Important and exciting twist on the WWII genre

Rating: 8/10 (11 October 2009)

I greatly enjoyed this film, and its long time flew by pretty quickly for me, so it was thoroughly entertaining. I often hesitate to see a QT movie worrying about the violence, but you can always look away, and he has a way of framing it either rapidly or humorously, which makes it tolerable. There is also often a real purpose to how it is used.
The Kill Bill movies were actually some of my least favorite by him, and I liked Death Proof a lot, despite its LONG intro.
Basterds is a much more epic film, covering an epic topic. I have to agree that Pitt's character was pretty cardboard, though he wasn't supposed to be a genius. He was the can-do rural citizen-soldier, say an Audie Murphy. That said, the leader of a covert ops squad would have something darker in him, and Pitt shows humanity, and supposed perversion, but something real is missing there. Brad Pitt is not all that convincing an actor, if very screen watchable.
Its not a big loss because the acting space is filled by others, including Cristoph Waltz, playing the major heavy, Daniel Bruhl, playing a creepy war hero, and a brief performance by August Diehl, an inquisitive Gestapo man. Melanie Laurent is also great, as well as a few of Pitt's crew, though they are given the least dimension. They are the easy cure, however, and Tarantino focuses on the disease.
I see that many writers have complained about the beating by bat at the beginning of the movie. Sure it IS cruel, and the officer IS brave, but Tarantino shows us war is not about justice in any way shape or form. Pitt offers him a way out, he doesn't take it, and well, that is that. The Basterds cheer and laugh at the beating, which is administered in more or less quick fashion. You can fault humans, but you can't fault QT. This IS reality.
People have claimed Eli Roth can't act. I think his inclusion as the 'Bear' jew who is physically huge is fantastic. It flies in the face of the stereotype of jews as cerebral Woody Allen types. It's also an awesome slap in the face of Aryan physical superiority. I thought his inclusion was a no-brainer.
Throughout the movie, Tarantino has a long plot thread headed towards the end, while he also includes set tension pieces, including the opening scene in a French farm hiding jews, and the bar scene. Both employ QT effects of long moments of peace and cordiality ending in total annihilation. Tarantino bests the old movies in the way the violence is executed. You need rewind to figure out what went down in the bar. It is over in five seconds. Tarantino knows when to employ violence as slow torture, or as life-changing rapidity. In that, he acknowledges the power of violence to change. He does this better than any other director I can think of, who use it in amoral, cartoon form. QT's violence is the most real of any in film, and it is shown here again.
The finale is a visual spectacle beyond words. There are some stretches in credulity in its formulation, and some holes could have been filled, but the fantasy itself is effective. The tragic end of two heroines is well-dramatized, maybe as a twist on other movies where the women are the ones that live. QT's additional statement on flammable film and Riefenstahl are interesting and timely, considering her death not long ago. The turning of Waltz's Landa is quite a stretch, but feasible, since he is a calculating man above all else. However, it seems nearly impossible that a man so dedicated to Nazi ideology would so blithely turn against the entire structure. You really expect to see Pitt get a taste of his own medicine, and he just becomes a secretary. Its truly anticlimactic, but QT makes you wonder if this is on purpose.
The film has far less of the cutesy, hip dialogue of other QT films, which I appreciated, and the inclusion of German, French and British characters speaking their own languages adds much authenticity. The QT signature film tricks also don't detract, and are kept brief and informative. My only gripe with his music selection was the 80s Bowie song Putting Out Fire. I cant believe he couldn't have found a WWII-era French song to put behind her. That was truly a mistake.
Overall, the film is very watchable, and usually beautiful. Scenes in the finale mix the imagery of film, light, fire, mayhem, nazi symbols, and cartoon violence in a way that takes your breath away, and pulls you in several directions at once. The theater itself becomes a gas chamber for the whole nazi idea, with the Bear Jew firing down on the crowd just as SS men fired at jews in ditches. Meanwhile, a mini-drama of brutality, compassion, and the error of showing compassion in wartime is played out in the projection room. The film even throws in some references to the warrior philosophy of the Apache, in my mind as a goad to those who would cower to the Nazis.
Whatever its imperfections, the film uses (not abuses) much of the symbology of WWII to give us a cathartic fantasy rewriting of history. I don't see how people can say it has no value. The casting of the Germans and the French is fantastic, and the plot, scenes and pacing are tight. The violence is realistic, but more in the employ of a bigger reworking of the symbolism of WWII and film itself. Plus it has some great actors from not just the USA, but Europe as well. Whatever its slight errors, IB is one for the cinematic history books.