Inglorious Bastards ( spoilers) Yes it's science fiction

Television, Movies Games and Books Other Science Fiction
#1

It was completely unrealistic in every detail to the point that is almost wasn’t enjoyable.

ALSO: it’s supposed to be an action flick. There are is about 4 mins of actual action in this movie.

there is the Shooting helpless jews scene: 15 seconds
Bastards montage: 8-10 seconds
Bear Jew doing what he does scene: 7 seconds
nazi nuts scene: 10 seconds
Booth shootout ( includeing slow motionwhich shouldn’t be considered action): 1 min tops
Gaurd rush: 10 seconds
LT’s capture: 2 seconds
finale: 3 mins

running time: 149 mins… does that sound like an action flick?

He took the worst things about Itallian westerns… and put them in this movie… poor editing, horrible music, scenes that took an unbearable amount of time to resolve… and I mean shots that took 45 seconds that should have been 4 secs becuase they didn’t build suspense… the built boredom.

Sam Jackson is a horrible narrarator.

I enjoy a good mindless action film… but this was Last Action Hero stupid. With little to no action!

Now I am quite a fan of WW2, but I won’t even mention how NOTHING in this movie is remotely plausable historicly… ( except weapons, uniforms, some cars and what not)… to the point that it just get’s stupid . The high school kids behind me were even like “that’s lame… that’s not even plausable” ( a theatre with Borman, Goring, Hitler and Gobels AFTER D-day… in Paris [ where btw everyone is just going to cafe’s and walking around like the continent hasn’t been invaded] and there are only 2 armed gaurds EVER seen in the theatre. There are no security… which is good becuase the Bastards are good at beating helpless prisoners with a bat, but they aren’t really secret agents at all. No skills really. Just Jewish people that want to kill. Thats their gig. EXCEPT that they don’t show them doing it… they talk about it!

Brad pit had funny one liners but his character was stupid. REALY REALY stupid. He kicked ass… but was stupid. He could NEVER be in the OSS, He had no skills to operate behind the linds… none. That was one of the jokes of the movie! He just killed! Didn’t even have hi able to speak french!

The other Bastards ( other than the Kraut and the Ausrian jew ) were pretty worthless. They weren’t even the dirty dozen. Hence the cast were all nerdy comedian types ( bj Novak, the kid from freaks and geeks and some other guys that never did anything but stand there and look Jewish- I mean they had that “look”)

It has some great tarintino style dialouge that is entertaining… but it drags too long to make it worth it. And only in a few scenes.

I loved the scene in the german bar… but it was a lot of time invested. The scene with Mike Myers that set it up was WAY too long and not needed.

I wanted a simple minded good ole 60’s style WW2 action movie. I got a farse. I get that it’s supposed to be an Italian western. That’s great… make it good then.The action was violent… but not really great. It was gory but too few and far between for a movie that was almost 3 hours long. The big finale… really wasn’t… and was pretty stupid.

I will buy this movie… and probably watch what adds up to be a total of 4 mins of action and the bars scene and nothing else.

As with Kill bill 2… this is an example or Tarantino needing to be over himself. Intead of makeing a WW2 itallian western and trying to do abstract art… just try makeing an all together good movie.

I was waiting for the action that never came OR it to be Tarantino like and the dialoge would have me laughing the whole time… didn’t happen either.

Like I said

Two scenes where standouts.

The opening scene with the Nazi Col and the French farmer.

The German basment bar scene… Those rocked!

Almost ANY scene with the Nazi col… very different than any sterotypical nazi character… and a great actor!

but together they made up about 45 mins of the 2 hours and 49 mins of a movie that was marketed as an action movie. Tarantino claimed it was a cross between an Italian Western and the Dirty Dozen. I guess if you mean a movie that had the crappy soundtrack and editing of Sergio Leone western without the action, grit, or over all bada$$-edness sure he’s right. If you mean the Dirty dozen in that there are multiple basterds that we never see actually do anything for the entire movie and their leader is never scene fighting, training, kicking butt in ANY kinda way… sure it’s like that!

We see Brad Pitt shoot one unarmed man… and we see him fail in his mission and get captured without throwing a punch or shot… plus they make a point to point out that he has no skills in operations. ( Sure has been behind the liines for two years so one can assume he is good in a fight… but show us… just once! Please in a movie that lasts 2 hrs and 29 mins… just show us)

Once again… Sam Jackson it not even a decent voice actor… so his narration was dumb. I thought that I was listneg to Uncle Remus. PLUS it’s a movie… show me, don’t tell me! It’s supposed to be a movie!

It’s sciece fiction becuase it’s alternate history. In this timeline… Hitler, Borman , Goring, and gobels would have been casualy attending a movie primier in paris with little to no gaurds after June 6th but before August 19th and if you notice… paris was peaceful… not bombers over head… no black outs… This was Post D-day when the allies were storming the continent.

I don’t have to go into historical explanation as to why NOTHING in this is plauseable even in jest. ( just like uniformed nazi’s running around in Egypt in Raiders!) this is science fiction! If the movie had been action packed and stupid historicaly… I could overlook it…but it was not… and i can’t!

#2

you just saved me 6 bucks, thanks :smiley:

#3

I haven’t seen the film yet. I was kinda hoping Tarantino had worked the Spaghetti Western outta his system with Kill Bill, Vol. 2. I guess not. Speaking of science fiction, I really wish Tarantino would do a sci-fi film with tones from ‘Dark Star’ / ‘Logan’s Run’ / ‘THX-1138’. I mean he’s already touched all all the “art house” stuff from the 70s but has avoided the niche of sci-fi from that era. Besides there are all kinds of nasty ways to die in space that he has yet to explore.

#4

One of the reviews - NY Times I think - mentioned that QU equals talky-action-movie, and so I had the appropriate attitude going in. And really, this one had about the same amount of action as Pulp Fiction. Not so Kill Bill I & II on account of the sword fights.

I thought it was pretty good. Kind’a slow at times. And his dialog has been better. Still, many others have said so, it’s the villain, Col Landa, who makes the movie. He’s so outlandish, yet well mannered, and still you can see how he’s good at his job. And the ending is, I think, great. No where, remotely historically accurate. Not. At. All. But funny nonetheless.

#5

Am I he only one who thought that movie was awesome. I thought the dialogue was awesome,and the characters extremely entertaining to watch. Also it was told in such a unique way. The music was a highlight for me. It could have used a little more action but I didn’t really care. Plus it had the balls to [spoiler]kill Hitler.[/spoiler] which was a movie I wanted to make/see for a while now. I could really care less about historical accuracy. If it’s not done right, psuedo-historical accuracy can make the movie worse. (PEARL HARBOR)

#6

I really liked this movie. Far darker and weirder than I expected. Incredible characters, great acting, great tension building. I did not want or expect farce, realism, or mindless action. And I was not disappointed in the least. But I can see where some of the slower scenes and perhaps less laughs than some might expect from the marketing and Tarantino’s previous work might leave some people cold. I highly recommend this film.

#7

I agree with monster_jester. the movie reminded me a lot of reservoir dogs. the dialoge with great the plot was intriguing. no it is not an action movies, i went in to the movie a bit worried that is was gonna be a mindless action movies i was happy it was not. I do agree it was science fiction in the subgenre of Alternate history.

#8

I went last night. I quite enjoyed it actually. “Bonjourno” had me in stiches

#9

I loved this movie.

If it suffers from one thing, it is that it was advertised incorrectly. It is NOT an action movie. A lot of people will probably walk away disappointed, having expected what was advertised, a story of the basterds killing nazis. That’s only a small part of the film.

Landa was awesome. I loved the Soshanna story and thought the actress was great. As always, the dialogue was mesmerizing.

Yeah, the Tennesseean bongiorno nearly had me on the floor.

I highly recommend this movie. Just don’t expect a lot of action or for it to be historically accurate.

#10

I haven’t seen the movie, but I’m listening to Adam Corrola’s podcast and he’s interviewing one of the Inglorious Bastards actors: Christoph Waltz.
And Adam, who has seen the movie, is RAVING about Waltz’s perfomance in the movie.
And Adam Corrolla ain’t the type to give fake praise.

#11

i listen to adam daily as well, but remeber that adam was a radio guy and he OFTEN kisses the person’s ass why they are there and talks crap about them a week later. It’s not two faced…It’s called being nice. Andi it’s called professional radio.

I usualy agree with adam on most things but he sometimes can’t pick em… Like he likes Terasa Strasser and the rest of the listners know that she is a crazy shrew!

#12

Did you listen to his interview with Waltz? I understand the idea of kissing ass, but yesterday Adam sounded like he was truly impressed with the guy. And Adam actually saw the movie.

I have no prob with Teresa. She plays well off of Adam I think.

#13

I agree. I like Teressa doing the news and playing off Adam.

BUT… she thinks that she is smarter than she is, and she’s crazy and insecure and is horrible when there is a guest that intimidates her. Remember how she was with DAG? Listen to her talk about haveing a baby. Theresa quote: " I sometinmes am afraid that my child isn’t going to love me as much as he loves his father and I know that a daughter will just turn on me…" that’s crazy my friends!

Well I am impressed with a LOT about inglorious Basterds. Chris Waltz especialy. Of course he thought that he was great… he was. It was a genius performance. BUT he isn’t in the entire … nor even a majority of the movie ( but neither are the basterds despite the trailer and title).
That doesn’t make 149 mins of mostly boredom and anticipation that doesn’t pay off worth your time.

When this movie is good… it’s awsome! but that is a total of 35-40 mins out of 149 mins.

If you work for minium wage and you feel that your time isn’t valuable… then the movie is worth the theatre trip. I don’t and I don’t have time to sit in a movie for 20+ mins of absolute boredom ( dialouge sucking and nothing moveing the plot) for a 3 min payoff… My time is worth too much for that. I could rent a video and not have to drive there, buy popcorn drinks and dinner for the date and drive home for a movie that was harmfuly boreing except for the times when it was excelent!

I love WW2 movies and I typicaly kinda like Tarentino. ( I like Resivoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Kil bill vol 1) ( I hate Jackiw Brown, Kill bill vo2, Death Proof, and MOST of Inglorious Basterds) I get that it was intentinaly bad… but that’s my point. Why doesn’t he make a movie that’s intenitaly good. … I’m starting to think that he can’t.

just finished the cast… He never saif it was an all together good movie… he just praised the actor and praised Quentin for useing ethnicly appropriate actors.

#14

I don’t want to get into a forum argument, but I found the last post to be a bit insulting. I work inside sales in the oil and gas industry, by no means minimum wage, and my time is often money. This movie was more than worth my time, I didn’t find myself bored in the slightest and I thoroughly enjoyed the entire film.

I’ll also point out that just because someone may work a minimum wage job doesn’t make their opinion on a movie or their time spent any less valid than yours. You are entititled to your opinion, but please keep it on the topic of the movie and not move into the realm of insulting those who have a differing opinion. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t intended that way, as the GWC forums and the Hive mind as a whole is filled with great people, but it could easily be read that way.

#15

I’m new here, just wanted to chime in real quick on this thread I found in the mortuary. Wifey and I loved the film! We knew what we were in for when we sat down because… well… Tarantino is who he is. So we weren’t caught unawares by the spaghetti editing.

What DID blindside us, however, was the brilliant performance by Christoph Waltz. I cannot think of a finer villain from any film I’ve watched in the past 5+ years, he was amazing.

We both agreed that:

  1. His performance alone made the movie worth watching for us, even if the rest of it had been crap.
  2. We will look for him in other things, he was tremendous.

There’s some serious service in this film, btw. Very satisfying scenarios and situations.

#16

Thunder, I think we’re past the point where you’re ‘new here.’

And thanks for the rec. Might be a difference maker for me.

#17

This was my favorite Tarintino movie.

I think Rooster got sucked in my a deceptive trailer. This was not an action movie and it was not a WW II movie. Tarintino really hasn’t even down an action movie. Some of his movies have had lots of action in them but i would nt classify them as action movies. What Tarintino does best is dialogue. And this one was amazing. Hans Landa is one of the best characters i have ever seen on the screen. He is so absolutely evil in everything he does and says but is so charismatic that you cant help but follow him and drink in what he is saying. Christoph Waltz He will undoubtedly be nominated for an Oscar and will probably win. No other on screen performance has been as compelling as his this year. I even think he might have beaten Heath Ledger last year if the flick were released then.

AS for the setting. It takes place during WW II and has people and places and events from the time but this is most certainly not a WW II movie. Its a live action cartoon version of what happened. I have no more to say about the plausibility of the events in this movie than the plausibility of the events of the Bugs Bunny Cartoons that came out during the war.

#18

I think that while Kill Bill (1&2 combined) is my favorite Tarantino movie, this is coming in a close second. Am I one of the only ones who didn’t go in expecting an action movie? I mean, go back and look through Tarantino’s works, and the stuff that he’s actually directed (with the exception of Kill Bill) tends to be more talk, less action. Very entertaining talk, sure, but still.

I’d also like to say that I’m waffling on whether or not to allow my husband to start steering the Star Wars RPG I’m running in a parallel direction if I run out of ideas. He’s determined to know an NPC that he’s going to refer to as the Bear Jedi.

#19

I think Tarentino is over rated as a film maker. ducks for cover
I do agree that he writes great dialogue. I can watch the Sicilian scene from True Romance or the restaurant scene from Reservoir Dogs over and over; it’s like listening to a favorite song.
It’s hard to believe that a Tarentino movie set in WWII doesn’t have much action, but I can think of a few good ones that rely almost entirely on character and dialogue: Stalag 17 and Lifeboat.
I’ve been trying to hold out for DVD, but I don’t know….Bugs Bunny? That’s a good sell.

#20

I looooooooove Stalag 17. One of my favorite movies period. I don’t really understand the dislike for Inglorious though, thought it was fantastic

Bear Sith makes roughly 99% more sense