Fan in Chicago Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Surprisingly underrated film....a lot of people I know who have seen it thought it was boring. I felt just the opposite! I loved the pacing, and the acting was amazing. Casey Affleck was fantastic. I just saw Inglorious Basterds tonight, and it surpassed my expectations. I agree with H&A that it's Tarantino's second best film next to Pulp Fiction. Tarantino used the concept of irony in this film very effectively, and it's not often that I have a cinematic experience that is THIS satisfying. I give this one 94 scalps! PS. Christoph Waltz was awesome in this flick! I whole heartedly second that. As good as Pitt was, I think Waltz stole the show with his fantastic job as Landa. I literally felt squeamish every time he started questioning somebody. That first scene on the French farm set his character beautifully and every subsequent sequence involving him just built up his performance. Don't get me wrong, I loved Pitt's acting and especially his dialog delivery (and yes, I think his performance in Burn After Reading was a fabulous and under appreciated) but Waltz was better in this movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazed and Amuzed Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I whole heartedly second that. As good as Pitt was, I think Waltz stole the show with his fantastic job as Landa. I literally felt squeamish every time he started questioning somebody. That first scene on the French farm set his character beautifully and every subsequent sequence involving him just built up his performance. Don't get me wrong, I loved Pitt's acting and especially his dialog delivery (and yes, I think his performance in Burn After Reading was a fabulous and under appreciated) but Waltz was better in this movie. I want to third that. I almost feel embarrassed for not mentioning him, he was great. The scene where he walks in on them talking about the theater with Shoshana made many in the theater squirm. Also Pitt speaking Italian was a great schtick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Also Pitt speaking Italian was a great schtick. That was one of the funniest AND most clever scenes in the entire film. The facial expressions were killin me! What a great scene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I whole heartedly second that. As good as Pitt was, I think Waltz stole the show with his fantastic job as Landa. I literally felt squeamish every time he started questioning somebody. I did too! I felt guilty of something every time he came on screen! What a fantastic performance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 12 Monkeys and se7en were also roles that Pitt did a great job in. What's in the box?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Actually the real reason why Bastards is misspelled in the title is because QT writes his scripts long hand on legal pads -- and he's a horrible speller. He then has some one type 'em up for him before sending them out. The script got leaked before a deal was made and everyone in town was giving him copious amounts of sh-- for misspelling the !@#$ing title. Instead of admitting he misspelled it he just said it was a "flourish" ... like the 100s of other words he misspelled in the script apparently. Had the script not been leaked and made so public, the title would have been fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Actually the real reason why Bastards is misspelled in the title is because QT writes his scripts long hand on legal pads -- and he's a horrible speller. He then has some one type 'em up for him before sending them out. The script got leaked before a deal was made and everyone in town was giving him copious amounts of sh-- for misspelling the !@#$ing title. Instead of admitting he misspelled it he just said it was a "flourish" ... like the 100s of other words he misspelled in the script apparently. Had the script not been leaked and made so public, the title would have been fixed. Actually Inglourious is 'mis-spelt' too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopsGuy Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Christoph Waltz was the guest on today's Adam Carolla Podcast. Two other Pitt performances I like: (1) Achilles in "Troy", and (2) Floyd in "True Romance"*. *Tarantino's original spelling "Troo Rowmantz" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Actually the real reason why Bastards is misspelled in the title is because QT writes his scripts long hand on legal pads -- and he's a horrible speller. He then has some one type 'em up for him before sending them out. The script got leaked before a deal was made and everyone in town was giving him copious amounts of sh-- for misspelling the !@#$ing title. Instead of admitting he misspelled it he just said it was a "flourish" ... like the 100s of other words he misspelled in the script apparently. Had the script not been leaked and made so public, the title would have been fixed. Outstanding. This is the kind of stuff you need to being to the table on a consistent basis. Christoph Waltz was the guest on today's Adam Carolla Podcast. Two other Pitt performances I like: (1) Achilles in "Troy", and (2) Floyd in "True Romance"*. *Tarantino's original spelling "Troo Rowmantz" Floyd is the reason I even paid attention to him. That is a great Pitt role. As I said, when he has something interesting to chew on, he usually does a terrific job. But when the character is more mainstream or less quirky, I think he is sometimes forgettable. There are some actors that make any role memorable, I'm not sure Pitt is that guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Outstanding. This is the kind of stuff you need to being to the table on a consistent basis. I'm working on it ... I know I've been MIA for too long now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I'm working on it ... I know I've been MIA for too long now. Excellent. And of course I meant "bring to the table". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damj Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Inglorious Basterds was just seen by ME How is DC Tom doing anyways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Went and saw it this afternoon, only seven people in the theater. Good pace, I liked it. One I might get the DVD when it comes out. Side note: Like I said, only seven people in a theater that holds around 100. I had my own row, these two other women had their own row, and another couple has their own row. Now the last couple to arrive, think they'll sit away from everyone else in their own row? No, they pick the row the first couple are in, and only leaving one seat seperating them. When the movie ended, the first couple had to ask the second couple to move so they could get out while the credits were rolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts