Inglorious Basterds, not to be confused with 1978s Inglorious Bastards (and there’s really no reason it should be), is a 2009 film written and directed by Quentin Tarantino that, unsurprisingly, follows a number of separate storylines, mainly in German-occupied France.
This is very much a Quentin Tarantino film, but I’m not sure you should let that statement determine your decision to watch this. If you like World War II movies and don’t like Tarantino films, you may well like this one.
If you already hate his films, this probably won’t change your mind, but this is a well-written and directed film, and the separate story lines come together in an interesting and reasonably satisfying manner. I wouldn’t call myself a fan of his work, though I would say he is an important and maybe great filmmaker, and this may be my favorite film of his.
The film begins:
But it is less like a fairy tale and more like Once Upon a Time in the West and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (which I like less). Sure, both of those movies are a little bit like fairy tales; this one is too.This one is like and unlike a great many movies and jumps between genres like . . . like something that jumps a great deal, smoothly and swiftly—a grasshopper on a pogo stick or something.
It starts like a western with a hard-working dairy farmer splitting logs and seeing a small column of Germans driving up a dusty road while one of his daughters is hanging laundry on a line to dry, and the music is evocative of 1960s Italian westerns, some of which were directed by Enzo G. Castellari (Inglorious Bastards).
And the farmer is stoic and taciturn like a classic western hero, but the antagonist is not. The villain is effusive and charming—while not being at all charming because his ease and politeness come from his immense power. When he asks if he may smoke his comically absurd pipe, the farmer has no real choice; the forms of politeness are part of the facade SS Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz) uses as he delights in toying with those powerless against him..
As he plays verbal cat and mouse with the farmer we gradually learn what both characters have apparently always known. And this information is revealed in an interesting and clear manner. Both characters are hiding a great deal but may in fact know much more and be hiding things each already knows and they may know even that. Many scenes in the film have a real tension where we don’t know what everyone knows, but they sure seem to know something. These scenes also contain the threat of violence which can and sometimes does abruptly erupt.
The first scene is rightfully praised as a masterpiece in writing, acting and directing. Even though it is not the only great scene in the film, it would be an award-winning short film. Waltz is great in part because he plays off of Denis Ménochet’s powerful and restrained performance as the farmer. The scene is also so clearly written by Tarantino that one of my notes reads: “Does Adolf Hitler look like a bitch to you?”
I love that joke because it is both entirely fair and unfair, and because I wrote it before I knew Samuel L. Jackson does a voiceover in the film.
Christoph Waltz has been justifiably praised for his creepily gleeful multi-lingual performance, but I want to praise Marie Laurent (Operation Finale, Days of Glory) as Shoshanna—where’s her Oscar™? She gives an excellent performance as a Jewish woman trying to survive in occupied Paris and somehow thrust amidst the Nazi elite When she is among Germans, there are no subtitles for the people speaking German, so we share her uncertainty of what is actually going on around her. She strives to retain her composure as a Jew in hiding sitting across the table from Joseph Goebbels or an SS colonel known as “The Jew Hunter.”
She is also in an odd relationship with a great hero of the Fatherland played by Daniel Brühl (John Rabe). Brühl does really well with a character who could have been given significantly less depth, and their relationship is interesting, as most of the characters and relationships in this film are, though the historical Nazis (Goebbels and Hitler) are more than a little cartoonish.
I don’t know where to put this part to make it less of a spoiler, but I love that someone asks an Allied spy speaking impeccable German—“That’s an odd accent. Where are you from?” How many times have we listened to a Richard Burton speaking German sounding exactly like a Richard Burton, and the Germans are just “Jawohl Mein Herr”?
The action here is typical of Tarantino’s work—graphic and short. There are bursts of graphic violence that are soon over, and this has a realism that I appreciate—a realism that doesn’t exist during parts of one action sequence at the end of the film, a sequence that also has some good dramatic moments and is a clear homage to The Dirty Dozen.
The mix of realism and what I’m going to call fantasy—or fairy tale or alternate history—for lack of a better word, is interesting and entertaining. It is also what may lead some to reject the film. There is a lot of talking, and much of it is not in English, but that didn’t bother me as much as it sometimes does, and Tarantino does at least two interesting things with the subtitles and people speaking different languages–at least two. I found myself loving almost every scene while also thinking the movie was too long—but I don’t know where to cut it. Maybe they’re in a basement too long, but a lot of really interesting stuff happens in that basement.
Okay—they are in the basement too long, but it’s an excellent set piece with a great nod to Where Eagles Dare that moves the story forward and is in some ways an interesting echo and counterpoint to the first scene.
An unscientific comparison of two stills from World War II movies featuring charming Gestapo officers in bars.
At the end of the first scene a character is seen running away and one shot is evocative of John Ford’s The Searchers—or maybe of Once Upon a Time in the West. And maybe Landa’s ridiculous pipe is a Sherlock Holmes reference. And maybe when someone says, “what kind of deal?” it’s a Kelly’s Heroes reference.
You can try and pull all the homages to westerns and 60s and 70s World War II movies, but few if any of them are distracting, or perhaps even important. Tarantino, to his credit, seems aware that he is in part the sum of his influences, and these nods are only part of a truly original work, and they are indicative of a joy in movies and movie making that is the only reason you might confuse this film with Inglorious Bastards.
It and JoJo Rabbit (and Dunkirk and The Thin Red Line) are examples of talented filmmakers with distinctive styles adding interesting and entertaining films to the genre, and I sort of understand if you don’t like those movies, but I’m also a little bit disappointed.
Recommendation
Give Inglorious Basterds a try; it’s good–it’s fun and entertaining. The other movies below are also entertaining and well done,. Though some are less fun, they are all great.