Where Tarantino fantasizes about dirty war in war

Rating: 4/10 (18 February 2010)

Okay – here's the story, in a paragraph: a bunch of American soldiers terrorize German infantry for years, in France, behind enemy lines. They become infamous to the Nazis, resorting to intense cruelty to the Germans. Even der Führer wants them caught. Meanwhile, in a French town, a lovely French-Jewish femme fatale plans to blow up her cinema when a famous German action flick is shown to the German hierarchy – including Hitler, Goering, Goebbels and Borman. Coincidentally, those infamous American soldiers are sent to do the same job. Also, there's a very nasty Nazi colonel who just loves to hunt down and kill Jews – and he smells a rat in the House of Cinema. How it all turns out, I'll leave up to you to discover – that is, if you see this film.
But, I don't recommend at all. Let me tell you why.
First, it's billed as drama/thriller/war. Well, I guess it does contain all of those attributes, but they forgot about fantasy. Because, this story is, at core, a spoof about war and sheer fantasy, in addition.
Second, in its effort to establish and develop character, it's often boring because it's way too talky for a thriller; you see character from what people do, not from what they say. Brad Pitt (as Aldo Raine) is okay as an over-the-top parody of hill-billy Americana – and he does it well. But, even his character becomes too talky. The nasty Nazi, Col. Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz) is talky also, but at least he's a detective (in his own words), so he has to ask a lot of questions. The rest of the cast do their best with a script that varies between intense dread, only occasionally, to high camp, often – especially concerning the German hierarchy.
Third, the whole story is preposterous. Let's face it – any war story that purports to show the entire German hierarchy being blown up in a cinema can only be regarded as coming from another planet Earth in another universe. And the (way too long) card game scene in the café basement is screechingly contrived coincidence and just too stupid for words. So, if you do see it, leave believability (the prime requirement for good stories, especially war) at the door. You've been warned.
And, finally, although Quentin Tarantino started well with his filmic revelation, Reservoir Dogs (1992), and followed up with his much better Elmore Leonard story, Jackie Brown (1997) – his best to date – this one is his nadir, in my opinion. Technically very good, especially with the editing, this basterd of a story nevertheless kills the whole experience. If he was trying to show war in the raw, look no further than the battle scenes in The Thin Red Line (1998). If he was trying to create a thriller, stay with the Bourne franchise. If he was attempting drama in war, watch From Here to Eternity (1953) or Twelve O'Clock High (1949), and too many other superior films.
To be fair, it has its moments: the frenetic shootout in the café basement is editing at its best. And the opening scenes at the French farm are a tour de force in building dread. However, the cardboard cutout characters left me totally indifferent to the fate of any of them: in sum, a dead story about death at its worst. It'll be interesting to see if Christoph Waltz gets the Oscar nod for Best Supporting Actor. Miracles do happen, though.
I note that Roger Ebert gave it four stars. Is that out of ten? I hope so – I give it four also.
Oh, heck, see it if you must, but just keep in mind it's a fantastic spoof.