David Theiss

Starring: Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Mélanie Laurent, Eli Roth

Directed By: Quentin Tarantino

Dan Trachtenberg: It’s by far his best movie since Pulp Fiction.

Jeff Cannata: It might be better than Pulp Fiction.

That little quote popped up in the middle of the Totally Rad Show’s review of Quentin Tarantino’s new movie “Inglourious Basterds.”  I’ve come to trust those guys and their opinions over the years I’ve watched their podcast, so naturally my hopes were high.  Quentin Tarrantino, while not my favorite modern director (that distinction goes to Paul Thomas Anderson), is without a doubt the most widely admired and arguably the most influential of the new-age, ”VCR film school” bunch.

So in short, is “Inglourious Basterds” better than “Pulp Fiction?”  No.

Is it his best movie since “Pulp Fiction?”  Honestly?  No.

Unfortunately, I have to say “Inglourious Basterds” is a modest disappointment.  It is the weakest of his big, tent-pole features (I’m conveniently excluding “Death Proof“) and is surprisingly self-indulgent and lacking focus.  The film basically boils down to four or five extended conversations that try to ratchet up the tension and suspense of an impending explosion of violence that hangs over every scene.  Most of these conversations involve Christoph Waltz’s Jew-Hunting Nazi Colonel Hans Landa.  He is the true star of the film.  The character has a smug creepiness that owns every scene he appears in.  Landa is often one step ahead of the audience, and we’re always aware of this, even if we don’t know exactly what information he has, which gives every exchange the prospect of turning bloody at a moments notice.  Waltz is simply excellent.

The disappointment belongs to the title characters: The Basterds.  The problem is that each one of them lack any resemblance of actual character – including Bard Pitt’s Aldo Raine.  Tarantino will go extended periods of time without them on the screen, which leaves the time we have with The Basterds feeling rushed and lacking any real meat.  These characters are nothing more than Nazi hunting cartoons (which isn’t entirely a bad thing all the time), and frankly I expect more from a QT picture.  That isn’t to say that the moments with them aren’t memorable: Raine convincing Nazi’s to rat out their comrades’ positions and the trio of Basterds speaking Italian before the film are all great and hilarious and masterfully crafted.

I don’t want to sound like this movie is bad.  It’s not.  In fact, it’s really good.  But we’ve come to expect greatness from Quentin Tarantino and this isn’t great.  His directing is flat and comes off very cliche.  It almost feels at times like he’s doing a parody of himself (i.e. the projection booth scene with it’s uber-slow-mo and overpowering score).  Also, the huge bits of dialogue go on too long at times and are a bit tedious – but these are all nitpicks.

Tarantino knows he’s earned the right to craft huge, extended scenes of nothing but witty and obtuse dialogue – he gets to do this because he’s Quentin Tarantino.  He knows we’ll watch and that we’ll love it.  And maybe that’s the problem.  Tarantino knows he’s good, and in “Inglourious Bastards” we have a movie from a director that has, for the first time in his career, relied upon his wealth of tricks (that are unquestionably uniquely his) at the expense of true substance and creativity.  But I liked this film a lot, regardless.

Anyway…

The final line of the movie goes like this:

Aldo Raine: You know somethin’, Utivich? I think this might just be my masterpiece!

We all get it, okay?  It’s a really good movie, Quentin.  But no – a masterpiece it is not.

My Grade: (a very, very solid) B