'Inglourious'? Quite the contrary..

inglourious-basterds

QT did it again. And I love him for it.

Checked out Inglourious Basterds (damn the spelling to hell!). Although I’m still trying to digest it all in full, I must say: GO SEE THIS MOVIE. And do it now.

I’ll be the first to admit that I’m quite biased in terms of Tarantino films. I love his love for cinema and it exudes out of every film he’s ever made, this one in particular – a spaghetti western set to the backdrop of World War 2 and Hitler and the Third Reich.

Things I loved:

1. Christoph Waltz as Col. Hans Landa. Waltz totally deserved the Best Actor prize at Cannes for his portrayal of the Austrian Colonel sent to track down Jews in hiding. His performance was light and airy, yet ice cold at the same time. Brilliant performance, really.

2. The film was still chock full of Tarantino’s great dialogue and superb tension building techniques. The scene in particular? Col. Landa’s inquisition of Pierre LaPadite (Denis Menochet) has Landa trying to discern whether or not Jews are being harbored in the Frenchman’s home. The conversation and tension, plus the respect both characters have for each other in that one scene is quite Tarantino-esque and quite rewarding as well.

3. Though definitely trademarked with Tarantino’s style, the movie wasn’t as zany and outlandish as I was expecting. Given his recent films (Death Proof, Kill Bill), I was expecting Basterds to be slightly more out there in terms of style and story. Surprisingly, it was relatively down to earth considering its creator.

Brad Pitt was surprisingly good! Eli Roth starred in it! So did B.J. Novak! I could continue to gush, but I won’t. Go see it.

One thought on “'Inglourious'? Quite the contrary..

Comments are closed.