Tarantino's Increasingly Inglorious 'Bastards'

Quentin Tarantino's upcoming Inglorious Bastards continues to make headlines on an almost more-than-daily basis. Two weeks ago, the news was great for QT fans: Brad Pitt was definitely in, the movie would begin filming this October, a studio signed up to distribute and help produce the film, and next year's Cannes Film Festival was still the date circled on the calendar. Then everything else happened. Leonardo DiCaprio passed on the project, and QT signed his friend (though not a noted actor) Eli Roth for a different character. The other names mentioned for the ensemble cast in the Nazi-killin' WWII drama included Simon Pegg, Nastassja Kinski, B.J. Novak from The Office, and David Krumholtz from Numbers. Two of those names have been crossed off the list, with Pegg citing scheduling issues and though we don't know the reasons for Krumholtz' removal from the list of potential Bastards, it's interesting that his younger brother on Freaks and Geeks, Samm Levine, has joined the cast. So in short order, Tarantino's mammoth epic (the script for which was apparently leaked online; you can read it here), has gone from pairing two of the biggest icons of their generation to getting half of that combo, the director of Hostel, maybe "The Temp" from The Office, and a kid from Freaks & Geeks. Did I mention Mike Myers? That's an odd little nugget. Oh, and now the Germans are pissed off. The Guardian says that many detractors in that country feel there is not a big enough distinction between Nazis and Germans. And historically, it's not accurate in any way to say that all Germans were Nazis. But in the script, the only good German is a dead German. And in typical Tarantino fashion, these will not be deaths by natural causes. "The film depicts scalpings, disembowelment and swastikas being engraved in foreheads," claims The Guardian, "as a group of American Jewish soldiers are airdropped into Nazi-occupied Europe to wreak revenge on the Germans." The article continues, "Apart from baseball-bat bashing and skin engravings, we see one German officer being shot in the testicles, as well as scalps being peeled 'like a banana skin' from others." I might ask what the purpose of that type of violence is, how scalpings and skin engravings help us better understand World War II, war in general, American soldiers, or even Nazis. It seems patently obvious that there is no inherent purpose to the violence other than being a different fictional interpretation of the war. It's a war movie as done by Quentin Tarantino. He's entitled, as is anyone, to put their own signature on any genre. To a degree, we should expect as much. I suppose I'm fine with that, although I thought we had advanced beyond just seeing the bloodshed to get inside the hearts and minds of the soldiers and that those things were really what we needed to investigate in war movies. Violence is always violence, the soldiers and their stories are what are different. Want proof? Watch Letters from Iwo Jima, a painfully violent but equally poetic film about those other brutalities of war. I have zero problem with violence in movies. There can be as much of it and it can be of any variety and it won't turn my stomach. But I think I expected more out of Tarantino, particularly since he'd been working on a script for over half a decade. Will any of the characters come through? They have always been stronger and more memorable than his violence, even the bloody Kill Bill movies. They would have fallen apart with less characterization. But his Inglorious Bastards don't appear to have nearly as much dimension in this script as his previous characters and appear to be taking a backseat to their mission: Scalping Nazis. And honestly, the casting is showing me nothing. At this point, I'd have to categorize it as bad or maybe even egocentric. There are still a few more key roles to be filled, but what's with all the comic actors? Does Eli Roth worry anyone else? I know people all over the internet are stoked about this movie, but the more I read the worse it gets.

Comments

[Adrian]

Quentin is the master cast-er. John Travolta, Pam Grier, Robert Forster... no one would have cast any of these three actors in lead roles in high profile pictures, but Quentin did no matter what anyone said, and what did we get? three great performances, two incredible movies and two oscar noms. So I think we should just trust the guy. He's an actor's director, if their in the picture it's for a good reason, they probably earned it.

[miyel19]

I hope the wonderful Nastassja Kinski will be in to see her again!! A real European icon in the 80ties, my favourite actress back in those years, thanks Tarantino!!

[Get The Big Picture]

Adrian -

The big difference in each case you reference is that they were all proven dramatic actors whose careers had slipped, but not their abilities. Can't say that for the acting resume of Eli Roth.

[Mce]

Time will tell, but Roth worries me too. DiCaprio didn't pass, QT wants a German actor for the role. Last paragraph:

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117990111

[RP]

I don't take the movie as seriously as I would most war movies for a number of reasons, but mainly because it's inspired by 70s film of the same name (below). I don't expect it to see the balance between gritty violence and the understanding you appreciate in war films. I'm not offended because no one should be. It's not what this movie is about. There are dozens of movies that have done/tried to do that, so why do I need Tarantino to do the same? I want a different approach -- something offbeat and untouched. I imagine Inglorious will have some comedic elements -- almost kick backs to the exploitation films and B-movies that Tarantino is heavily influenced by.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076584

[Get The Big Picture]

I agree in principle, RP, but Quentin spent nearly a decade on this script, supposedly "doing research." So if he's made some effort to strive for historical accuracy, then I don't understand the scalpings. Unless, of course, he did his research, hated what he came up with, and completely re-wrote it. That's possible.

I don't mind the violence, like I said, I just think there are some things here that are incongruent, especially when you try to fit the cast with the almost gory action.

[DKelly]

I don't think it's ever been Tarantino's intention to make a serious war film, or a film that investigates the mind of soldiers, or strives for historical accuracy, or any of that. This is yet another of his grindhouse-homage-genre pictures. In the 60s and 70s in Europe mostly, there were tons of tasteless, sleazy WWII era Nazi torture-death-camp expolitation films, and tons of B-grade action films set during WWII. This generation is used to if you make a war film, it must be serious and dignified. Tarantino is not looking to make "Saving Private Ryan", or "Flags of Our Fathers". He is making a grindhouse movie. Again.

[Matt]

The scalpings, head bashing and testicle shooting while over the top and shocking were definitly earned by the nazi party. They commited some of the most awful and deplorable crimes of the twentieth century. Personally I like the idea of carving a swastika in the forhead of any known nazi they should be forced to live a life of persacution for the crimes they either aided in or commited themselves. If you think the treatment of the nazis in this movie was obscene then perhaps you should go to a haulocost museum and see the horrendous things they did to the Jews. I believe this movie was a bit of a fantasy, a Jewish persons dream as to how the war might have ended, and offers a slight chance to finally be able to smile a a WWII movie dont forget the Jewish people were the real victims in that horrible conflict. I cant think of a better and more fitting revenge than Jews scalpin and bashing in a few nazi heads, not to mention, two jews opening fire with machine guns on an theatre full of burning nazi hierarchy scum. As for the Germans whining for distinction between them and nazis their ancestors elected that wreched excuse for a man so atleast a mojority of them are to blame so i dont really care to hear their side of the story.