Inglorious Basterds !!!!!!!!!!!

This is an old debate about art vs commerce. The bottom line this that most audiences don't want to be challenged when they go to the theater, so most films made aren't challenging. There isn't enough money in it. I think my tastes tend to straddle the middle of this issue. I love a challenging film that explores an idea or a truth in a multi dimensional way without reducing things to the lowest common denominator. I am also content to just be entertained as long as my intelligence isn't being insulted. They are not mutually exclusive and the best films usually do both things. but I don't expect every movie to be all things to all people. As far as Tarantino, I don't think his work is any deeper than your average comic strip. But it is unique and well crafted and I give him props for that. I don't think it's fair to judge a film based on what it's not, only on how well it accomplishes what it set out to do.
 
Batutta said:
...I don't think it's fair to judge a film based on what it's not, only on how well it accomplishes what it set out to do.
Click to expand...

You nailed it for me. I don't really know if I like this film or not, because after the opening scene, I sat there wondering what the **** I was looking at. I had no idea what it was trying to be, it felt so inconsistent and all over the place.

Certain things like the explanation about Nitrate film, are impossible to know, because that might very well have been Harvey, afraid that everyone would be too stupid to understand the film without that bit.

But again, the opening scene was great, straight up, very clear about its sense of and use of humor(the meerschaum pipe gag). But then the film quickly turned into seemingly a different film for each actor, almost, just a crazy mish-mash...and I don't know if that was intentional, or what...

So I dunno...I need another viewing at least.
 
Batutta said:
This is an old debate about art vs commerce. The bottom line this that most audiences don't want to be challenged when they go to the theater, so most films made aren't challenging. There isn't enough money in it. I think my tastes tend to straddle the middle of this issue. I love a challenging film that explores an idea or a truth in a multi dimensional way without reducing things to the lowest common denominator. I am also content to just be entertained as long as my intelligence isn't being insulted. They are not mutually exclusive and the best films usually do both things. but I don't expect every movie to be all things to all people. As far as Tarantino, I don't think his work is any deeper than your average comic strip. But it is unique and well crafted and I give him props for that. I don't think it's fair to judge a film based on what it's not, only on how well it accomplishes what it set out to do.
Click to expand...

I was going to say the same exact thing. Every point you made. Film buffs tend to be so dogmatic about cinema. In fact, I used to be that guy. Until I realized that not everything has to be Cassavetes or Malle. There are just different flavors. Cassavetes and Malle are delicious, but Smith and Tarantino aren't bad either. Someone else earlier in the thread said something to the effect that you can enjoy gourmet food, but a good pizza once in a while never hurt.
 
All I'm saying is DON'T TURN OFF YOUR BRAINS like some say. We do enough of this in America. That's why we have "America's Got Talent". You know this, I know this. The whole "I need to escape" thing is silly. Like someone said on here, his films are a comic strip, they aren't the pinnacle of our artform. No one thinks Rambo was deep, and god help you if you do. If you look at his films with your brain on, you can see his shallowness, his tricks, and realize you're on some carnival ride. I just have a problem with Tarantino being used as an educational tool for young filmmakers. It would be like Chef's teaching you how to make a Big Mac in cooking school.

Look, it's like hiking a mountain trail you've never hiked before versus one of those spinning rides at the carnival. Which one would you rather do 5 times in one week?
 
jpastuch said:
All I'm saying is DON'T TURN OFF YOUR BRAINS like some say. We do enough of this in America. That's why we have "America's Got Talent". You know this, I know this. The whole "I need to escape" thing is silly. Like someone said on here, his films are a comic strip, they aren't the pinnacle of our artform. No one thinks Rambo was deep, and god help you if you do. If you look at his films with your brain on, you can see his shallowness, his tricks, and realize you're on some carnival ride. I just have a problem with Tarantino being used as an educational tool for young filmmakers. It would be like Chef's teaching you how to make a Big Mac in cooking school.

Look, it's like hiking a mountain trail you've never hiked before versus one of those spinning rides at the carnival. Which one would you rather do 5 times in one week?
Click to expand...
I left my brain on and still enjoyed the film quite a bit.

There were 3 great long sequences in this film that were well worth the price of admission alone. Comparing this movie to the likes of "America's Got Talent" has me baffled. :huh:
 
Why couldn't Tarantino be used as an eductational tool for young filmmakers? The man can compose one hell of a shot and some of his scenes have been fantastic, including a few in IB.

A Big Mac would be Uwe Boll, Tarantino is more like a Five Guys Burger with layered expensive Truffles and topped with a slice of 4-year Gouda.
 
Michael Anthony Horrigan said:
I can see that you feel that way. You've repeated it several times. Thanks for letting us know.
Click to expand...

I was replying to your post in which you needed clarification, apparently.

And I don't care how much Tarantino can compose a shot. There are hundreds of directors who can compose shots and you know, uh, actually say stuff in their films too. His popularity has helped make an entire generation of aspiring filmmakers into morons, more or less.
 
jpastuch said:
I was replying to your post in which you needed clarification, apparently.

And I don't care how much Tarantino can compose a shot. There are hundreds of directors who can compose shots and you know, uh, actually say stuff in their films too. His popularity has helped make an entire generation of aspiring filmmakers into morons, more or less.
Click to expand...
Nope. I was baffled by you making the comparison, not baffled by the meaning behind it. And it was more than just composing a shot but why nitpick.

You obviously have a pretty big chip on your shoulder when it come to Tarantino so I'll let you rant and rave. He's obviously beneath you so I'll move on.

I love it when people get a kick out of tearing down other directors.
A negative review is one thing but this is entirely different.

Have fun.

MAH
 
I have no chip on my shoulder when it comes to Tarantino, he's free to make whatever garbage he wishes. I have a chip on my shoulder when professors try to teach his films in universities to me and other people. I have a chip on my shoulder when marketing mixes with education. It has to do with people holding up the most shallow things in cinema in the highest regard. As usual. American culture is built on the most shallow aspects of life, and this is especially true in Hollywood. And it's spread worldwide by this point. Have you seen some of the textbooks they use? They spend entire chapters on films like Pulp Fiction, Jurassic Park, and Star Wars. Pure madness.

But if you want to ignore what I said and make up an imaginary psychoanalysis, go for it.


EDIT: spidey, this discussion has nothing to do with my work, so I'm sending you a PM of a link to my stuff to avoid getting off track (though feel free to share it with whomever- doesn't bother me).
 
jpastuch said:
I have no chip on my shoulder when it comes to Tarantino, he's free to make whatever garbage he wishes. I have a chip on my shoulder when professors try to teach his films in universities to me and other people. I have a chip on my shoulder when marketing mixes with education. It has to do with people holding up the most shallow things in cinema in the highest regard. As usual. American culture is built on the most shallow aspects of life, and this is especially true in Hollywood. And it's spread worldwide by this point. Have you seen some of the textbooks they use? They spend entire chapters on films like Pulp Fiction, Jurassic Park, and Star Wars. Pure madness.

But if you want to ignore what I said and make up an imaginary psychoanalysis, go for it.
Click to expand...
No need. You're proving my point quite nicely on your own.
 
It's kind of cute when people mistake a discussion about the state of film as personal attacks on a director.
 
jpastuch said:
It's kind of cute when people mistake a discussion about the state of film as personal attacks on a director.
Click to expand...
It's kind of cute when someone uses terms like garbage, morons, and compares American cinema to the shallowest aspects of life.
And goes on about it endlessly yet expects others to believe that it's nothing personal. :grin:

This will be my last post addressing you in this thread so I'll let you have the last word. Like I had a choice.

Have fun bashing away, maybe you'll convince yourself of what you're preaching if you say it often enough.

MAH
 
jpastuch said:
I have no chip on my shoulder when it comes to Tarantino, he's free to make whatever garbage he wishes. I have a chip on my shoulder when professors try to teach his films in universities to me and other people. I have a chip on my shoulder when marketing mixes with education. It has to do with people holding up the most shallow things in cinema in the highest regard. As usual. American culture is built on the most shallow aspects of life, and this is especially true in Hollywood. And it's spread worldwide by this point. Have you seen some of the textbooks they use? They spend entire chapters on films like Pulp Fiction, Jurassic Park, and Star Wars. Pure madness.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but any professor who didn't include Tarantino in a serious film study would be the one I'd have doubts about. Love him or hate him (which you obviously do), he is one of the most influential directors of the past 20 years so he demands attention. Should he be put up on a pedestal as an example for all to emulate? No. Should he be discussed? Absolutely. Along with Spielberg and Lucas and hell, even Michael Bay, as well as Antonioni and Fellini and Max Ophuls and Truffaut etc. If your school isn't showing you the full range of films than that's an issue for you and your school. I went to a pretty crappy school but my teachers exposed me to the classics and foreign films as well as more current stuff. Just because your film school experience is suffering doesn't mean we have to suffer your very biased and skewed rants.
 
im curious now though..

I'm influenced by directors and writers and shots choice and design. tell me what you think, or anyone in here its cool.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8xTCOi29IY

it's in 3 parts.

I would say that my biggest influences is PTA, his stories are incredible to me. but i also am influenced by kurosawa, tarantino and others.
 
The style to this film was fantastic.

Some scenes dragged on, but I did like that..

The camera movement when there questioning the German was simply the best camera shots in the film...(After those weird rack focus' with the screen stretching, simply amazing)

The camera going back and forth to the 3 men...Come on, seriously, creative and wicked!

The action in this was sweet and the build up to the suspense was dead on.

Robbie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top