argument argue about share argue how
 
argue for



pros and cons   against

 
All TopicsArt & LiteratureFilm

Arguments for and against

Inglorius Bastards

started by allonzo1 on 1/1/10.

Inglorius Bastards
For Against
 
arguesreason
Critic James Berardinelli gave the film his first 4/4 star review of 2009, stating, "With Inglourious Basterds, Quentin Tarantino has made his best movie since Pulp Fiction," and that it was "one hell of an enjoyable ride." Roger Ebert also gave the film a four-star review, writing that "Quentin Tarantino’s 'Inglourious Basterds' is a big, bold, audacious war movie that will annoy some, startle others and demonstrate once again that he’s the real thing, a director of quixotic delights." Anne Thompson of Variety praised the film, but opined that it was not a masterpiece, claiming, "Inglourious Basterds is great fun to watch, but the movie isn't entirely engaging... You don't jump into the world of the film in a participatory way; you watch it from a distance, appreciating the references and the masterful mise-en-scene. This is a film that will benefit from a second viewing".


by Katzwinkel (69.39) on 1/3/10.

00
argumentsreasons

arguesreason
More than a few of the scenes exhibited the playfully intricate dialogue that Tarantino fans have come to love, though I wouldn't say that the dialogue was enough to carry the wonky story arc.

by Katzwinkel (69.39) on 1/3/10.

00
argumentsreasons

arguesreason
I'm not sure what you were expecting out of a Tarantino film but I certainly got what I expected and LOVED it. "Basterds" is a film buff's homage to a great American movie genre. The guy wanted to make a WWII flick with his own unique spin on it and he succeeded. Christoph Waltz's character alone is worth the admission (or rental for that matter).

by LA_Mike (51.02) on 1/5/10.

00
argumentsreasons

 
 
argumentsdebate
British critic Peter Bradshaw stated he was "struck... by how exasperatingly awful and transcendentally disappointing it is". Author and critic Daniel Mendelsohn was disturbed by the portrayal of Jewish-American soldiers mimicking German atrocities done to European Jews, stating, "In Inglourious Basterds, Tarantino indulges this taste for vengeful violence by—well, by turning Jews into Nazis".


by Katzwinkel (69.39) on 1/3/10.

20
argumentargue

argumentsdebate
The film has met some criticism from Jewish press. In Tablet, Liel Liebowitz criticizes the film as lacking moral depth. He argues that the power of film lies in its ability to impart knowledge and subtle understanding, but Inglourious Basterds serves more as an "alternative to reality, a magical and Manichean world where we needn’t worry about the complexities of morality, where violence solves everything, and where the Third Reich is always just a film reel and a lit match away from cartoonish defeat".


by Katzwinkel (69.39) on 1/3/10.

20
argumentargue

argumentsdebate
I did not get it. Someone please explain the point of the picture.

by allonzo1 (22.07) on 1/1/10.

21
argumentargue

argumentsdebate
It was as though somebody said, "I bet Quentin Tarantino could make the most God-awful movie of the year and still rake in millions of dollars." Which he did; but he hedged his bets by making the whole movie about murdering Nazis.

It was ten scant months between shooting the first scene and the theatrical release, and you can tell.

by Katzwinkel (69.39) on 1/3/10.

00
argumentargue

argumentsdebate
So other than an escape from reality.what was the point? were these good guys or bad guys? If this sort of behavior could have ended the war earlier, was that a good thing? Was this sort of behavior common place during WWII? There must have been one over riding theme, but i am still missing it.

by allonzo1 (22.07) on 1/3/10.

00
argumentargue

argumentsdebate
I have enjoyed Tarantino films in the past, and to some degree I enjoyed this one. In the other films that I can recall, the actions of the characters affected a smaller group of people. They did not change the course of history. Since he choose to have his characters make such an impact on his fictional history, I think he did so for a purpose. It appears to me that the larger question he poses is, "Can a small amount of barbaric behavior be justified if it averts the death of hundreds of thousands of people?" I have not done an exhaustive search of reviews of this movie. So, maybe this has already been addressed. If so, i would be interested in reading about it.

by allonzo1 (22.07) on 1/5/10.

00
argumentargue

 
Inglorius Bastards
 
         
argue   for
© 2009 13 Guys Named Ed, LLC   •   About   •   Feedback   •   Sitemap
against   argues