Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds

Tarantino claims this movie as his best masterpiece yet; Also cleverly stamping it with the last words in the movie. Given that it took so many rewrites and 7 years for RTM, it better be. But having watched the movie, I must say that the on-the-edge feeling one gets watching PF (or, even Jackie Brown) was missing. Storyline had history stacked up against it, so it was bound to be “tense”. I read that this version is about 1/3rd the size of the original script. That probably explains why some of the gaps are too evident, which surprisingly included many of the character developments.

May be it’s just me, but I detest film makers using narration to develop the story. Instead of building the character/ story line, this I feel is a short cut way to set premises. Setting a period say, 1941, France, is alright, but I expect more from QT. On the other hand, short interludes works fine. Say, the blip shot of sex with translator was very QT.

Soundtrack is pretty good. Audio/Visual has nothing to complain about. In fact, the DP did a great job. And the German actor who did SS Colonel Landa was brilliant. One actually felt uneasy when the character came on scene. Rest of the casting was alright, just about. Brad was pits. Why Brad? Why not say, William Macy?

Anyways, I feel this movie was hastened up for release. In terms of craft, I would say that this is typical Tarantino. And given the kind of engagements he had after the Kill Bills, I can understand why critics are calling it, the return of the king. Still an 8/10 for me.