Quentin Tarantino and Inglorious Basterds rant

[Pappy13]

I wouldn't make that comparison. I would however put Pulp Fiction into that class of movie.

How would you compare Pulp Fiction to a movie like the Godfather or Goodfellas?  I consider those movies some the best of the time and far outclass Pulp Fiction IMHO.

[Pappy13]

Warning: Saying something complimentary about the Wayans brothers movies after saying you don't like Tarantino Films is a sure way to make me go "what is this dude thinking?" Comparing a Wayans brothers movie to anything done by Tarantino is like comparing a Jehovah's Witness leaflet that someone hands you at the bus stop with an original print run copy of "Lord of the Flies."

Well okay maybe that was a bit of a bad example, but I think you know what I mean.  How about a movie like "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb".  Is that a better example?  I didn't really care for that movie either, but I think it's a closer comparision to a Tarrantino movie.  I've seen Pulp fiction described as making fun of something that's not funny.  I think that's pretty close to what it does and what the above movie did as well.  Not bad movies in my opinion, but don't compare to the best.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Do you skip Batman movies because he breaks the law?

Batman is pure fiction.  IB is a fictional movie set in a historical setting. I skipped Pocahontas because I did not like Disney's distortion of history.  On the other hand I had no problem with them deviating from the original plot of the Hunchback of Notre Dame.  

Also I am not fan of gratuitous violence in movies. Violence has a place in movies, but just to see 2 hours of people getting killed is not my idea of entertainment.  I was not entertained by Indepence Day.  Gratuitous female nudity on the other is just fine for a movie.  

I watched part of Pulp Fiction but thought it was pointless.  

The plot of IB sounds stupid.  I am not watching it.  I have that right.

[Phishfan]

How would you compare Pulp Fiction to a movie like the Godfather or Goodfellas?  I consider those movies some the best of the time and far outclass Pulp Fiction IMHO.

I would put all three on my list of favorites. Saying any are better is almost impossible. I just don't compare things that way. I don't really know that I can say I enjoy any of them more than the others. I just know I enjoy watching all three.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Yeah, because there's no way that a Jewish person could be a ruthless killer...or do anything illegal or immoral.

I am not saying that.  But during this historical period of time there was a clear evil and clear victim.  QT has them backwards. 

[Pappy13]

I would put all three on my list of favorites. Saying any are better is almost impossible. I just don't compare things that way. I don't really know that I can say I enjoy any of them more than the others. I just know I enjoy watching all three.

Perhaps this is my problem.  I hear people say that Pulp Fiction is one of their favorite movies and I take that to mean it's better than most other movies, yet perhaps they simply don't make a big distinction between a lot of movies.  Like you said you enjoy watching all three.  There are parts of Pulp Fiction that I really enjoyed with excellent dialogue and acting, but when I view the movie as a whole, it doesn't have the same impact upon me that others do.  Perhaps it's not suppose to and I can respect that and yet in my humble opinion if that's the case it's lacking something the others are not, therefore they are better movies.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[Dave Gray]

Why are Tarantino Films considered some of the best ever?

You can not like him, and I get that -- he does  a lot of things that may turn you off, however, it's pretty undeniable that he's unique in what he does.  ...and he has a distinct style that sets him apart from other story tellers.  Let's talk Pulp Fiction.  He tells the story out of order, he all but invented the idea of fantastic characters in fantastic settings talking about very regular things.  That's now been copied over and over, but he popularized it.  When's the last time you saw two gangsters on their way to a hit talking about the differences between McDonalds in America vs. Amsterdam or the sensuality of a foot massage?  Also, he uses these moments to build tension.  There is a scene in Pulp Fiction where two gangsters are at a guy's house to collect money, and Sam Jackson's character starts asking the guy about his lunch.  They talk all about how he loves burgers, but doesn't eat them often and he even politely asks for a drink of the guy's soda.  Then, he abruptly shoots another dude lying on the couch.  These scenes build real tension, but through non-conventional means.  The opening scene of Inglorious Basterds (with the farmhouse and the guy drinking milk and talking about languages) does this better than any film I've ever seen.  There is an incredible amount of tension, and yet nobody is really talking about danger, but we can infer that it's there.

To Hoodie

If you aren't a fan of Tarantino and don't want to watch Inglorious Basterds, that's cool.  However, your stated reasons for not wanting to watch it are a gross, gross misrepresentation of the film.  First off, to say that it's a fictional story set in a historical setting is not even really all that accurate.  It's more of an alternate universe and it's very clear that this is not historical fiction....just fiction (the ending cements this).  It also does some really interesting things with the portrayal of both Nazis and Jews, by flipping the script on them.  The Nazis are very much portrayed as real, calculated evil, being done by real people, rather than the comic-book one-dimensional Nazis that film usually gives us.  On the other hand, the Inglorious Basterds are a complete comical group of bad-asses.  These are not real characters and are portrayed a lot more like super-heroes.  It's like revenge-porn for Jews, if anything.

Also, the villain in Inglorious Basterds is up there with Hannibal Lecter as one of the best ever.  The character is fantastic and the actor's performance is even better.  The guy is amazing.

[Phishfan]

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

The beautiful thing about opinions is there is no right or wrong.

[Dave Gray]

I am not saying that.  But during this historical period of time there was a clear evil and clear victim.  QT has them backwards. 

You're talking crazy.  That's not the case at all.  ...at all.

Your idea of what the film is is way, way, way off.

[Phishfan]

^^^ Not only is his interpretation of the film wrong, his interpretation of history is a bit off as well. The Allies most certainly committed war crimes (which apparently we cannot mention because the Nazis committed crimes as well) just as every waring nation has committed crimes during war.

[Cathal]

I was not entertained by Indepence Day.

Holy crap man. If that wasn't entertaining to you then what kind of movies do you like? By the way, I finally saw IB about a month or two ago and it was nothing like I thought it would be. I thought there would be a lot of violence, shooting, clubbing, etc..., but there wasn't. It was a pretty good movie and it shows everyone in a negative light so I don't think there is any kind of bias.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Holy crap man. If that wasn't entertaining to you then what kind of movies do you like?

Comedies  --  Animal House, Caddy Shack, All of Mel Brooks movies, Stripes, etc.

quality dramas- Crimson Tide, A Few Good Men, Goodwill Hunting, Mr. Holland's Last Opus.  etc. 

SciFi - that has a plot and is more than just things getting blown up -- Star Wars, Star Trek, Harry Potter, etc.

[Pappy13]

...however, it's pretty undeniable that he's unique in what he does...and he has a distinct style that sets him apart from other story tellers.

I don't know if he's unique, but he is different, I acknowledge that.  I think there have been a few others before and after him that have done some things similar to what he does.  In fact in some ways he gets his ideas from other films.  That's Ok, I just don't see what he does as unique.

he all but invented the idea of fantastic characters in fantastic settings talking about very regular things..(snip)..The opening scene of Inglorious Basterds (with the farmhouse and the guy drinking milk and talking about languages) does this better than any film I've ever seen.  There is an incredible amount of tension, and yet nobody is really talking about danger, but we can infer that it's there.

I agree.  This is actually the reason that I stopped to watch the movie in the first place.  I really liked this first scene and I liked the scene in the tavern and I liked the scene where he is eating pastry with the girl.  There's obviously a lot of tension throughout all those scenes and yet they are merely 3 memorable scenes in a jumbled mess of a movie.  I had no clear concept of what it was QT is trying to say with the movie other than it's like all of his other movies.

Yes he has a style.  But that's all he has, a style.  Where is the substance?  Can he do something MORE than just his style or can he make his style work in a movie that has a real story to tell.  Maybe that's a bit much to ask, but then that's what I expect of a truly great movie.  I very much enjoyed a movie called Memento (I wouldn't put it as one of my favorites, but I liked it much better than IB) because it has a pretty unique style, but in that movie the style actually makes the story work.  It's essential to make the story and what makes it a good movie.  Now maybe that was true for Pulp Fiction as well, in fact that's kinda the point of Pulp Fiction, it's not really about the story, it's about the style and I can appreciate that and Pulp Fiction is probably his best work, but lets see him do something else now.  His style was not really needed for IB, it's just accepted now that a QT film will be done in his style, but it's getting old now.

I enjoyed the 2 hours I spent watching IB, but I probably won't watch it again and I probably will forget it rather quickly.  Great movies are movies that I want to watch over and over because they are so powerful and they'll remain in my thoughts for a long time to come.

Here's a few of what I would consider my favorites.  I'm sure it's not all encompassing, I just tried to pick a couple from different genres.  I sorted them alphabetically because it would be extremely hard to try to sort them best to worst.  Feel free to rip me on my choices.

12 Angry Men
2001: A Space Odyssey
A Few Good Men
Avatar
Blade Runner
Braveheart
Bridge Over the River Kwai
Goodfellas
It's a Wonderful Life
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
Platoon
Saving Private Ryan
Schindler's List
Shawshank Redemption
Silence of the Lambs
Spy Game
Star Wars
The Deer Hunter
The Godfather
The Lord of the Rings
The Sixth Sense
Twelve Monkeys
Unforgiven

[fyo]

Gratuitous female nudity on the other is just fine for a movie.

Let's just make this perfectly clear: There is no such thing as gratuitous female nudity.

[bsmooth]

Ok, I "get" that.  He's poking fun at things, I "get" that.  I really enjoyed all the Wayan's brothers Scary Movies, moreso than the movies they are making fun of, but are they the best movies of their time?  Hardly.  How can you compare a movie like IG with Schindler's list or Saving Private Ryan for example?  You can't.  There's NO comparision IMHO.  I don't get that.

He is not really poking fun at things. He is a very astute observer of all things pop culture, and he is an incredible student of all things movies to include genres of movies that are in the realm of cult classics that have gotten very little viewership by the mainstream.
He is paying homage to these older movies by using and updating gimmicks and ground breaking ideas 30-40 years ago that few people ever saw.
Resevior Dogs was not a huge hit, and Pulp Fiction was not as big as many other movies, but you see many, many directors trying to copy his style.
If you were going to compare QT to any director, I would pick Sam Peckinpaw as he was ahead of his time with violent movies and many of his movies were not fully understood and excepted by the public, but he is still considered a genius director.