joliom

I don't get all the love for Inglourious Basterds. Besides Death Proof - which benefits from being paired with Planet Terror and the whole Grindhouse cinema experience - I find it to be the lowest point of his career. All the usual "Tarantinoisms" that usually work in his other films, just crash and burn in Inglourious Basterds. I liked Christoph Waltz and Melanie Laurent and that was it. The rest just seemed silly, awkward, and self-indulgent on Tarantino's part. Django, despite it's excessive running time, felt like a big step up to me. I'm hoping The Hateful Eight will be like Django, but tighter and punchier. So maybe a better comparison would be like a Western version of Reservoir Dogs.

Mabuse

iB is a masterpiece. QT's invocation of genuine german film history, which did have a great deal to do with sculpting the Arian ideal, is very cleverly weaved into a film that is a war film, while at the same time being a film about war films, and it all ends in a huge celuloid fueled conflagration that represents the whole crazy war. It touches on propaganda, film as propaganda, and the importance of both in shaping public opinion.

It's also incredibly suspenseful, takes time to create rich characters, and deals directly with the almost never discused issue of Nazis cutting themselves sweet deals with Americans at the end of the war.

gmanca

What you described is the overall depth of the film and what it was going for but I agree that the Tarantinoisms were too much for me to enjoy it. The "the first thing about fighting in a basement is that you don't fight in a basement" line was too cute by half.

joliom

Come on. Seriously? Other than Waltz and Laurent, who are the rich characters? Brad Pitt and the rest of the Basterds squad are cartoon characters. So are all the Nazis. So is Mike Myers' British general character that might as well be from Austin Powers. The odd tonal shifts, black comedy, situational irony, "table talking," genre homages, and pop culture references that are trademarks of Tarantino films all fail miserably here. The choice to do an alternate fantasy history of WWII is dumb. The whole thing is loaded with plot holes that everyone seems eager to write-off as post-modernism or playful parody on the part of Tarantino. That's a pretty nice pass he's been given, if you ask me. And lastly, there's the appalling decision to cast Jews as barbaric brutes running around Europe scalping soldiers, murdering unarmed prisoners of war, and generally showing themselves to have no virtue whatsoever. By contrast, the Nazis seem the more honorable. I can only assume that was unintentional on Tarantino's part. All the mindless sadistic violence might serve as a cheap thrill for audience members who want to see objectified, one-dimensional evil Nazis get their comeuppance, but it's not good filmmaking. Sorry, but Inglourious Basterds is far from a masterpiece in my humble opinion.

Throwing Copper

Yep, but a lot of us loved it, and so did critics. If you didn't think that film was good and entertaining, I can't image what your impression of actual shitty films is.

Osiris3657

Not sure if I'm in the minority, but I found the trailer for this to be very "meh". I would be very surprised if I felt that way after seeing the movie though. Only movie of QT's that I didn't like was Death Proof, so the odds are good that I'll like The Hateful Eight.

inri222

In my opinion IB is his best post Jackie Brown film. It is better Than Django Unchained and way, way better than Kill Bill.

I felt the same way but then again I have never seen a good trailer for one of his films.

Ash Ketchum

You're actually both right, but I tend to lean with Mabuse on this one. Tarantino's a very audacious genre filmmaker, something we haven't had since the likes of Sam Fuller, Sam Peckinpah or Robert Aldrich, but filtered through a cinephile's consciousness rather than, say, the life experience that someone like Fuller brought to his films thanks to his background as a crime reporter and infantryman (Omaha Beach, for Chrissakes!). And Fuller, Aldrich, et al, never got the budgets that Tarantino's had, so he's able to indulge himself to a greater extent. Those of us who revel in Tarantino's self-indulgence enjoy his films. Those who just don't share that sensibility, for whatever reasons, have difficulty with them. (Just like I have difficulty with Wes and P.T. Anderson, for example.) You should also keep in mind that when Aldrich made THE DIRTY DOZEN (1967), a movie filled with actual WWII vets in the cast (Lee Marvin, Charles Bronson, et al), he took a lot of flack from war vets, including my father, for making it look like the Nazis could only be beaten by psychos and condemned prisoners. The reviews were scathing, yet it was a huge hit and Aldrich's best known film.

Solid Snake

Why is an alternate history wrong? Many films in the past have done that. IB itself launches that fact immediately it doesn't hide that this is a fantasy. Much like Django Unchained was. I see nothing wrong with depicting a violent fantasy, veering positive for the Jewish guys. He did the same thing with with Django. Making him a slave fantasy. There's no wrong in the idea, his execution of upholding that is good too. Film qualities aside.

Talking about the length of IB and DU. IB is solid. DU has issues. It's not the length. It's the pace of editing that is felt in it. It's not horrible but you can feel it's a bit off. Sally passing away is really felt in there cuz she was able to nurture the material unlike her assistant that now became the editor of DU.

And the Nazis aren't typically one note either. Jew Hunter aside, we've the young German sniper too. He is an interesting one. Changing a bit and then falling into his own specific nature too.

The violence? Sadistic. No. Mindless? Absolutely not. It has a point in holding the revenge fantasy. Much like any of his violence. It's all an extreme.

I also found how he played in style or tone to be great.

I am not sold on calling it a masterpiece but it has a lot of great qualities to it.

stp115

I agree with both as well, but I lean towards the joliom side. I'm a big fan of Tarantino's work - I own it all except Death Proof, (which I simply haven't seen yet) Jackie Brown (I saw it with my friend and we both loathed it so much that he apologized to me afterwards) and IB. For the most part, I do like Tarantino's self-indulgence, but for me, it reaches George R. R. Martin levels. I think that it showed moments of brilliance, but for me, it didn't ultimately work.

dex14

and more... spoilered for size

Ash Ketchum

The movie/TV references in the character names are a bit overdone, even by my standards:
Domergue (Faith Domergue), Marquis Warren (Charles Marquis Warren), Mannix (TV's Joe Mannix), Mobray (Alan Mowbray), Smithers (William Smithers). Unless Mannix is also a reference to MGM studio exec Eddie Mannix.

rocket1312

Put me in the camp that thinks Inglorious Basterds is pretty great. I didn't love it at first, but it grew on me with repeat viewings and is probably the film of his that I feel most compelled to revisit. It's a messy film, and it doesn't all work, but I think that's one of things that's most compelling about it. It's not always clear to me what exactly Tarantino was trying to express with IB, but it always seems like it's up to something. Mabuse touched on some of the themes already, so I won't rehash them, but IB feels much less superficial to me than some of Tarantino's earlier work (which I mostly all like).

As for Hateful Eight, I didn't think the trailer was all that special, but I love the idea of this being a smaller film mostly contained to a single location. I also love Samuel L. Jackson in anything by Tarantino. I thought he was the highlight of Django Unchained and Tarantino always seems to get the best out of him. Sometimes I forget just how captivating he can be on screen after watching him bore up the joint as Nick Fury.

inri222

Could be dubber Edward Mannix who's voice was used for Bud Spencer and also in a lot of dubbed Italian films :Poliziotteschi, Spaghetti Westerns, Horro, Giallo, Post-apocalyptic (Argento, Fulci, Castelleri, Lenzi, Deodato). He also did some Japanese animation.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZTPt0QMp7Ug" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Ash Ketchum

Ahh, that sounds more like it. Which makes the name choice more interesting now. Bud Spencer would have been a likely casting choice for a film like this if made in Italy 40 years ago. And Edward Mannix would have dubbed him.

OldBoy

so nice to see Madsen back. hope he is back in form as well...

OldBoy

i agree about Sam L., reason i just bought Black Snake Moan again on bluray. very good in those smaller, non-over-the-top roles...

joliom

You're right. That must be it. I don't agree with you, so it must be because I have no taste and not because I just don't agree with you in this instance.

joliom

I'd be happy to address all your questions and explain in further detail what I didn't like about it, but I don't want to hijack the thread. Suffice it to say, I'm a big fan of Tarantino, but I don't believe he can do no wrong. I personally didn't care for Death Proof or IB. I think Jackie Brown and Django Unchained had some issues, but I still enjoyed them overall. Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, and Kill Bill, I thought were fantastic. I'm looking forward to The Hateful Eight. I have no idea where it will end up falling in his oeuvre, but I'm always eager to see what he'll come up with next.

DaveyJoe

I think Tarantino has become a parody of himself, he's coasting on cool dialogue and movie references. His ego is out of control, but everybody seems to be okay with his self-indulgence. Kill Bill never should have been two movies.

inri222

I agree. I still find his films watchable but I don't think he has made anything as good as his first 3. Kill Bill IMO is his worst film, IB was good but not great and DU to me was average. I believe that QT is very talented but he has no self-restraint and is too in love with himself. He needs to mix it up a bit and either direct a screenplay written by someone else (which he has never done), collaborate on a screenplay (he did it with Pulp Fiction) or adapt a screenplay (he did it with Jackie Brown). I will still watch TH8 and hope that it turns out good

joliom

In his defense wasn't Kill Bill split into two films at the insistence of Harvey Weinstein? As far as I am aware, Tarantino always preferred it be a single film. I wish they would release "The Whole Bloody Affair" version on Blu-ray like they finally did with Grindhouse.

Mabuse

Says everybody since 1994. Anything original to add?

inri222

I think he means that KB should have just been one 2.5 hour film. Which if it is, I would agree.

I said it since 1997.

DaveyJoe

I seriously doubt it. Weinstein does not tell Tarantino what to do with his movies, Tarantino practically saved Miramax in the 90s. I guarantee he was happy to pad out Kill Bill.

Bullshit, almost everything I see on the internet regarding Tarantino is an escalating dick sucking contest.

2 hours or less, there's just not much substance there.