****/****

Saw it a second time. There is so much to love about this movie. It is obvious that QT loves making movies. We get the ending that history didn't give us. It's just so badass.

It gets even better the second time. My #1 film of the year.

copycat!

I thought it was fantastic, the best of Tarantino's career, and the best film released since... There Will Be Blood? Maybe. It's that good.

It's not just that it's a terrifically entertaining and exciting cinematic treat (which it is, of course), it's that it's such an assured, mature piece of film pastiche. Tarantino has always been known for his cinematic references, of course, but Basterds is the first film where I really felt he was paying homage to classic films, instead of ripping them off shamelessly.

There's also a brilliant streak of meta-cinematic subtextuality running throughout, climaxing in the explosively overblown symbolism of cinema literally destroying the Nazis. Maybe a bit heavy-handed, but I thought it worked great

Plus there's the dynamic performances, superb dialogue (in three - and a bit - languages!), involving story, and unique music choices you should always expect from QT, mixed in with the iconic historical geography of WWII and a blistering sense of black humour. It's really running on all cylinders. I loved it.

doesn't it feel a bit....long though? I found it to drag considerably in the middle, do you disagree trixster?

It was no more or less a homage/rip-off than Kill Bill. If you have seen some easterns from the 70s and 80s, it's pretty obvious. I both are leaning towards the former, but whatever you assign to Basterds should also apply to Kill Bill.... (as far as that very aspect goes).

I thought Kill Bill was considerably more annoying and pretentious. Perhaps because I just don't dig those types of films.

I didn't find this to drag at all. I could've spent another three hours in this world.

Yeah, I suppose you're not into easterns because as far as those go, Tarantino did his job well.

Which is interesting when you consider that Tarentino said that it was seeing TWBB tht finally inspired him to do this.

And yeah, this was awesome.

I felt the dialogue was not nearly as clever, crisp, or dramatic as pulp fictions, and while it was still good, could not really carry the film on its own. And cosidering the 3rd and 4th chapters were essentially dialogue.
Also, I was pulled in by the basterds part of the story, the hans part of the story, but not really by the cinema/private whatshisname part of the story. I found that part to be rather unengaging, as such, it dragged.

Don't get me wrong, I do love this movie, but better than any movie since TWBB let alone Pulp Fiction?NIMO, not at all.

The dialogue was some of the best I've ever heard.

Freaking brilliant.

Apparently you haven't seen many intellectual films.
Start with A few Good Men, or The Savages
than you can move on to Network and all About Eve.

A Few Good Men and The Savages may have great dialogues but definately not as good as Basterds.

I disagree, however we were talking specifically about dialogue, not the movies in general.

could you provide a few examples for great dialogue in a few good men?

A Few Good Men is a fine film...but an intellectual film?

What is an 'intellectual film'?

I have not seen "A Few Good Men". Does that mean I'm not intellectual?

Apparently.

Whatever an intellectual film is, 'A Few Good Men' is none.

What is an intellectual film?
by John Savage

An intellectual film is a film that is among the 5 films (out of a total 20 I have seen) with the most dialogue, which additionally covers serious adult problems in a seemingly clever and therefore intellectual way.

Fin.


What is 'A Few Good Men'?
by Prof. Dr. Salami "Mimikri" Waffenfels Baron Freiherr von Balsam CII.

'A Few Good Men' is exclusively an "intellectual film" according to those that would consider such a film to be "intellectual".

Well this thread took a turn for the gross.

Trix knew what he unleashed, he is a crafty bugger.