he'll make another movie as good as Jackie Brown (his best picture by miles, for me), but on the strength of this, it's beginning to look a lot less likely.
Having said that, as Doc mentions, it seems that his most grown up film Jackie Brown - where he seemed to be making strides towards offering up more rounded and emotionally mature characters - has in fact scared him off from trying anything similar since with perhaps only a fleeting moment between Uma and Carradine in Kill Bill Pt 2 offering anything near since.
This latest film (what the F*ck is with the terd title?) again seems to be him making a film that's deliberately trying to be a B-Movie on an A-Grade budget and thus more a cynical calculated movie rather than one done with real passion. Pitt's involvement also suggests this as he's made much of his career making "alternative" movies designed for the mainstream.
I've always been happy to separate Tarantino the obnoxious childman from his films but this is another indication that his love of movies is being swamped by the ego.
Aldo Ray? Seriously? If only Aldo Ray were still alive to kick his ass.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/may/20/cannes-film-festival-tarantino-inglourious-basterds
I felt the same way about Travolta & Willis before I saw Pulp Fiction