Author Topic: Inglourious Basterds  (Read 62856 times)

ferris

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10831
  • "Bravo Vincent....Bravo!"
Re: Inglourious Basterds
« Reply #380 on: December 21, 2009, 10:22:36 AM »

...plus, the Basterds and the Allies seems a bit "dumb" at the end.... why was the Jewish film owner better equiped and prepared to take down the Nazis then the Basterds.... suicide bombing?  Really?...... like they couldn't have left the explosives under their seat and then locked the doors...


As much as i LOVE this movie, after watching it a bunch of times I'm thinking it would be fun to do a fan commentary ripping apart the entire ending - Historical Fiction aside - I mean the amount of suspension of disbelief necessary for the lack of security at the theater, especially after a basement bar full of Nazi's were shot a mere 24 km away....Even if Landa had planned lackluster security because he was staging his exit right along...there is not enough even for his own plausible    deniability.  How does a "negro man" manage to walk around the lobby with two crow bars and go to the front entrance with them?  There is NO ONE posted outside the doors?  One could go on and one once you break this apart.

I've thought about this  - and I'm willing to let this just be a Taratino conceit.  

For instance the brief segue on nitrate film - Taratino needed to explain the significance of the nitrate film and couldn't build it honestly into the diaglog between the two theater people.  So he said "f-it" and he did a full blown over-to-top "hi, I am an exposition"  scene.  

So perhaps the lack of security in the theater was a conceit like this.  Instead of playing a ton of games with holes in security he just made it basically non-existent.  I dunno.  Anyone else have a take on this?
« Last Edit: December 21, 2009, 10:24:19 AM by ferris »
"And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs" - Exodus 8:2 KJV
(switchboard)

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: Inglourious Basterds
« Reply #381 on: December 21, 2009, 10:26:02 AM »
It's what you said. It's a conceit and Tarantino runs with it. It doesn't need to make sense, and in the moment it really doesn't matter.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

joker

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1958
  • CINECAST! off
Re: Inglourious Basterds
« Reply #382 on: December 21, 2009, 10:44:52 AM »
It's what you said. It's a conceit and Tarantino runs with it. It doesn't need to make sense, and in the moment it really doesn't matter.

sure it did.... to have no military inforcements in France, when HITLER was attending a film premier was eye roll inducing... I'm sorry, but that is the biggest load of crap.... not to mention they allowed people into the theater, who were strangers, and didn't search them?  give me a break....

I would normally be like "hey, it's just a movie, and serves to move the story along"  but like a poster said above... they go to such lengths to explain every other little detail... how this guy got his nickname.... how the film is extrememly flammable, etc... to just be like "go with it" seemed lazy... almost like QT got to the ending in his screen play, and just wanted to finish it...

oh, and it just so happened that no one tried to use the doors for the ten minutes they were locked before the film interuption?  right?  
So basic QT story telling, concentrate the plot on insignifigent areas, like the English solider meeting the Basterds, or someones accent, but overlook things such as military presense and the gun shots in the projector booth that everyone should hear.... the second set happened when there was no guns noises on screen... so, there is no way the audeinces didn't hear them

And it's good to see Hitler hired two Stormtroopers to keep guard outside his private balacony...


I think the movie itself sets itself up for being a dissapoinemnt because the first two chapters are so strong.... followed by sub par story telling after that....
I really wanted to love this film...
« Last Edit: December 21, 2009, 10:47:17 AM by jokernick »
"This movie made me laugh so hard, I had mild headaches. So I went to the doctor to get checked out, I'm currently awaiting results"
-Gene Siskel

ferris

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10831
  • "Bravo Vincent....Bravo!"
Re: Inglourious Basterds
« Reply #383 on: December 21, 2009, 10:56:38 AM »
It's what you said. It's a conceit and Tarantino runs with it. It doesn't need to make sense, and in the moment it really doesn't matter.

sure it did.... to have no military inforcements in France, when HITLER was attending a film premier was eye roll inducing... I'm sorry, but that is the biggest load of crap.... not to mention they allowed people into the theater, who were strangers, and didn't search them?  give me a break....

I would normally be like "hey, it's just a movie, and serves to move the story along"  but like a poster said above... they go to such lengths to explain every other little detail... how this guy got his nickname.... how the film is extrememly flammable, etc... to just be like "go with it" seemed lazy... almost like QT got to the ending in his screen play, and just wanted to finish it...

oh, and it just so happened that no one tried to use the doors for the ten minutes they were locked before the film interuption?  right?  
So basic QT story telling, concentrate the plot on insignifigent areas, like the English solider meeting the Basterds, or someones accent, but overlook things such as military presense and the gun shots in the projector booth that everyone should hear.... the second set happened when there was no guns noises on screen... so, there is no way the audeinces didn't hear them

And it's good to see Hitler hired two Stormtroopers to keep guard outside his private balacony...

All great points.  If you start looking closely there are tons more examples even earlier in the film.

See I think a phantom-review-eque fan commentary would be very satisfying to detractors of the film.  

But again - (trying to establish the right tone here in the English written word) - I LOVE this film.  :)  Not sure why I'd find any satisfaction in tearing it down.  Maybe just to confront my own second-guessing straight on and exocrise those demons!





"And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs" - Exodus 8:2 KJV
(switchboard)

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: Inglourious Basterds
« Reply #384 on: December 21, 2009, 11:01:15 AM »
Obviously there are tons of holes in the film. But the reason details like Landa's nickname are fixated upon is that those are the things that have more relevance to the thematic progression of the story. Landa needs to be called The Jew Hunter. Hitler needs to die, and so Tarantino comes up with a wild and crazy way in which to do so, without the need to dwell on details like security.

Also, the gun shots in the projection booth would not have been heard. First of all, projectors are really CINECAST!ing loud, meaning you probably would have trouble hearing the gun shots just down the hall, let alone in a theatre auditorium. Also the gun shots are happening as loud shots are ringing out in the film the audience is watching. This is clearly meant to be understood as a viable reason why the shots may not have been heard.

Also, the film being flammable needs to be explained. Trust me. I've gotten too many people asking me how come the DVDs they use at home aren't as good as the ones in the movie theatre, and whether we use "HD DVDs" and stuff like that. A show once broke down on me and a woman downstairs was yelling at the ushers saying that they should let her upstairs because she knows how to fix DVD players since she's done so at home several times. I would never assume that and audience understands the mechanics of modern film projection, let alone the fact that old nitrate stock was incredibly flammable.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

ferris

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10831
  • "Bravo Vincent....Bravo!"
Re: Inglourious Basterds
« Reply #385 on: December 21, 2009, 11:08:00 AM »
Also, the film being flammable needs to be explained....

I agree with you on this.  I think it was totally the wise thing to "break character" and go into full-frontal exposition there.  Adding Sam Jackson to round out the conceit is a very nice touch. 
"And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs" - Exodus 8:2 KJV
(switchboard)

'Noke

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 11799
Re: Inglourious Basterds
« Reply #386 on: December 21, 2009, 11:08:47 AM »
Obviously there are tons of holes in the film. But the reason details like Landa's nickname are fixated upon is that those are the things that have more relevance to the thematic progression of the story. Landa needs to be called The Jew Hunter. Hitler needs to die, and so Tarantino comes up with a wild and crazy way in which to do so, without the need to dwell on details like security.

It's like the Frogs in Magnolia.
I actually consider a lot of movies to be life-changing! I take them to my heart and they melt into my personality.

'Noke

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 11799
Re: Inglourious Basterds
« Reply #387 on: December 21, 2009, 11:09:46 AM »
Also, the film being flammable needs to be explained....

I agree with you on this.  I think it was totally the wise thing to "break character" and go into full-frontal exposition there.  Adding Sam Jackson to round out the conceit is a very nice touch. 

I agree, it was necessary. And the fact is, I enjoyed it, it was well puty together, and I'm happy they pulled someone with a distinctive and awesome voice like Jackson instead of boring Voice over guy.
I actually consider a lot of movies to be life-changing! I take them to my heart and they melt into my personality.

ferris

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10831
  • "Bravo Vincent....Bravo!"
Re: Inglourious Basterds
« Reply #388 on: December 21, 2009, 11:11:01 AM »
Obviously there are tons of holes in the film. But the reason details like Landa's nickname are fixated upon is that those are the things that have more relevance to the thematic progression of the story. Landa needs to be called The Jew Hunter. Hitler needs to die, and so Tarantino comes up with a wild and crazy way in which to do so, without the need to dwell on details like security.

It's like the Frogs in Magnolia.

NOTHING IN FILM is like the Frogs in Magnolia.  :)
"And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs" - Exodus 8:2 KJV
(switchboard)

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: Inglourious Basterds
« Reply #389 on: December 21, 2009, 11:14:02 AM »
Also, the film being flammable needs to be explained....

I agree with you on this.  I think it was totally the wise thing to "break character" and go into full-frontal exposition there.  Adding Sam Jackson to round out the conceit is a very nice touch. 

And that's what I love about this movie: Tarantino knows its a movie and so he's able to just run with things.

"Hey Tarantino, film is flammable?"
"Old film was. Shit, I guess I should just put in a scene with Sam Jackson and old stock footage to explain it."

"Hey Tarantino, wouldn't there be security at the premiere?"
"There was some security, and we can also assume Landa took the security down a good notch considering he plans on Hitler dying and he is in charge of security for the premiere. Also, it's a CINECAST!ing movie, so who cares?"

"Hey Tarantino, how is it that a guy got blown out of that circular window during the explosion at the end? Shouldn't everyone have been locked up in the auditorium?"
"Ummm... It looks awesome when the guy flies out the window."
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad