Inglourious Basterds

[Otto 83]

Always open to new ideas, any titles? I can't see myself enjoying the genre, but I have been surprised before

I might suggest something from Oliver Stone..

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I've never been a big fan of Tarantino's films.

I watched Pulp Fiction again recently - and it really is a good film (probably his best).

I'm open to watching it again. The characters in his movies are cartoons though...I guess once you accept that, then you can enjoy the movie for what it is and not anything more.

There are plenty of well-regarded movies that lack coherent characterisation (or plotting) - Nicholas Roeg or Peter Greenaway spring to mind. Tarantino is different because he took his inspiration from video (the first director to do that), rather than the art house.

Always open to new ideas, any titles? I can't see myself enjoying the genre, but I have been surprised before

Well its not really one genre - Tarantino references everything from Sergio Leone westerns to 70s blaxploitation films to Hong Kong kung fu films.

You could try - Fistful of Dollars, For a Few Dollars More and The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Also things like Shaft or Coffy (I saw a good one with Paul Winfield recently I think, called Gordon's War about black Vietnam vets taking back Harlem from drug dealers).

I get the references so it works for me. Kill Bill didn't work for me because I didn't really think he did a good enough job of disguising his references or making them his own. The Pai Mei character, for example was plagiarised directly from a Shaw Brothers martial arts movie and Lady Snowblood heavily influenced the Lucy Liu character (right down to the costume and the music during the fight scene). Lady Snowblood is actually a better movie than Kill Bill.

I've never been a big fan of Tarantino's films.

I watched Pulp Fiction again recently - and it really is a good film (probably his best).

I'm open to watching it again. The characters in his movies are cartoons though...I guess once you accept that, then you can enjoy the movie for what it is and not anything more.

There are plenty of well-regarded movies that lack coherent characterisation (or plotting) - Nicholas Roeg or Peter Greenaway's movies spring to mind. Tarantino is different because he took his inspiration from video (the first director to do that), rather than the art house.

I guess if I were to pick a director is on the other side of Tarantino, I'd pick Ang Lee. His characters, even though larger than life, have a more dimensional quality to them...there's more to them than just what's on the surface.

I'd go with Kurosawa - perhaps the biggest influence on Hollywood narrative since about 1950. Several of his movies were remade into very well known Hollywood versions and he also directed two of the best adaptations of Shakespeare for the screen.

Edited August 19, 2009 by Private Pike

[Peikko 1,575]

I don't think I have knowingly watched films that 'lack coherent characterization (or plotting)' and thought they were fantastic - so I just wondered if that was some kind of genre I am not familiar with.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Always open to new ideas, any titles? I can't see myself enjoying the genre, but I have been surprised before

I might suggest something from Oliver Stone..

Natural Born Killers

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't think I have knowingly watched films that 'lack coherent characterization (or plotting)' and thought they were fantastic - so I just wondered if that was some kind of genre I am not familiar with.

Not really a genre - more of a style.

Satyricon - is a non-linear narrative that conveys its message through visual imagery rather than formal narrative plotting (it basically tries to convey the feeling of alternate morality in Ancient Rome), but I doubt many people have seen that.

The Wall is a bit more mainstream - there's no characterisation in the conventional sense.

Edited August 19, 2009 by Private Pike

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

The movie was pretty damn good. Of course if you hate Jews you might want to skip it.

Oh... and the picture in the original post is wrong. It's not a 'card' game they are playing. See the movie before you criticize it.

[Peikko 1,575]

The movie was pretty damn good. Of course if you hate Jews you might want to skip it.

Oh... and the picture in the original post is wrong. It's not a 'card' game they are playing. See the movie before you criticize it.

The OP piece was written by someone who had seen it, twice and the second time the film had been revised after the Cannes screening. As for the rest of the thread - no one else did critique the film, it was simply a discussion about the Director and film genre. Perhaps you need to refresh your reading skills

So, you have seen it, what was 'pretty damn good' about it? Pretty damn good really doesn't tell anyone anything.

[almaty 19]

I like Tarantino..and look forward to seeing it ..even if i hate Jews....

same logic as rich's post

[Peikko 1,575]

Lol, the original OP piece doesn't say they were playing cards either. just re read it and he says it was a 'guessing-game with playing cards'. LS seems to be trying to make a point about something, but he missed the mark on all counts

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That was one review - rottentomatoes.com gave it an 88% positive score.

[Peikko 1,575]

That was one review - rottentomatoes.com gave it an 88% positive score.

Right, I am not saying the review is right or wrong but it was entertaining and the author had seen the film and he made his arguments clear as to why he thought what he thought. He didn't simply say, I don't like it or, I thought it was fab . Of course, I am slightly biased in that direction for the reasons I have stated - I am not that big of a fan. However, I didn't complete the circle and say "I hate the film" by proxy. I haven't seen it and I might, or might not - but definitely not in the cinema

Edited August 24, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That was one review - rottentomatoes.com gave it an 88% positive score.

Right, I am not saying the review is right or wrong but it was entertaining and the author had seen the film and he made his arguments clear as to why he thought what he thought. He didn't simply say, I don't like it or, I thought it was fab . Of course, I am slightly biased in that direction for the reasons I have stated - I am not that big of a fan. However, I wouldn't didn't complete the circle and say I hate the film because I haven't seen it.

Well I didn't buy Lucky's arguments about how "Jew haters" won't like it - as if this is somehow meaningful. I can't exactly see that appearing in an Ebert and Roeper review...

[Peikko 1,575]

That's the point, even when discussing films LS can't resist one of his throwaway comments directed at 'terrorist' sympathisers and lefties

[alienlovechild 75]

The OP piece was written by someone who had seen it, twice and the second time the film had been revised after the Cannes screening. As for the rest of the thread - no one else did critique the film, it was simply a discussion about the Director and film genre. Perhaps you need to refresh your reading skills

So, you have seen it, what was 'pretty damn good' about it? Pretty damn good really doesn't tell anyone anything.

28 posts and one poster at took a shot at something that happened in the film. The rest of you must not have seen it or had nothing to say. I read the critics, too, because I don't want to purposely waste my time with ####### with there are better movies or other things to do. It better than I expected but it's a not a great movie.

Pitt was good for a few laughs as the down-to-earth leader of the basterds but he really had a small part compared to the entire movie. One big mistake was saying Dr. Goebbels was second in command to Hitler. The guy who played the SD colonel was interesting to watch as he toyed with various characters. The scene in the bar was good as it was unpredictable as some key characters bite the dust early in the movie.

Obviously, the film is nowhere near being historically correct with the entire German Army in fear of a squad of murderous Jews and the final scene in the theater didn't happen. I was struck by the audience members shouting and clapping at the brutually to POWs in the movie when were currently at war and there's been all the talk about detainees. Hey, it's just a movie, right?

[almaty 19]

interesting....i have not seen the film....hope too