Miscellaneous Movie Musings - Page 482

Alex · 09-14-2009, 01:11 PM

His 8 year old is not a biological child. It is a child that Calista Flockhart had adopted before she and Ford got together. His last biological child was born when he was 48. Not young, but not horribly old either (though his four biological children came in pairs 15-20 years apart with two wives).

Tref · 09-14-2009, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

His last biological child was born when he was 48.

That is one long gestation period!

Snowflake · 09-14-2009, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

They're prepping for Indy 5

I just let out a Charlie Brown-esque "Auuuggghhh!" just now.

That's what I felt and sounded like with the announcement of another POTC film.

Gemini Cricket · 09-14-2009, 09:32 PM

Inglorious Basterds

I saw it today. I have a lot to say. Sorry if this post is uberlong.

Dirty Dozen with a dash of Cinema Paradiso and a splatter of Reservoir Dogs.

Let me do bad stuff first:

1. Too long. Tarantino seems to have the George Lucas air about him that people around him are worried about telling him the stuff he's doing needs to be cut. The first table scene in the movie is dull. Now, if it built suspense, like the last five minutes of the scene did then it would have been a different scene altogether. But it didn't. At least, not for me.

2. Too long deux. There were chunks of this film that could have been featured as deleted scenes on the DVD release. I mean if long sections of a scene don't lead up to anything and doesn't move the story along, it's not needed.

3. It's built up to be this sort of Dirty Dozen with us following the Basterds around. Uh, not exactly. It's like he wanted to make one film at first and then thought... hmm, let's change course. What's the point in building up characters like the Bear Jew and Hugo Stiglitz when they are introduced as major players and then are nothing more than less than secondary characters? I know Tarantino likes to do the "ooh, you didn't expect that didn't you" thing but surprises still can be pertinent to the story.

4. "Fu ck a duck!" and referring to a guy's dick as a "weinerschnitzel" pulls me right out of the movie. They are totally modern day references that distract from the movie's intent of trying to convince you that you're in the mid-40's.

5. The gore didn't affect me at all. I was expecting it and now I don't even wince at it when it happens in a Tarantino flick. Yeah, we get it you have the brain of a teenage boy.

6. I wasn't on-board with the Aldo Raine character. Again, Brad Pitt being Brad Pitt with an accent. Pulled me right out of the movie... There's a point where certain actors become parodies of themselves on screen. I started feeling that with Pitt around Ocean's 11...

7. When the film ended, I thought what's the point of this movie? Yes, it's historical fiction, a fantasy version of what happened. But I have no idea what Tarantino is trying to say here other than "wouldn't it have been cool if..."

The good stuff:

1. Two words: Daniel Brühl. He first caught my eye in Ladies in Lavender and again in this film. So very cute and not a bad actor. But I love how he was portrayed as being so likable until you find out more and more about him. Nicely done.

2. Tarantino knows how to use music. The music choices in the film were great. But again, it pulled me out of it at times.

3. The montage of Shoshana getting ready for the premiere is wonderful.

4. Christoph Waltz is a delight to watch. So jolly then so evil.

5. The Reservoir Dogs standoff scene in a French basement. I liked it. The camera loves Diane Kruger.

So, did I like it? I guess. Did I love it? No. Did I hate it? No. I guess I'm on the fence on this one. Great moments, great choices here and there but a long-winded script is still a long-winded script no matter what.

Alex · 09-14-2009, 10:11 PM

Strongly opposing reaction for me. The prologue (assume what you mean by "first table scene" is probably the best single scene I've seen in recent memory.

According to Google Books, "**** a duck" has appeared in print at least back to the early '50s. "**** a duck and screw a pigeon, that's the way you'll get religion" is a piece of bathroom graffiti that I now learn originated in a 1955 novel.

My dictionary tells me the wiener/penis connection is about 100 years old. Don't know how long it took for the first wienerschnitzel joke to be told.

That said, it didn't take me out of the movie even if it is modern swearing. I remember hearing David Milch asked why he had his characters in Deadwood saying "**********" all of the time. His answer was that he wanted to true to the foul mouths of the characters but that we'd laugh at what was considered profane at the time. So it is spiritually accurate if not linguistically.

Loved Aldo Rains and am glad the movie wasn't actually a chronicle of the basterds exploits. That would have been boring.

To me, a big part of what the movie is saying is "how comfortable are you with brutality and slaughter when you agree ideologically with those doing it." We in the audience are condemning the Nazi's for their pleasure at a chronicle of the slaughter of U.S. soldiers and are immediately dumped into ourselves taking some positive feeling from the slaughter of the Nazis (and what exactly is the distinction between Zoller as a hero and Audie Murphy as a hero?).

To me it actually took a little bit away from that to have Hitler and the rest of the leadership there. It took away from the ambiguity. Very hard to feel any sympathy at all for Hitler. More questionable would be the slaughter of a hundred mid-level officials and their families.

Cadaverous Pallor · 09-14-2009, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

7. When the film ended, I thought what's the point of this movie? Yes, it's historical fiction, a fantasy version of what happened. But I have no idea what Tarantino is trying to say here other than "wouldn't it have been cool if..."

I believe this is all that Tarantino is ever trying to say with any movie.

I dug this one. While the music choices and language obviously clashed with the period, I enjoyed that, as it was his way of saying that while they didn't say "kick ass" back then, they meant the same things. (At least this is how I rationalized it.)

I was also rather bummed to not see more of the cool characters. I was struck by Tarantino's usual mark of not making any of the characters stupid or bumbling (which I believe Alex mentioned earlier). Everyone was smart, everyone did the best they could, for good or evil. I'm so sick of movies where you end up shaking your head at the stupid choices that don't make sense within the characters. This was much more enjoyable.

ETA - agreed with Alex, the first table scene was awesome.

Gemini Cricket · 09-14-2009, 10:22 PM

I mean, I think one would have to be pretty out of it if one didn't know the man was hiding people at his house. I knew it from the start. But the scene didn't build for me at all. When we finally saw the man cry and even seeing the expression of Shoshana (I believe it was her) through the slats that's where I bought the scene. But the scene could have started a lot later in.

I wanted to see a scene where Landa realized who Shoshana was. I mean, what's the point in him knowing her name at the beginning if that doesn't happen. UNLESS we're supposed to derive from the milk reference that he knew. Not sure.

Alex · 09-14-2009, 10:30 PM

Since half the purpose of that scene was to set a tone I think it would have lost its value if it started later (though of course that is lost anyway if the tone doesn't work for a person).

Of course we knew he was hiding them as soon as Landa's purpose was revealed. It wasn't about whether he was, it was about what Landa would do with that knowledge. But talking where Michael Bay would have a 50-person shootout is pretty much the epitome of Tarantino.

Gemini Cricket · 09-14-2009, 10:40 PM

Which is why I think he'd make a great playwright.

innerSpaceman · 09-14-2009, 10:45 PM

And yes, I'm pretty sure the milk reference was the pay-off on that. Nice that it wasn't spelled out with spilt ink, but pretty clear nonetheless.

I'm with Alex all-the-way on this one. Table Scene 1 (as it shall henceforth be known) = brilliant. Un-exploit chronicling = smart. The series of scenes were tense, entertaining and suspenseful just as much for the interplay between the characters as for the situations. That they didn't consist entirely of when the situations are prevalent was a unique joy of these film.

Most movies don't have scenes that play out so langorously as these. True, if you find them boring, they are just "slow." But I found ever scene in this movie clever and interesting.

09-14-2009, 01:11 PM	#4811
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	His 8 year old is not a biological child. It is a child that Calista Flockhart had adopted before she and Ford got together. His last biological child was born when he was 48. Not young, but not horribly old either (though his four biological children came in pairs 15-20 years apart with two wives).
	Submit to Quotes

09-14-2009, 09:32 PM	#4814
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	Inglorious Spoilers Ahoy! Inglorious Basterds I saw it today. I have a lot to say. Sorry if this post is uberlong. Dirty Dozen with a dash of Cinema Paradiso and a splatter of Reservoir Dogs. Let me do bad stuff first: 1. Too long. Tarantino seems to have the George Lucas air about him that people around him are worried about telling him the stuff he's doing needs to be cut. The first table scene in the movie is dull. Now, if it built suspense, like the last five minutes of the scene did then it would have been a different scene altogether. But it didn't. At least, not for me. 2. Too long deux. There were chunks of this film that could have been featured as deleted scenes on the DVD release. I mean if long sections of a scene don't lead up to anything and doesn't move the story along, it's not needed. 3. It's built up to be this sort of Dirty Dozen with us following the Basterds around. Uh, not exactly. It's like he wanted to make one film at first and then thought... hmm, let's change course. What's the point in building up characters like the Bear Jew and Hugo Stiglitz when they are introduced as major players and then are nothing more than less than secondary characters? I know Tarantino likes to do the "ooh, you didn't expect that didn't you" thing but surprises still can be pertinent to the story. 4. "Fu ck a duck!" and referring to a guy's dick as a "weinerschnitzel" pulls me right out of the movie. They are totally modern day references that distract from the movie's intent of trying to convince you that you're in the mid-40's. 5. The gore didn't affect me at all. I was expecting it and now I don't even wince at it when it happens in a Tarantino flick. Yeah, we get it you have the brain of a teenage boy. 6. I wasn't on-board with the Aldo Raine character. Again, Brad Pitt being Brad Pitt with an accent. Pulled me right out of the movie... There's a point where certain actors become parodies of themselves on screen. I started feeling that with Pitt around Ocean's 11... 7. When the film ended, I thought what's the point of this movie? Yes, it's historical fiction, a fantasy version of what happened. But I have no idea what Tarantino is trying to say here other than "wouldn't it have been cool if..." The good stuff: 1. Two words: Daniel Brühl. He first caught my eye in Ladies in Lavender and again in this film. So very cute and not a bad actor. But I love how he was portrayed as being so likable until you find out more and more about him. Nicely done. 2. Tarantino knows how to use music. The music choices in the film were great. But again, it pulled me out of it at times. 3. The montage of Shoshana getting ready for the premiere is wonderful. 4. Christoph Waltz is a delight to watch. So jolly then so evil. 5. The Reservoir Dogs standoff scene in a French basement. I liked it. The camera loves Diane Kruger. So, did I like it? I guess. Did I love it? No. Did I hate it? No. I guess I'm on the fence on this one. Great moments, great choices here and there but a long-winded script is still a long-winded script no matter what.
	Submit to Quotes

09-14-2009, 10:11 PM	#4815
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Strongly opposing reaction for me. The prologue (assume what you mean by "first table scene" is probably the best single scene I've seen in recent memory. According to Google Books, "** a duck" has appeared in print at least back to the early '50s. "** a duck and screw a pigeon, that's the way you'll get religion" is a piece of bathroom graffiti that I now learn originated in a 1955 novel. My dictionary tells me the wiener/penis connection is about 100 years old. Don't know how long it took for the first wienerschnitzel joke to be told. That said, it didn't take me out of the movie even if it is modern swearing. I remember hearing David Milch asked why he had his characters in Deadwood saying "**********" all of the time. His answer was that he wanted to true to the foul mouths of the characters but that we'd laugh at what was considered profane at the time. So it is spiritually accurate if not linguistically. Loved Aldo Rains and am glad the movie wasn't actually a chronicle of the basterds exploits. That would have been boring. To me, a big part of what the movie is saying is "how comfortable are you with brutality and slaughter when you agree ideologically with those doing it." We in the audience are condemning the Nazi's for their pleasure at a chronicle of the slaughter of U.S. soldiers and are immediately dumped into ourselves taking some positive feeling from the slaughter of the Nazis (and what exactly is the distinction between Zoller as a hero and Audie Murphy as a hero?). To me it actually took a little bit away from that to have Hitler and the rest of the leadership there. It took away from the ambiguity. Very hard to feel any sympathy at all for Hitler. More questionable would be the slaughter of a hundred mid-level officials and their families.
	Submit to Quotes

09-14-2009, 10:22 PM	#4817
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	I mean, I think one would have to be pretty out of it if one didn't know the man was hiding people at his house. I knew it from the start. But the scene didn't build for me at all. When we finally saw the man cry and even seeing the expression of Shoshana (I believe it was her) through the slats that's where I bought the scene. But the scene could have started a lot later in. I wanted to see a scene where Landa realized who Shoshana was. I mean, what's the point in him knowing her name at the beginning if that doesn't happen. UNLESS we're supposed to derive from the milk reference that he knew. Not sure.
	Submit to Quotes

09-14-2009, 10:30 PM	#4818
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Since half the purpose of that scene was to set a tone I think it would have lost its value if it started later (though of course that is lost anyway if the tone doesn't work for a person). Of course we knew he was hiding them as soon as Landa's purpose was revealed. It wasn't about whether he was, it was about what Landa would do with that knowledge. But talking where Michael Bay would have a 50-person shootout is pretty much the epitome of Tarantino. Last edited by Alex : 09-14-2009 at 10:40 PM.
	Submit to Quotes

09-14-2009, 10:40 PM	#4819
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	Which is why I think he'd make a great playwright.
	Submit to Quotes

09-14-2009, 10:45 PM	#4820
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	And yes, I'm pretty sure the milk reference was the pay-off on that. Nice that it wasn't spelled out with spilt ink, but pretty clear nonetheless. I'm with Alex all-the-way on this one. Table Scene 1 (as it shall henceforth be known) = brilliant. Un-exploit chronicling = smart. The series of scenes were tense, entertaining and suspenseful just as much for the interplay between the characters as for the situations. That they didn't consist entirely of when the situations are prevalent was a unique joy of these film. Most movies don't have scenes that play out so langorously as these. True, if you find them boring, they are just "slow." But I found ever scene in this movie clever and interesting.
	Submit to Quotes