Quentin Tarantino’s latest piece ‘Inglourious Basterds’ (2009) is a brave, but entertaining spin on the World War II experience. Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt) fronts a band of Jewish-American rogue soldiers into the heart of the Third Reich. Their mission: shedding as much Nazi blood as possible. Once the Basterds make contact with Shosanna (Mélanie Laurent), a French-Jewish cinema owner in hiding, strategies to fight off Hitler’s men begin to take form. Tarantino’s approach is reminiscent of his other major works: style always dominates substance and scenes are always heavily laden with dialogue (in this film’s case, French and German). Beautifully crafted European scenery, an intriguing score and spurts of ultra-violence do much to turn the heads of viewers. Tarantino’s attention seeking, however, does not always happen for the right reasons.
The flick is confused in many ways. On one hand, it seems as if Tarantino’s intention was to create the ultimate revenge flick: to transform the oppressed Jewish figure into a symbol of chaotic vengeance. His approach though – however risky it may seem – is comical in the sense that his band of soliders are clumsily fronted by Raine: a neatly-moustached, slightly idiotic Tennessean leader. He is a drill sergeant with a blasé edge; a walking contradiction. What remains concerning about Tarantino’s piece, however, is the stylistic way he reanimates this dark period in history. Is his piece an insensitive twist on a sensitive topic? Or, does Tarantino’s postmodern emphasis on visual aesthetics help to shun any deep or political reading of the film? This argument remains highly debatable. Then, there is the question of his use of blood and bullets. The film’s violence – whilst graphic and intense – is intermittent and infrequent. However, Tarantino’s tendency towards bending the boundaries of visual excess and storytelling, it could be argued, renders his story palatable. His cast, for instance, is caricatured ad nauseam. Tarantino’s playful approach to characterisation here proves successful. Pitt is amusing as the leader of the Basterds; comical and camp. Martin Wuttke (as Adolf Hitler) and Sylvester Groth (as Joseph Goebbels) are equally colurful as SS figureheads; loud and schizoid. Eli Roth as Donny (also known as the Bear Jew) is entertaining too; ridiculously numb and comically serious. Like Sgt. Hugo Stiglitz (well played by Til Schweiger), he is an exaggerated figure of war, beaten and weary. In these qualities, however, rests irony: both men are violent soldiers that just happen to be Jewish. This sense of character campness, however, is not always present. Apart from being unbelievably attractive, Mélanie Laurent (as Shosanna Dreyfuss) subduely, but amazingly portrays the French-Jewish girl under Nazi siege. Her reservation and bitterness is symptomatic of loss and suppression. Jacky Ido, Daniel Brühl, B.J. Novak, Omar Doom, Gedeon Burkhard, Diane Kruger, Mike Myers and Michael Fassbender are equally impressive in their roles too, even though dialogue commonly switches from language to language. Christoph Waltz (as Col. Hans Landa) is particularly good. His character is tightly drawn down to the finest detail. The way he eats strudel and drinks milk, for instance, is always well-rounded and deliberate; you can almost taste the sugar and lactose. Waltz’ ability to fluidly shift between French, German, English and Italian is equally amazing. Whilst his lingual and acting skills are impressive, so is his parody of the Nazi solider: stern, sharp, clinical and ordered.
As usual, Tarantino parades his knowledge of film and culture. He conducts discussion on filmmakers via his British solider, Lt. Archie Hicox (Fassbender), who also happens to be a film critic. To the naked eye, this may seem impressive, even interesting from a characterisation point of view: a reviewer-come-fighter. To others who happen to know a little bit about film history and theory, Tarantino’s intentions could come off as being a little superfluous and self-indulgent. It must be stressed, however, that Tarantino’s references to film culture does succeed quite well in parts. Using Shosanna’s French film theatre as a place of respite and revenge, for example, works nicely. He tastefully reveals his love for film by using it as a legitimate visual space in his own story.
Without doubt, Tarantino creates an amusing flick. It is a mildly lengthy, but still an incredibly stylistic tale about blood, guts and glory. His ‘ultimate revenge’ intentions could be read as crude by some, possibly offensive. Overall, however, I think it would be wrong to take his film too seriously since it is – like his other major works – excessive in (and driven by) visual style.
(4/5)
Popularity: 7% [?]
