Guest Review: Albert D.: "Inglourious Basterds"

When I saw the trailer to this flick, I knew it was going to be good. I guess at first it was partly because it was staring one of my favorite actors, Brad Pitt, as well as the very funny B. J. Novak, who can be seen on a little show called "The Office." And Yes, I have to admit that the fact that Quentin Tarantino was directing was a plus... at first.

Thing is, and I’m 100% sure Matt is going to kick my ass for this, but the only thing that made this movie such a drag was Quentin Tarantino and his wannabe "original" directing style. He literally spent at least 15 minutes of the movie on close up shots of things like lips or eyes. No joke - I almost fell asleep 2 times from the constant close ups, and the ridiculously long dialogs you had to read. Yeah that’s right, did I mention that only about 10% of the movie is in English! Most of the movie is dialog, and I think there were only a few action scenes.

Brad Pitt plays Lt. Aldo Raine who is the leader of the Bastards, and is accompanied by Jewish American soldiers with only 1 objective, to put absolute fear into the heart of the German army. Later, they are given a mission to attempt take out the entire German Nazi leadership in a single mission. Adolf Hitler and his top advisers are meeting at a film premiere in Paris celebrating the exploits of a German sniper who had managed to kill 300 American soldiers. I've never heard of Christoph Waltz until today, but he is pure genius in this movie, holy crap. “The Jew Hunter” will literally make you want to pee your pants after seeing him brake down people for information.

I’m pretty sure most people are going to disagree with me about the directing, but I don’t really care. I agree that directing movies is a really hard thing to do. I give directors a great deal of respect, but to label them geniuses, or anything near that, is strictly a matter of opinion. I can’t stand people throwing around the word genius; as if anyone that has mastered their craft automatically gets labeled a genius. I think a director is supposed to tell a story so the viewer can see the movie through HIS own eyes, to entertain his audience, not bore them to death with the methods used by all of his predecessors.

The movie itself is an extremely entertaining story, other than the over-dramatic directing by Tarantino. I really enjoyed this movie. I’m totally sure if anyone else directed this movie, I would have enjoyed it way, way more.

4 out of 5 Stars for "Inglourious Basterds"

The 'Basterds' win the weekend box office

Quentin Tarantino has done it again... won the weekend box office. Inglourious Basterds took in 37.6 million dollars Friday to Sunday. The industry experts predicted 25 million. The film marks Tarantino's biggest opening ever, beating out Kill Bill Vol. 2 back in 2004; that movie took in 25 million its first weekend. The movie had great reviews from both fans and critics. AtD reviews coming soon.

District 9 was the surprise hit last week, and continued to do well this week. The film took in a great 18.9 million dollars in its second week. G.I. Joe fell to third, but is doing well at 120+ million so far.

Tarantino's long time friend and collaborator, Robert Rodriguez had Shorts, a family film, hit the top ten this week. The movie took in 6.6 million and is expected to have a long run through September as kids are going back to school. Here's the rest of the top ten:


1. "Inglourious Basterds," $37.6 million.

2. "District 9," $18.9 million.

3. "G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra," $12.5 million.

4. "The Time Traveler's Wife," $10 million.

5. "Julie & Julia," $9 million.

6. "Shorts," $6.6 million.

7. "G-Force," $4.2 million.

8. "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince," $3.5 million.

9. "The Ugly Truth," $2.9 million.

10. "Post Grad," $2.8 million.

Matt & Tony: The Quentin Tarantino Argument

As you know, this is "AtD: Movies with Matt & Tony." Matt and Tony don't see eye to eye on a lot of film topics, and today you'll see what we mean. This is a conversation about the film director Quentin Tarantino and his new film, "Inglourious Basterds." AtD's friend, Albert, started the conversation:

Albert:
Just saw it with the my girlfriend, opening night, which is the only way to see a movie. Amazing stuff. Go see it. The funny thing is, and i'm 100% sure Matt is going to kick my ass for this, but the only thing that made this movie such a drag was Quentin Tarantino and his wannabe "original" directing style. He literally spent at least 15 minutes of the movie on close up shots of things like lips or eyes. no joke i almost fell asleep 2 times from the constant reading, because only 10% of the movie is in English.

Most of the movie is dialog, maybe a few action scenes, and there is 2 VERY lengthy scene of 30 minutes of dialog, back and forth, back and forth. any normal director would of cut the ish out of all that nonsense. Brad Pitt was very funny in this. I've never heard of Christoph Waltz until today, but he is pure genius in this movie, holy cow. He will literally make you want to pee your pants after talking to him.


Matt:
Sorry, Al. here I go...
1. Zooming in on a facial feature is not original, (Kubrick? Coppola? Heck, even Chaplin? hahaha). that's what Tarantino does. he makes every movie a crazy homage collage of all his favorites. Matter of fact, every director does. Just like Langella and Scorsese constantly stole from Hitchcock.

2. Are you really complaining that a TARANTINO MOVIE had TOO MUCH DIALOGUE? Wow. I don't even know what to say. not only is that a "duh, no ish" but that's also a "ya, stupid, that's what makes it good."

Aaaand that's pretty much it.... Read More, write a review! Tony & I are already getting one from Jen, too. so this will be a cool 4-way review thing.


Tony:
Matt please, for your future wife's sake, stop kissing up to Tarantino every time we discuss movies. Pulp Fiction was original, yes... Everything else is a rip off of someone lesser known, yet its got a "Tarantino style". That's stupid. Oh and by the way, I will see the movie Monday for review so you don't say "you can't talk, you haven't seen it".


Matt:
Tony, please, let me kiss up to Tarantino if I want to. "Pulp Fiction" was not original. It was a rip off of a bunch of different Euro and Japanese movies. Heck, even the character's names and the way they're dressed is STRAIGHT from other films.
To find an "original director" you need to go wayyy back to Chaplin or Kurasawa. Every director rips off someone else. The difference with Tarantino is that he admits it often. Others only say it secretly in some documentary or something.

THERE IS such a thing as "Tarantino style". I can watch the "Inglourious Basterds" TRAILER and know that it's a Tarantino flick.

What makes a director good is the quality of the end product. That being said, Tarantino is already a master filmmaker at his young age. And please, for YOUR wife's sake, stop kissing up to James Cameron. The "highly anticipated" trailer for "Avatar" looks like ish. Its like a live-action "Delgo." Good luck with that.


Tony:
Agree to Disagree... But yes, there will be a Delgo lawsuit before you know it.



This is just one example of a Matt & Tony argument... more to come.

Quickie: "Machete" Casting News

2007's "Grindhouse," which had two separate features films directed by Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino respectively, had faux movie trailers in between the real two features. One of the trailers was for an action picture called "Machete," starring Danny Trejo (Con Air) as a machete-wielding Mexican ex-Federale bent on revenge after being double-crossed by a corrupt state senator named McLaughlin.

Well Robert Rodriguez is now bringing this entertaining little trailer to life in the form of a full-length feature.

Bloody Disgusting has posted some very interesting casting news recently.
Aside from the obvious Danny Trejo being cast as "Machete," they are reporting that Michelle Rodriguez (Fast & Furious) is set to play the character "Luz," Jonah Hill (Superbad) will play "Julio," and the Robert DeNiro will play "Senator McLaughlin."

Hmmm... I can see Michelle Rodriguez cast in this movie. That makes sense.
And Robert DeNiro being cast, while totally awesome, isn't much of a shocker either. Tarantino and DeNiro have strong ties leading back to "Jackie Brown," and seeing how Tarantino and Rodriguez are very close friends, this one is very possible.

The surprise here is Jonah Hill. This news, if true, leads me to believe that the film will probably have the same underlying comedy cheesiness of the original trailer.

Any thoughts?

Inglourious Basterds will NOT be cut

A few weeks ago, we told you Harvey Weinstein asked mister Quentin Tarantino to cut some 40 minutes from his new movie, Inglourious Basterds. Seems mister Weinstein is backtracking now. Check out these unbelievable quotes from GQ magazine:

No fucking way! I was telling Quentin the opposite—'You should put that shit back in the movie.' There’s scenes with Brad Pitt and the Basterds, and I’m praying he puts that shit back in, ‘cause it’s un-fucking-believably great. Listen—this movie will be between two hours and twenty minutes and two hours and twenty-seven minutes. I don’t think it’s going to be shorter—it’s just a question of rearranging.

Wow, I don't know who to believe... but I will tell you this, Weinstein is the boss, period! So had he told Tarantino to cut the movie, Tarantino cuts the movie, no questions. So we'll see how this plays out, but for all you Tarantino lovers, you get a 2 and a half hour movie coming soon.

New Italian Inglourious Basterd Poster

Today is the day of posters and photos, so I thought I'd share this new Italian poster of Inglourious Basterd. It looks much better than the one we posted previously. What do you think? Is Tarantino a genius? Or do his movies suck and make no sense? Debate it here... after all, we are Agree to Disagree. The photos is courtesy of Obsessed with Film.

40 Minutes Cut From "Inglourious Basterds"?

Slash Film and The Wrap are reporting that the Big Man at The Weinstein Company, Harvey Weinstein, is asking sir Quentin Tarantino to cut 40 minutes from his rough cut of "Inglourious Basterd".

There are several rumors as to why this would happen, number one being money. It costs money to cut, re-shoot, edit, etc. The Weinstein Company has had a bunch of flops over the last two years, most notably Fanboys, The Long Shots, etc. I'm a bit divided on this one. There are three hour movies that need not be, i.e. every Speilberg movie, and then there are those who need the entire time to tell the story, i.e. "The Dark Knight".

I also believe that it is the artist's choice to do what he wish with the picture. Tarantino, hate him or love him, is an artist and should be allowed to work his magic anyway he see fit. But the other side of me sees the potential problems in a three hour picture. Less showings at theaters during any given day, 90 minute action flicks that make much more money, and marketing. There are movies that pull it off like the 'Rings' trilogy, but for the most part, it's very difficult to have a viable three hour film.