Inglourious Basterds Review.

"...It's a Tarantino movie. You don't go to see Metallica and ask the fuckers to turn the music down." - Quentin Tarantino

Inglourious Basterds. This is the movie independent filmmaker Quentin Tarantino has proclaimed to be his beast of a movie. His baby. A self proclaimed masterpiece. I remember reading about it before any form of advertisement. I saw names showing up like Michael Madsen, Brad Pitt, Simon Pegg, Leonardo Dicaprio, Mike Myers. Granted only two of them made it into the movie but still. I read that it was the film Tarantino had been dreaming of making since before Kill Bill. Then I saw the trailers with Brad Pitt strutting along talking about his plans to eviscerate the Nazis. Clips, mere glimpses shot across the screen showing huge shootouts, familiar faces, all to the sound of genuine dialogue. I was pumped from the getgo. And almost a year of anticipation later, I just returned from catching 3:25 showing of Tarantino's holy film Inglourious Basterds! AND LET ME TELL YOU LADIES AND GENTLEMEN...It was pretty good.

Well, it's in no way a masterpiece. It's not even the best film of the year so far. I mean, this may be the hardest film to review. I should watch again so I can find the right words, but the world, or at least my small community of readers, has to know while it's still out.

Starting off, from the trailers one would think that this movie specifically follows a group of cutthroat bad ass Jewish soldiers and one overzealous redneck (Pitt) as they take on the whole Nazi party. If you thought this than you are wrong. The film was falsely advertised and falsely titled. The film is not centered on The Basterds. Truth be told, it isn't much centered on any one character. Sure we have the Americans scalping SS officers and such but there are more subplots. Such as a British operative (Michael Fassbender) sent in by an Allied CO (Mike Myers), than a German actress/spy (Diane Kruger), than a vengeful movie theatre owning Jewish girl (Melanie Laurent), and finally the atrocities of an eccentric SS colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz). This is a perfect example of Tarantino's love for mythology. He always has a mythology with every story. Seriously the exploits of this movie could match that of the Bible.

I will despense with any comparisons with other Tarantino movies right...after this! Okay we get everything you'd expect. There are tight close ups, hip music (as hip as forties French music can be), cool action, clever dialogue (a bit too clever for the forties), memorable characters, chapters, movie references, and of course women's feet. Surprisingly Tarantino wasn't able to do a trunk angled shot. Strike 1: okay Quentin, I think after almost eight movies we get it. You are a very versatile filmgoer. You know a lot about movies. You know more than most people. Maybe even most filmmakers. This we know. Strike 2: I love Tarantino dialogue...That is, I loved it in the 90s. But so many characters, stretching out for so long and in the forties? The dialogue was kind of unbelieveable in this movie, just like it was for Kill Bill. There is no way every single character could be that well worded and smooth. And Christ, there are like twenty scenes of unbelieveable dialogue going for twenty goddamn minutes and at least ten scenes involving someone raising their glasses to toast to something. Strike 3: of all things that I couldn't believe he could've dropped the ball on, Tarantino does not do his characters any justice. He leads us to believe Brad Pitt and Eli Roth are the big stars of this movie when in fact they may have ten scenes. Not just that but no character has any development. Mike Myers has one scene, much like Christopher Walken. But where Walken stands out and makes himself memorable, Myers does not. People like Michael Fassbender (300) and Til Schwieger (from King Arthur and The Replacement Killers)show up. I know who these two are. They've played badasses before and they were built up to be bad asses here, and just when you think they are gonna kick some ass they are written off faster than a speeding bullet (literally). It was like in Reservoir Dogs if Mr. Blond had been killed before he cut off the cop's ear, it would've ruined the character.

Okay, if you're still reading let me make it clear that I did not hate this movie there were just some things that kept from achieving a rating of "Greatness". It must be said that this is probably the most creative thing Tarantino has ever done between Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill. And I'm sure that after the disappointment WWII film Valkryie, Inglourious Basterds is just what the doctor ordered. There are not huge battles and this is not a war. This is not history, in this film the universe belongs to Tarantino so he can do whatever he wants with it. Now this may catch some unsuspecting people by surprise, like it did me. But this decision sets it apart from other war movies and that is interesting. Though the characters were underdeveloped, the acting was solid. Melanie Laurent plays a woman turned cold and vicious by revenge and lets emotion slip in ever so often (in the context of her character, she could be Kill Bill's The Bride's mother). Actors like Eli Roth and Til Schwieger are cast as members of The Basterds who each hold legendary reputations. Roth is a protege of Tarantino's who performs well in his first big role as the zany "Bear Jew". Schwieger has the look of someone who always loathes everything around him and even though his time was cut short he was still good. Michael Fassbender has the thick British accent and an actual "jolly good" line that makes him a true cliche that somehow works; again he had the grace and potential to be a huge bad ass. Brad Pitt, for the few times we see him, is a delight to watch as always. He's older, making him a more believeable commanding officer. Not to mention he looks more like Robert Redford than ever. Had he had more scenes this could've been one of his best films. But the real show was Christoph Waltz as the villain Hans Landa. Here is a guy who encapsulates all sorts of mannerisms that make a character memorable. You can't tell whether he is insane or just weird. His scenes are the best. And speaking of scenes, there are those standout scenes that may or may not be memorable after a few more viewings. My favorite would have to be the intense and brutal opening involving Waltz and a scruffy Jude Law lookalike. Then there is another involving disguised Basterds trapped in a bar with several real Nazi soldiers. The bar scene could have been cut down by ten minutes but it was still great. In terms of directing this couldn't have been better. Cinematography, sets, acting, lighting, design, everything looks great and is great. Also if there is a reason to see this film at all, it is because this movie is absolutely hilarious. It's just hysterical! Tarantino brings his A game to the director's chair but not to the writer's desk.

So ending off, Inlgourious Bastards. Glourious or Inglourious? I can't say. It was a film I liked a great deal. Quentin Tarantino, saying this is the closest he has ever come to matching Pulp Fiction, has made a fascinating and unique film but certainly not a masterpiece. It can never be said that this movie was better than Pulp Fiction. It takes a helluva lot to get to that point. It was an enjoyable experience. It was an interesting way to look at movies and show how movies can be different. But it will not be talked about positively ten years from now. Some people may hate it, some people may love it, but I am only caught in between. The likes and dislikes outweigh each other, leaving me content. So any preconceptions you people may have had for Inglourious Basterds being the end all best movie of 2009, I may have to disagree. Now our only hope is Avatar. But oh no, James Cameron is proclaiming this to be HIS masterpiece. Will this one fail too? Let's hope not.