I wanted to compliment you on the review.

It was a great one ( I had not had much time recently to listen to your podcasts nor read the reviews and now know what I have probably been missing ). I have not seen the film yet, I had somewhat written the project off, after seeing the previews and becoming more and more disenchanted with Quentin Tarantino with each subsequent film of his that I see. I ended up feeling that his references to other films weren’t much of a substitute for Film-making ( I enjoy seeing the referenced so much more ) and were all a bit tiresome too. Your review had enough bite and insight to change my mind about seeing it and I thank you for that. Unfortunately, it has already made its way through Albuquerque, so I will have to end up seeing it on the small screen, not a good thing with a Tarantino film…

Of course this is simply my opinion, whether or not you think I missed the point of the film is simply your opinion, of course I do not think I did miss the point I simply was not swayed by Tarintino fanboyism to declare the film anything other than how I saw it.

I actually read that review. Great review. I still prefer Hoberman. In any case there is no point further arguing. I think it is a matter of taste but I do love the feedback!

I have no real problem with Tarintino, in fact his enthuiasm for my favourite film, Chungking Express makes me regard him as a person fairly warmly. However, his films I do have a problem with. Death Proof as I mentioned is a something which I consider to be truly terrible and made vow never to see another of his films on the big screen, my hate of that film was so visceral. However, the marketing loured me in like the fool I am. And once again I was disappointed. However, I do think Jackie Brown is a masterpiece and Kill Bill vol 1 is amazing. The rest of his films I can take or leave.

Citizen Kane is a great film. And something which I thoroughly enjoy watching.

The world’s greatest film critic is in fact Peter Bradshaw, and here is his one star review for you to read:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/aug/19/inglourious-basterds-review-brad-pitt-quentin-tarantino

I estimate that Tarantino’s audience takes up about a fourth of all movie buffs. Not every movie buff likes these so called grindhouse / exploitation films but I do. I am not sure if you actually listened to our podcast but if you did than I think we stated enough reason why this is a good movie. Perhaps it doesn’t speak to you but if you are writing it off as a bad movie than I think you have completely missed the point of the film seeing as you have already completely missed the point of Waltz’s performance. So good I guarantee an Oscar nomination this year.

I like bad movies but I know they are bad. Take for instance The Happening. Horrible on every level but I was able to enjoy it and laugh throughout the film. In fact I want to see it again. Perhaps on the second view I might not be so amused but at least it entertained me upon first viewing.

I also dislike great movies. My prime example is Citizen Kane. It is without a doubt one of the greatest films ever made and one of the most influential. However I was not alive when the film came out so it did not have that impact on me. I can recognize its greatness but I find it a long and tedious bore with a disappointing ending.

What it is great about Tarantino is that his films always strike up great debates. My only problem is that most people can’t get past the artist and leave their personal feeling aside. So most Tarantino haters dive into a Tarantino film ready to hate it just so they can have more ammunition to back up their views on the “Great Tarantino debate”. Another film maker who suffers because of his personality is Mel Gibson. I can’t tell you how many times a client at the video store has refused to watch any of Mel Gibson’s films based solely on the fact that they hate him. I can never understand this way of thinking. Grant it that Tarantino may be a prick and Mel Gibson is insane but the same can be said for almost every film maker out there. The only difference is they are put into the spotlight and their personality becomes visible.

As I mentioned in top 10 film critics article, a great film critic needs to put his prejudices aside while watching a film and acknowledge them in their review. One of the reasons why I brought up David Edelstein’s review of Jackie Brown from Slate. He right away mentions his hatred for Tarantino yet still reviewed the film as a film and admits to liking it.

The point is you clearly don’t like Tarantino films. You swore you would never see a Tarantino film ever again. So why did you see Inglourious Basterds if you were so ready to hate it? Just curious.

Since I already said all that has to be said about this film on the show, I will end this piece of feedback with a link to the world’s greatest film critic, Mr. J. Hoberman and his review of the film.

http://www.villagevoice.com/2009-08-18/film/quentin-tarantino-s-inglourious-basterds-makes-holocaust-revisionism-fun/

The only other point I will make at the moment is that I cannot understand the adulation that Christoph Waltz is getting for his horrendous over acting and terrible performance as Hans Landa. He is God Awful in the film. Tarintino once again shows he cannot extract good performances from poor actors. He hired a soap actor, he got a soap actor performance.

(Only Michael Fassbender’s impersonation of George Sanders is the remotely interesting thing in the film, and that is solely because I love George Sanders and Fassbender is a silly fascimilie of the man.)

Once again all the characters in this movie sound exactly the same, they all sound like Tarintino. The Pabst, O’Selznick, Refinstahl references are as tired as they are pointless. The dialogue is absurdly overwritten, making it sound like a 15 year old who has found his first note-pad and throws up in times new roman. The dialogue which is neither funny nor threatening nor fresh adds to what is another major problem with this film which is it length, and correlatory the boredom factor. Never before have I looked at my watch so often, scenes drag for hours, then big chunks are missed out and the film splutters forward for no apparent reason.

Also, the film jumps from interior shot to interior shot throughout, Basterds lacks any scope or dare I say it ambition. I cannot put in words how much a travesty this film is.