In describing Quentin Tarantino’s Inglorious Basterds, allow me to begin by skipping the hyperbole and overstatement that would only echo the sentiments of scores of other critics and simply say that Inglorious Basterds was the single most entertaining film of the summer. Period.
Well, I tried.
Now, I’m going to further parrot my fellow critics’ enthusiasm: Inglorious Basterds is a masterpiece. This film is storytelling at its brightest, sharpest and most engaging. In fact, one can only find flaws by nitpicking Tarantino’s indulgence in long stretches of dialogue and quirky stylistic flourishes. Ultimately, those flaws pale in comparison to wonderful whole of the cinematic experience that is Inglorious Basterds.
Contrary to the trailers, Basterds is more than the story of Brad Pitt’s Lt. Aldo “The Apache” Raine and his ragtag Jewish-American, plus a few German defectors, “special ops” squad as they dare to slaughter as many Nazis as humanly possible during the height of World War II. It is the story of Shoshanna Dreyfus (Melanie Laurent), Col. Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz), Bridget von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger), and so many more. It is the story of those dared to bloody their hands and souls in an attempt to bring the Third Reich to its knees. The plan to achieve this ambitious goal includes Raine’s Basterds, Shoshanna and her lover Marcel’s Parisian cinema house and the collaborative efforts of German Spies, British counterintelligence and duplicitous Nazi officers. Basterds explores these elements through four separate chapters, culminating with a rousing, explosive finish that legitimately makes you laugh, cry, and cheer.
To paraphrase one of Basterds more outrageous characters, Donny Donowitz, the “Bear-Jew,” Tarantino knocked this one straight over the Green Monster and into the Atlantic. There is patience in the storytelling and heart in this film that Tarantino merely hinted at in his earlier films. Each character is developed through extended, theatrical scenes that are enlivened through beautiful cinematography that evokes the sensibility and style of WWII movie made during the late 60s or early 70s. Tarantino’s patience allows the audience to experience each character and their lives in the midst of this tragic era before moving them towards the film’s climax. It also gives the actors room to deliver some of the best performances of the year. Among the best are Laurent’s gripping performance as Shoshanna Dreyfus, the sole survivor of a vicious Nazi raid led by the charmingly, villainous Col. Landa. Shoshanna is unquestionably the soul of this film. Laurent’s anguished performance is balanced by a measured approach that is never over-the-top and perfectly evocative of the simmering rage, fear, and anxiety that fuel vengeance. Counterbalancing Laurent’s performance is Christoph Waltz’s turn as one of this generation’s best screen villains, Col. Hans Landa. Waltz plays Landa as a twisted Sherlock Holmes, a charming and perceptive man who is rightfully impressed with his own intelligence yet prone to fits of unimaginable viciousness. Waltz uses the pitch perfect approach to his portrayal of Landa, only going over to top when necessary but constantly bubbling with an infectious energy that draws in enemies and allies like flies to a spider’s web. It may be premature, but, based on Waltz’s performance, Landa is the undoubtedly the screen villain of the year.
Not to be forgotten is megastar Brad Pitt and his deliberately exaggerated turn as Lt. Aldo Raine. Pitt plays Raine with a Tennessee accent, a variation on his Benjamin Button N’awlins accent, and devilish smirk that shows he takes far too much pleasure in killing, scalping and scarring Nazis. The power of the three main performances does not diminish the impact of supporting performances by Diane Kruger, Eli Roth, Michael Fassbender, Til Schweiger, and Daniel Brühl who all turn in amazing, nuanced performances that add to the humor, heart and tension of the film.
The wonderful performances in Basterds highlight the mostly character-focused nature of the film, but, being a Tarantino film, scenes of visceral violence consistently punctuate each chapter. And, what glorious violence it is! The action scenes in this film tiptoe between grisly spectacle and grim reminders of the cost of war. Each scene of violence, prior to the prolonged ultraviolent climax, is fast, furious and brutal, topped with shocking images of scalping, bullet holes and scarring. That said, some of the scenes may prove difficult for the squeamish. But, thanks to Tarantino’s assured direction and slavish adherence to story and character over spectacle, each scene serves the story and the characters rather than being violent for the sake of the R-rating.
Indeed some viewers may find the violence to be unbearable, but they may also find the lengthy scenes of dialogue equally unbearable. Tarantino is famous for the wit, sharpness, and the amount of dialogue in his films and Basterds proves no exception to that rule. Many scenes in Basterds, such as the bar rendezvous and Shoshanna’s lunch with Joseph Goebbels, could have stood to lose about five minutes, though at possible detriment to the story. It’s hard to say whether many other directors would have taken the risk and let those scenes run long. But, based on the excellence of the final cut, it seems to have been a calculated risk with mostly positive results. Just be prepared to digest a lot of talk before the action starts.
In addition to the Tarantino dialogue, there are a few other stylistic flourishes that may pull audiences out of the story including a 70s-style mini-movie dedicated to one character’s back story (complete with the old-school big font title and porno music), a glut of filmmaking references, and a strangely anachronistic narration by one of Tarantino’s premier players. Again, each is a minor indulgence that reflects Tarantino’s style and personality, but may prove confounding to the two or three moviegoers unfamiliar with Tarantino’s style.
Minor nitpicking aside, Inglorious Basterds is awesome (and Michael Bay wasn’t even involved). This is moviemaking, nay storytelling, at it should always be: emotionally engaging, riotously funny, truly touching, terribly thrilling, and, most importantly, unrepentantly entertaining.
