Inglourious Basterds (2009)

[Rovin]

Yes, it's apparently spelled that way.

Anyway, Here's a teaser trailer.

[Jesus Wept]

Haha, sweet. It actually doesn't look like more of the same from Tarantino. It doesn't appear to be another post-modern pastiche; an exercise in in grade school art class collage.

...that said, it still IS exactly that. But still, maybe Tarantino's finally figured out how to once again inject creativity and his own originality into tried and true ideas? It's something he hasn't really done since Pulp Fiction.


Well, consider me more interested in this now than I was before. Thanks for sharing that trailer.

[Rovin]

Originally Posted by Jesus Wept

Well, consider me more interested in this now than I was before. Thanks for sharing that trailer.

I love the way Pitt pronounces "Nazi." Makes me giggle.

[PsychotronicFan]

Originally Posted by Rovin

I love the way Pitt pronounces "Nazi." Makes me giggle.

You should probably spell it "gnatsie"

[Rovin]

Originally Posted by PsychotronicFan

You should probably spell it "gnatsie"

GNAT-see!

[PsychotronicFan]

Originally Posted by Rovin

GNAT-see!

Lol. Thanks for posting that link.

I'm a sucker for war movies (exploitation or not) and am looking forward to seeing this one.

[Jesus Was A Robot]

Looks awesome! I love the ending where Hitlers yelling Nein, nein, nein, nein, nein. I still stand by Quintin Tarantino's special feature in Inglorious Bastards being worth the purchase alone.

[Temp_Revenge]

I'm trying not to let myself get too pumped up for this one. It looks like it could be great but it wouldn't be the first time a trailer has deceived me.

[Tarantinoholic]

Oh man, I don't know how I feel about this...

As a(n obviously) die-hard Tarantino fan, I've kinda been anticipating this like the second coming of Christ. I read the script a few months ago and went apeshit for it, and since then I've been following the production like ravenous, blood-thirsty vulture. The cognitive rough cut that plays in my head is the best thing Tarantino has ever put to film, which might be why I feel so crushingly, bizarrely... underwhelmed with this teaser.

As a lot of people have stated other places, the whole thing looks really flat and rushed, and Brad Pitt's delivery is really kind of bizarre. Don't even get me started on Eli Roth. On the other hand, maybe I oughta give the thing the benefit of the doubt. All we're really shown here is Pitt's speech to the Basterds and the quick inserts of action and chaos look more like the kinda thing we'd expect from a WWII film directed by Quentin Tarantino. I don't know... the whole thing has really thrown me for a loop here. I still have faith in QT, but this is the first time it's even been shaken for me.

[Mr. Monster]

There is a god.

[PsychotronicFan]

For the uninitiated, here is a link to a previous discussion thread...

http://www.rue-morgue.com/boards/sho...ous+bastar ds

[Killah Tomater]

I can't wait for this to finally be released in theaters, if only to see what jaunty pop tune Tarantino uses for the most gruesomely violent scene in the film.

[Jesus Wept]

The more I watch this, the giddier I get.

[PsychotronicFan]

http://www.dvd-forum.at/3297/news_kino.htm

A link to a few pics from a German site.

ETA: A loose translation of the intro paragraph on the site from Babelfish and I filled in a few parts to paraphrase..

Half-ass quote follows as well as minor spoilers

One recognizes Quentin Tarantinos film style usually by his films and also with many fans cult status brought in. Whether just as well its newest caper will succeed to it INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS will show up, which pursues and in the Second World War plays this time a rather serious topic, probably still 2009 over universal Pictures. If one clicks on these, one gets the pictures in its highest resolution with all details to see. " Inglourious Basterds" begins in the German occupied France, where Shosanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent) becomes a witness of the execution of their family by Nazi Colonel Hans Landa (Walzer). Shosanna, who could escape, flees to Paris, where she begins a new life under a new identity as owner and Betreiberin cinema. Elsewhere in Europe, second lieutenant Aldo Raine (Pitt) of a group of Jewish soldiers, organizes a group to retaliate.…

Nice neck scar...

[Nonsense]

That trailer gives me serious wood.

[Rovin]

Originally Posted by Tarantinoholic

Don't even get me started on Eli Roth.

You see that bit at the very bottom of my second post in this thread saying I'd edited it for pointless jokes?

The joke was, "Countdown until someone bitches about Eli Roth being in this.... 10.... 9.... 8...."

[Scotty]

When the camera hits Roth, the movie stops cold dead. It's like the key grip wondered onto the set. Hell, Pitt doesn't even look awake. I'm not sure anyone is taking this very seriously, but that could still work depending on the whole.

Jury's out.

[Tarantinoholic]

Originally Posted by Rovin

You see that bit at the very bottom of my second post in this thread saying I'd edited it for pointless jokes?

The joke was, "Countdown until someone bitches about Eli Roth being in this.... 10.... 9.... 8...."

Sorry about that, Rovin. Something about the guy's screen presence (or complete lack thereof) just irks me. At least he's not the ONLY thing I bitched about, though. Also, for anyone who cares, Harry Knowles just posted a huge article on AICN regarding a recent set visit. You can check it out here!

(Countdown until someone bitches about me posting about Harry Knowles and/or AICN.... 10.... 9.... 8....)

[Rovin]

Originally Posted by Tarantinoholic

Sorry about that, Rovin. Something about the guy's screen presence (or complete lack thereof) just irks me. At least he's not the ONLY thing I bitched about, though. Also, for anyone who cares, Harry Knowles just posted a huge article on AICN regarding a recent set visit. You can check it out here!

(Countdown until someone bitches about me posting about Harry Knowles and/or AICN.... 10.... 9.... 8....)

It's okay, really. BTW, you DID notice that one of the guys they show in the lineup was the younger brother's best friend on Freaks and Geeks, right?

[Nallix]

I'll watch pretty much anything Tarantino puts on the screen and have dug it all so far. The trailer looks like a vicious, brutal war/exploitation film, and that makes me very happy. Sadly, I wonder how well a film that like would actually do in theatres.

[Nonsense]

For those who think Tarantino is dropping his fanboy schtick for a more serious outing, consider some of the character names-

Aldo Raine - tribute to b-movie staple Aldo Ray

Ed Fenech (Mike Myer's character) - the name based on euro babe Edwige Fenech

Sgt Hugo Stiglitz - Hugo Stiglitz was the star of Nightmare City among other z-grade poopshows.

Of course, none of should affect the tone of the film...but come on, it's still QT dropping references like he was applying for a day job.

[Fred Garvin]

Tarantino breaks down the teaser trailer.

[Fred Garvin]

New teaser posters can be seen here. I like the one with the baseball bat!

[FEEDBACK]

Originally Posted by Tarantinoholic

Oh man, I don't know how I feel about this...

As a(n obviously) die-hard Tarantino fan, I've kinda been anticipating this like the second coming of Christ. I read the script a few months ago and went apeshit for it, and since then I've been following the production like ravenous, blood-thirsty vulture. The cognitive rough cut that plays in my head is the best thing Tarantino has ever put to film, which might be why I feel so crushingly, bizarrely... underwhelmed with this teaser.

As a lot of people have stated other places, the whole thing looks really flat and rushed, and Brad Pitt's delivery is really kind of bizarre. Don't even get me started on Eli Roth. On the other hand, maybe I oughta give the thing the benefit of the doubt. All we're really shown here is Pitt's speech to the Basterds and the quick inserts of action and chaos look more like the kinda thing we'd expect from a WWII film directed by Quentin Tarantino. I don't know... the whole thing has really thrown me for a loop here. I still have faith in QT, but this is the first time it's even been shaken for me.

I'm with you entirely (except I haven't read the script.)
It's the first time I've seen a trailer or preview for a Tarantino joint and felt this underwhelmed.

I've been anticipating this one for years!

But Brad Pitt seems so terribly miscast.

And as for Eli Roth?

WTF????????????????????????????????????

First, he makes Cabin Fever.
What a piece of shit that was.
Then Hostel.
Load of Crap (but slightly better...)
Then Hostel 2.
Alright, he's slowly getting better....
Then the THANKSGIVING trailer.
Hmmm...
Best thing he's ever done.
Then he starts popping up in every single documentary about films produced in the last five years.
Huh?
Then he pops up in Death Proof.
WTF?
And now this....???????
Sharing top billing in the trailer with Brad Pitt?
Seriously. How did this happen?

Is Eli Roth on course to be the next Schwarzeneggar? Are we looking at the rise of yet another sociopath intent on ascending through the ranks of the entertainment world only to arrive at the highest political offices in the land?????

Then again....

I liked Roth's stuff in the trailer FAR better than Pitt's.

Hmmmmm.......

Depressing really. Kinda feel sad I've arrived at a place where I'm no longer looking forward to the next Tarantino flick.


The Future of Eli Roth?

[The Gore-met]

Originally Posted by FEEDBACK

Kinda feel sad I've arrived at a place where I'm no longer looking forward to the next Tarantino flick.

Don't feel bad, I've been happily living here since From Dusk 'til Dawn. Needless to say, I have zero interest in this one.

[Killah Tomater]

Eli Roth is in no danger of being the next Schwarzeneggar. At best, he'll have a great career as the next Hector Elizondo - you'll keep seeing and recognizing him in various other films/TV shows, but he'll never be the guy who carries the production.

[FEEDBACK]

Originally Posted by The Gore-met

Don't feel bad, I've been happily living here since From Dusk 'til Dawn.

Yes - but that's an absolutely unfounded position.

[Melo]

I was really....surprised by this trailer. Specifically with Brad Pit. At first it left a really foul taste in my mouth, but after watching it a few times, it's so bizarre that now I just can't wait to see this flick. (I should have prefaced that I'd would have gladly lined up to see this opening day, trailer or not)

Can't wait.

[Nallix]

The trailer did exactly what it was supposed to do for me: it gave me enough information about the plot to make me crave more, then showed flashes of interesting points of the movie. It didn't spell the whole plot out or give everything away. It showed just enough to make me curious and excited.

I'll be there for the opening for sure.

[Jesus Was A Robot]

I like that Brad Pitt is in this. He is a well rounded actor and can pull off almost any role. As far as Eli Roth, yea he's a twerp but his films are watchable. I liked Cabin Fever and wish he would make more films like that. It had a quirky side to it which made it hilarious to me. I think this film has a lot of potential.

[fizzmaster]

Lame trailer, but I'd bet serious coin that the movie will be awesome.

[Satan's Favorite Son]

The Weinstein's seem to want 40 minutes cut from the film..?

http://chud.com/articles/articles/19...TES/Page1.html

I'd say no big deal, we'll have these deleted minutes on the eventual DVD, but then I remember how we're still waitin' here in Region 1 for Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair, and a theatrical cut of Grindhouse.

And on another note reguardin' the Weinstein's...

http://gawker.com/5285827/the-weinst...re-sale-begins

[El Capitan]

Wow, I would have figured the Weinsteins would be multibillionaires since they now own the term "Grindhouse".

The news about IB pisses me off though. They'll never forgive American audiences for the Grindhouse failure at the box office will they?

[Rovin]

Originally Posted by El Capitan

The news about IB pisses me off though. They'll never forgive American audiences for the Grindhouse failure at the box office will they?

No, but it's okay, we don't forgive them for Doogal, so it evens out.

[Satan's Favorite Son]

I just find it pretty sad that aside from Inglorious Basterds, these guys are hedgin' all their bets on H2. I mean, have they seen the shit Zombie's puttin' out there? If that latest Uncle Coffins vid is any clue as to where the movie is headin', they'd better just start the liquidation right now.

[El Capitan]

Originally Posted by Satan's Favorite Son

I just find it pretty sad that aside from Inglorious Basterds, these guys are hedgin' all their bets on H2. I mean, have they seen the shit Zombie's puttin' out there? If that latest Uncle Coffins vid is any clue as to where the movie is headin', they'd better just start the liquidation right now.

Are you serious? I'm thinking that H2 is going to be total shit, but I still think it's going to make a shitload of cash at the box office.

[KISS Fan]

Originally Posted by Satan's Favorite Son

The Weinstein's seem to want 40 minutes cut from the film..?

http://chud.com/articles/articles/19...TES/Page1.html

I'd say no big deal, we'll have these deleted minutes on the eventual DVD, but then I remember how we're still waitin' here in Region 1 for Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair, and a theatrical cut of Grindhouse.

And on another note reguardin' the Weinstein's...

http://gawker.com/5285827/the-weinst...re-sale-begins

That's a smart move on their part. This movie will likely bomb at the box office being that long. Why do we need a 3 hour movie? Keep it to under 2 hours. Plus they are also looking at it as a way to have more show times squeezed into the day. Then they can release it on DVD uncut like everyone else does.
It's sad that Kill Bill and Grindhouse still don't have a better release.

[Rovin]

Originally Posted by KISS Fan

That's a smart move on their part. This movie will likely bomb at the box office being that long. Why do we need a 3 hour movie? Keep it to under 2 hours. Plus they are also looking at it as a way to have more show times squeezed into the day. Then they can release it on DVD uncut like everyone else does.
It's sad that Kill Bill and Grindhouse still don't have a better release.

There's no way in hell in this day and age that I'm going in to a three hour R-rated film. They don't do intermissions anymore, and at that length it makes it more of a pain to find someone to watch the kids. It'd have to be something REALLY special to get me in the doors, and Tarantino isn't that precious to me.

[Mr. Monster]

Originally Posted by KISS Fan

That's a smart move on their part. This movie will likely bomb at the box office being that long. Why do we need a 3 hour movie? Keep it to under 2 hours. Plus they are also looking at it as a way to have more show times squeezed into the day. Then they can release it on DVD uncut like everyone else does.
It's sad that Kill Bill and Grindhouse still don't have a better release.

This is exactly the problem. Business concerns overriding artistic ones. Make a good fuckin' movie and put it out. If no one comes, fuck 'em. I realize it's unrealistically idealistic of me, but I think the entertainment business should place quality of product first. But the truth is, if they could sell as many tickets by putting a sign on the theatre that said "Come in, it's air conditioned and you'll be out of the sun", then there'd be a lot more out of work directors.

[Satan's Favorite Son]

Are you serious? I'm thinking that H2 is going to be total shit, but I still think it's going to make a shitload of cash at the box office

I'm not sure. There hasn't been as much conversation about the film compared to the first one on message boards and the like. What little there has been, has mostly been negative. Granted yeah, a lotta folks who bash it will see it, but I don't think it's gonna be as big of a hit as many would believe.

Originally Posted by Mr. Monster

This is exactly the problem. Business concerns overriding artistic ones. Make a good fuckin' movie and put it out. If no one comes, fuck 'em. I realize it's unrealistically idealistic of me, but I think the entertainment business should place quality of product first. But the truth is, if they could sell as many tickets by putting a sign on the theatre that said "Come in, it's air conditioned and you'll be out of the sun", then there'd be a lot more out of work directors.

I'm with MM on this one. I can understand Rovin's argument, but you need look no further than films like Titanic, Lord of the Rings... 3 plus hour films that did good box office despite their run times. Personally, I'd rather sit through a long movie that keeps my interest rather than a short and sweet flick that gets the point across, but leaves me wantin' more. With ticket prices goin' up almost every month, I feel I get my money's worth.

I'd rather 2 cuts of the film be released, 'cause I'd always check out the longer cut. 9 times outta 10, a truncated version of the film doesn't fully realize the plot, leavin' you with questions that have been explored in the longer cut.

[Rovin]

Originally Posted by Satan's Favorite Son

I'm with MM on this one. I can understand Rovin's argument, but you need look no further than films like Titanic, Lord of the Rings... 3 plus hour films that did good box office despite their run times.

They're not Rated R.

[Nate]

I'm bypassing this one and going straight to "The Expendables" for my action movie fix.

[Satan's Favorite Son]

Originally Posted by Rovin

They're not Rated R.

Damn you and your technicalities!

[ROBERT BLACK]

Originally Posted by Rovin

There's no way in hell in this day and age that I'm going in to a three hour R-rated film. They don't do intermissions anymore, and at that length it makes it more of a pain to find someone to watch the kids.

If that's what it comes down to why not just wait for the Blu ray or DVD? A 3 hour film with no intermission for a washroom break is tough but I'd rather see a good satisfying 3-4 hour film than a shitty 85 minutes of fluff for my dollar. It makes the hassle that much more worthwhile in the end.

[Rovin]

Originally Posted by ROBERT BLACK

If that's what it comes down to why not just wait for the Blu ray or DVD? A 3 hour film with no intermission for a washroom break is tough but I'd rather see a good satisfying 3-4 hour film than a shitty 85 minutes of fluff for my dollar. It makes the hassle that much more worthwhile in the end.

That's exactly what I do in those cases, actually... wait for the BD or DVD. It's not that I don't like well done films with length, it's that life doesn't supply a lot of good opportunities to make them convenient to go to. I would have LOVED to have seen Watchmen. I didn't. My wife's parents live an hour and a half away, my own mother is in the middle of what's been a two-year battle with lung cancer, my Dad's frequently gone for public service stuff, and we've got no really regular babysitting friends. That's just how life goes. "Luck" and "schedule" have to intersect exactly right, and that isn't a very often occurance.

While I really do support filmmakers' artistic right to make the film they want to make, if they're going to make extra super-long R-rated films they need to keep in mind that there are probably a "few" people out there like me - people who really honestly have an interest in what they're doing but aren't often in the position to partake in it. I wouldn't have probably seen Drag Me To Hell in the theater with my wife had it not been our wedding anniversary weekend and I'd scheduled that evening free well beforehand.

[KISS Fan]

Originally Posted by Satan's Favorite Son

I'm with MM on this one. I can understand Rovin's argument, but you need look no further than films like Titanic, Lord of the Rings... 3 plus hour films that did good box office despite their run times. Personally, I'd rather sit through a long movie that keeps my interest rather than a short and sweet flick that gets the point across, but leaves me wantin' more. With ticket prices goin' up almost every month, I feel I get my money's worth.

I'd rather 2 cuts of the film be released, 'cause I'd always check out the longer cut. 9 times outta 10, a truncated version of the film doesn't fully realize the plot, leavin' you with questions that have been explored in the longer cut.

Lord of the Rings, Titanic, and King Kong all were known films with a big history behind them. That's why they did big box office numbers. Inglorious Bastards is a remake of a 70s movie that only about 1% of todays movie goers have heard of.
Oddly enough both King Kong and Lord of the Rings still had extended versions released on DVD.
I will see the longer cut if I can.

Recently I saw The 40 Year Old Virgin and I enjoyed it but thought that it was way too long. Turns out the version I saw was the unrated version and was something like 20 minutes longer than the theatrical version. I probably would have liked the theatrical version better.

Same thing with Dawn of the Dead. A lot of people like the European Version or the theatrical version better than the extended version.

[Mr. Monster]

Originally Posted by Rovin

They're not Rated R.

I would love to go to a theatre that actually enforces the R rating.

[Nate]

Originally Posted by Mr. Monster

I would love to go to a theatre that actually enforces the R rating.

Quoted for truth, and I'll add that I'd love for a theater to deny entry to an R rated film to any parent bringing a child in single digit ages.

[Satan's Favorite Son]

Originally Posted by KISS Fan

Lord of the Rings, Titanic, and King Kong all were known films with a big history behind them. That's why they did big box office numbers. Inglorious Bastards is a remake of a 70s movie that only about 1% of todays movie goers have heard of.
Oddly enough both King Kong and Lord of the Rings still had extended versions released on DVD.
I will see the longer cut if I can.

Recently I saw The 40 Year Old Virgin and I enjoyed it but thought that it was way too long. Turns out the version I saw was the unrated version and was something like 20 minutes longer than the theatrical version. I probably would have liked the theatrical version better.

Same thing with Dawn of the Dead. A lot of people like the European Version or the theatrical version better than the extended version.

Dammit! Everyone pokin' holes in my theory. Guess that's what I get for tryin' to act all intelligent like.

As for extended cuts, I think it depends on the subject matter, and if it warrants more story. While I've never seen The 40 Year Old Virgin, it doesn't really strike me as a film that would have exised a lotta plot from its theatrical runnin' time (though, I could be wrong on that). With a movie like Basterds (knowin' Tarantino's writin'), it seems like 40 minutes would make a big dent in certain characters and ideas.

Also, I think in certain cases, if you've seen a film before (like Dawn of the Dead), and it becomes a favorite, then you see new footage in it? I think that would throw you off, and you wouldn't really dig that version. It's like those Star Wars re-releases. My nephew saw those, loved 'em, then saw the originals. He despised 'em! So I'd say it's more to when you first experienced 'em rather than the addition of new scenes.

Maybe it's just me, but I'm a sucker for character development. But if most people are like me, they can tell when certain things are cut out of films, 'cause they don't seem to add up while gettin' into the picture at the theater.

[Rovin]

Originally Posted by Mr. Monster

I would love to go to a theatre that actually enforces the R rating.

Whether or not you want to BELIEVE some do, a lot really do. In my twenties I was carded on entry to numerous films.

Not to mention the fact that a lot of kids will buy tickets for something else so they don't have to have that hassle than sneak into the R-Rated's auditorium.