Inglourious Basterds

[DISPATER]

An new flick by Tarantino set in WW2 about a group of Jewish-American soldiers chosen to be in a special unit for the sole purpose of exterminating Nazis. Looks pretty awesome. Comes out August 21.

http://www.inglouriousbasterds-movie.com/intl/#/trailer-us

[Ponce]

That... was the silliest thing I've ever seen.






DON'T MENTION THE WAR

[xPANCAKEx]

this looks excellent on so many levels

[Rutskarn]

I've yet to see anything by Tarantino I haven't loved to death.

[raitalin]

As a historian I throw up in my mouth a little at the idea of Tarantino doing a historic flick.

I've only really liked 2 of his movies, Reservoir Dogs and Kill Bill 2, I feel like everything else was terribly overrated.

And as a person I feel he's a monstrous douche.

[Innis Cabal]

As a historian I throw up in my mouth a little at the idea of Tarintino doing a historic flick.

Good thing you won't be seeing it then :smallbiggrin:

[Rutskarn]

As a historian I throw up in my mouth a little at the idea of Tarintino doing a historic flick.

It will be about as historically accurate as the 70s warsploitation movies he's going to base it off of, but that's exactly what he's going for.

You have to give him some credit--it's not that he was too lazy to do the research, it's that he intentionally didn't and then forgot anything he knew about the war for good measure.

[raitalin]

The problem is most people's knowledge of history doesn't extend beyond the channel of the same name. So people will think this is accurate and the picture of history becomes even more horribly distorted.

I never really understood QT's love of remaking styles of movies that were crap in the first place. Kill Bill worked because it crossed so many genres that it became something new, but Jackie Brown and Death Proof were thoroughly mediocre.

And Christian Slater in True Romance feels like the epitome of a Gary Stu.

[chiasaur11]

So, you hate films because a mythical "average American" might get the wrong idea about history from it?

Seems rather insulting to people in general.

Also: Warsploitation films?

Often awesome. The Dirty Dozen is pure awesome.

[Erts]

Well, QT isn't really going for the historical accuracy.

From what I have seen prior to this film, is that that parts of it are interesting, no matter what you think on war movies. It's split into 6 different "acts," and involves two plot lines converging. The second one doesn't sound as good as a bunch of Jewish-American soldiers and their crazy hillbilly hinted lynch survivor Lt., but it details a French-Jewish girl on the run.

My take is that if it is done well, this will be excellent. If done poorly, it will fail miserably.
Oh, and the music in the trailer is good. Which means nothing, but still cool.

[Rutskarn]

My take is that if it is done well, this will be excellent. If done poorly, it will fail miserably.
Oh, and the music in the trailer is good. Which means nothing, but still cool.

QT is nothing if not a good storyteller, in my view. I have great faith in his ability to realize the potential of any set of material.

[raitalin]

I have a problem with movies that glorify war. I have a problem with movies that play fast and loose with history.

So this movie is certainly not for me.

All Quiet on the Western Front, The Great Escape, Platoon, Saving Private Ryan and though its not exactly a movie Band of Brothers all treat war with the seriousness and weight it should be presented with while staying reasonably true to history. Stuff like The Dirty Dozen place action movie antics along side serious events, and our population does a poor job of distinguishing the two.

It might be insulting, but most people really do know jack all about history, especially about understanding events in historical context. Our high school history education in this country is completely gimped by political correctness and a total failure to realize what is supposed to be learned from history.

[averagejoe]

I've never understood why historians get their underclothes in a bunch about historical fiction. I mean, physicists still like... well, pick a sci fi movie that physicists like. I defy you to find anything with a lower standard for research than science. (Well, besides furry culture. :smalltongue:) Historical fiction at least gets English words mostly correct.

This is the first movie in a long time that I'm feeling somewhat optimistic about.

Edit: I haven't seen any of the other movies, but Saving Private Ryan was a total glorification of the soldier, about how awesome it is to die for your country, or for one guy who's trying to make something of a difference.

The Great Escape was pretty good, though. However, I do find it hilarious that all the British prisoners got caught saying the wrong word or acting suspiciously or something, while the American was caught jumping his motorcycle over the barbed wire fence into Switzerland in a grippingly exciting chase scene.

[raitalin]

I've never understood why historians get their underclothes in a bunch about historical fiction. I mean, physicists still like... well, pick a sci fi movie that physicists like. I defy you to find anything with a lower standard for research than science. (Well, besides furry culture. :smalltongue:) Historical fiction at least gets English words mostly correct.
.

Because Sci Fi is easier to discern from real science and is speculative. Nothing in SF has happened yet, and so much of it is theoretically possible, if horribly implausible.

Historical fiction is easily misinterpreted as history (how many people think Paul Revere was a hero of the American Revolution?) and distorts people's view of the present day. For instance: how many people think it's a historical precedent that the U.S. play the world's "good guys" and so should continue the process? ( I don't mean for anyone to answer that, the discussion could swerve to politics, just giving an example)

[chiasaur11]

I've never understood why historians get their underclothes in a bunch about historical fiction. I mean, physicists still like... well, pick a sci fi movie that physicists like. I defy you to find anything with a lower standard for research than science. (Well, besides furry culture. :smalltongue:) Historical fiction at least gets English words mostly correct.

This is the first movie in a long time that I'm feeling somewhat optimistic about.

Edit: I haven't seen any of the other movies, but Saving Private Ryan was a total glorification of the soldier, about how awesome it is to die for your country, or for one guy who's trying to make something of a difference.

The Great Escape was pretty good, though. However, I do find it hilarious that all the British prisoners got caught saying the wrong word or acting suspiciously or something, while the American was caught jumping his motorcycle over the barbed wire fence into Switzerland in a grippingly exciting chase scene.

It was Steve McQueen. He probably can't go to the bathroom without an exiting motorbike chase.

Besides, the three Americans were the most fictional of the individuals, so they could get away with more.

[Rutskarn]

I have a problem with movies that glorify war.

You know, I've seen this reaction, and let me say this: I wouldn't bet too much that this movie glorifies war any more than Reservoir Dogs glorified bank robbers, or Pulp Fiction glorified drug use. The portrayal is frank and lurid, and more than a little surreal, but it's still pretty negative.

From interviews, summaries, and the trailer, it doesn't look like this is a Hell-Yeah-Kill-Dem-Nazis movie. There are characters with this attitude, but how many Tarantino characters are entirely sympathetic?

[Erts]

For instance: how many people think it's a historical precedent that the U.S. play the world's "good guys" and so should continue the process?

I doubt you will be able to say they are too good, seeing as he wants 600 nazi scalps. :smalleek:

The problem is (I am a HUGE actual history fan when I say this, so I am sad as well,) that people, well, don't care whether or not something is historically accurate. They want to know that "well, yeah, Americans were best at this time," when there were amazing things done with all sides. (Not trying to sound like a Nazi sympathezier.)

[ghost_warlock]

http://www.pbfcomics.com/archive_b/PBF209-Now_Showing.jpg

[OverdrivePrime]

Oh man, the guys and I are all about heading over to the local Brew n' View when this one comes out. It's gonna be fantastic. Historical Accuracy? Whatever, a wizard did it. For three hours and then some, all we're gonna care about is getting our BAC up around .2 and watching Nazis get their faces wrecked. I can't think of a better way to spend a Saturday afternoon with a bunch of dudes. :smallcool:

[Rutskarn]

I doubt you will be able to say they are too good, seeing as he wants 600 nazi scalps. :smalleek:

The problem is (I am a HUGE actual history fan when I say this, so I am sad as well,) that people, well, don't care whether or not something is historically accurate. They want to know that "well, yeah, Americans were best at this time," when there were amazing things done with all sides. (Not trying to sound like a Nazi sympathezier.)

Hey, you don't have to be a Nazi sympathizer to acknowledge that some German soldiers did extraordinary things (http://www.snopes.com/military/charliebrown.asp).

People are not causes unless they want to be.

[chiasaur11]

Hey, you don't have to be a Nazi sympathizer to acknowledge that some German soldiers did extraordinary things (http://www.snopes.com/military/charliebrown.asp).

People are not causes unless they want to be.

Heck, we all know Schindler was a Nazi. There were good men in Germany.

That, however, does not prevent me from enjoying a good Nazi massacring spree in fiction. Nazis as individuals were occasionally good and honorable men. As a concept, national socialism is one of the most revolting in history, and ending it one bullet at a time is deeply satisfying.

[skywalker]

This thread has way too many people with extreme opinions. In the interest of steering away from commentary on Tarantino in general, I will merely agree with this point:


And as a person I feel he's a monstrous douche.

Next, I'd like to point out that Saving Private Ryan was a glorification of service, and those who serve. It did not say that it is awesome to die for your country. It was a reminder (to those who don't serve) of the painful and horrific sacrifice of those who do serve. It demands respect, but in my opinion, those who see it as a glorification of war are missing the point.

Finally, I'd like to point out that it's called "Inglorious Basterds," not "Glorious Basterds." So perhaps it is not meant as a "glorification of war." That being said, it plays to the desire in our culture for exploitation cinema. It would be laughable to say that Tarantino produced it without embracing and even channeling the sizable portion of his audience that has no concept of irony and loves the glorification.

[Erts]

To sum it up: You arn't supposed to sympathize with these guys, you are supposed to gape at them.
It's not a serious movie, and only the second plot will get real emotional dept.