Inglorious Bastards

[thatguy]

I hadn't intended on dropping $10 to go see this, but some friends from work invited me and I wanted to get out and do something. It was playing at the Del Mar which is our restored Art Deco theater with a full neon marquee. It's a great place to see a movie.

I was surprised to find that the 8:30p show had sold out, And pre-8:30p, the line was forming for the 9:15p showing ticket holders, waiting to get in and claim their seats. Who knew this was going to be so popular? Luckily we had some downtown Santa Cruz entertainment while we were waiting 45 minutes to get in. We had a clown making balloon animals, such as an anorexic Elmo, and a busker singing about how all he wanted was shoes.

We finally got in. Even though this showing was on their larger screen, I think this show is also sold out. The theater was packed. I won't say anything about the story, but here are a few comments:

Despite the trailers, I think this movie is less violent than Tarantino's other movies. Maybe this one is for the kiddies...(not!).

The consensus from the people I was with is that it also had more of a story arc.

I find Tarantino's use of fonts completely distracting. Who did these opening credits? They should have him shot...(At least the credits roll before the movie starts, unlike most Hollywood releases that drop credits in during the movie for the first 15 minutes.)

Casting Mike Myers was an "interesting" choice.

The actor that played the lead German office was great.

--tg

[Drunk Monk]

The opening credits were an homage to WWII classic films. They even used the period Universal logo. That was cute.

IB didn't blow me away, but I was entertained throughout. The shock impact of OT films has lessened over the years for me. Perhaps I'm just too jaded from seeing a lot of the original cinema (Asian film and in this case, vintage WWII flicks and westerns) that QT poaches for his ideas. Also QT can be so self absorbed in his long-winded edits - that's part of his style, I know, but it did tend to slow things down a bit.

I love QT's ear for sound. The Ennio Morricone/Lalo Schiffrin nods were really amusing. Honestly, his homage work is what gets me the most. However, the pilfering of another film's signature theme song (no spoiler - I won't say which but you'll know it the instant it starts) did not work for me at all. Sure, there a hot actress putting on makeup and loading a pistol, but it didn't hold a candle to the original. Remember the original? Not even in the ballpark with that scene. It should have been totally cut.

It's all about Christoph Waltz and Brad Pitt. They just chewed up every scene they were in and spat it back with such defiant delight. With their scenes, the long-winded edits worked well. I chuckled at almost every line of Pitts. And Waltz was a spectacular villain, delicious in the details, which was key in this flick. I would have like to have seen the other Basterds developed more. We got a brief intro to the gang, extended on a few, and that didn't go anywhere. Unlike those wonderful old 'band of soldiers' flicks (I'm thinking like Guns of Navarone or Dirty Dozen), the gang wasn't as fleshed out as I would have liked. The story arcs of the minor Basterds was lost. I would have rather seen that then the makeup theme song lift scene. I totally missed Bo Svenson's scene - IMDB says he was cast as the "American Colonel" but that just didn't pop out at me. I was worried because it made me think that what we published on our ezine was fake. At least, it was marginally relevant. That article just fell in our lap in a timely manner.

I was processing QT's commentary on exploitative violence in film after the movie. There was almost one of those artsy fartsy comments on propaganda and the spectacle of violence, but in the end, it didn't flesh out for me. Perhaps that was lost in the edit... or maybe I was projecting (as writers tend to do). Any thoughts on that, tg?

[Greg_phpbb3_import1]

I think Brad Britt was supposed to be the star, but he couldn't have been on screen for more than twenty minutes. Yet, the movie is almost ten hours long. Well, It felt that long. Especially after the three hour opening sequence in the French farm house. I kept yelling cut at the screen, but the movie makers refused
I know Tarantino is known for his indulgent dialogue but this film sure could have used a good trimming. Scenes went on forever. The scenes with Christolph Waltz were good, but those were few and far between. But they went on too long as well. There were a couple of surprising scenes, were you went whoa, like the one in the basement bar, but not enough of them. And for a film called Inglourious Basterds, you don't see much of them, either. You just hear about them.
To recap, you don't see the star much. You don't see the Basterds exploits. And it's long winded. I say pass.

[Drunk Monk]

it wasn't a minute longer than eight.

[youtube]Qw9oX-kZ_9k[/youtube]

[Greg_phpbb3_import1]

What you talking about, Willis?

[Drunk Monk]

stop repeating me.

[Greg_phpbb3_import1]

Can you nap in the fugue state?

I worry about the next highly touted film we are going to see which is "The Hurt Locker"

[Dr. Ivor Yeti]

California is the "Fugue State".

[Drunk Monk]

That way, whenever you see Tom Cruise's eyepatch, you could get up and get a beer or go to the bathroom.