Inglourious Basterds

If there's one director I could trust with my life to make a brilliantly beautiful film about revenge, no matter its time period, location, and characters, it's Quentin Tarantino. Even though I've only seen two of his films, Django: Unchained (2014), and now Inglourious Basterds (2009), I can already tell that he's rapidly shaping up to be one of my favorite directors of all time, if not already my favorite screenwriter. Obviously, I'll be getting more into why he was the perfect choice to direct this film, and how he made it his own, but before that, I want to acknowledge some of the countless aspects of Inglourious Basterds that made it a near-flawless, five star film. Firstly, the performances. Honestly, I don't even need to explain just how impeccable each actor's performance was in this film, because actions speak much louder than words. However, the least I can do is praise them. Every scene was filled with absolute golden performances, may it be prolific actors that keep proving that they're one of the greatest of our time, like Christoph Waltz who plays the diabolical sociopath Colonel Hans Landa, or international actors like French actor, Denis Ménochet, who plays the very first character of the entire film, Perrier LaPadite, the French dairy farmer who is forced to give up information about the Jewish family living under his floorboards. Christoph Waltz, however, definitely holds the position as the greatest performance in this film. He was genuinely horrifying from the very first scene he was in and I could tell because I had goosebumps—and not the good kind. His ability to change his facial expressions when he was having an intense conversation/interrogation with someone was incredibly creepy, yet so terrifyingly real, that I didn't hesitate for a second to believe that he was a despicable Nazi. Moreover, I think the second greatest performance in this film was by Mélanie Laurent, who played Shoshana Dreyfus, or Emmanuelle Mimieux, the daughter of a Jewish dairy farmer in France who ran away and changed her whole identity. Every moment throughout the film, I could practically see the gears in her head moving and the yearning for revenge in her eyes and it felt so real that I couldn't help but forget that it was just a film. Obviously, I could go all day about how exemplary each performance was including Michael Fassbender's, Daniel Brühl's, and Diane Kruger's, but there are other features of this film that I need to give justice to in this review. Secondly, this is one of the only films I've ever watched that has so fantastically executed such heavy and important dialogue in four different languages for such an extended period of runtime. This is not an easy feat, considering most people watching this film (like me) aren't fluent in French, German and Italian, unlike Christopher Waltz. When I first started this film, I was worried that I wouldn't understand the film completely, and initially, I didn't really like the fact that it wasn't in English. But then I thought about it. In a film like this, the different languages spoken tell the story in the most realistic way possible. Why would Germans speak English amongst themselves? Why would a French dairy farmer begin a conversation in anything but French? Why would an American pretending not to be American speak English? Looking back, I was very foolish to criticize the changing of languages throughout the film because they were what made the film so much more interesting. Plus, who knew Michael Fassbender could speak fluent German? I think Tarantino's decision to include these different languages gave the film a sense of realism and also allowed the actors to broaden their performances. It was something that was very masterfully done, and to be honest, I'm not sure I would've enjoyed the film this much if it was all in English, because the variation of different languages and dialects gave the story depth and a sense of true realism. Thirdly, I think it's important to address the unique approach to storytelling Tarantino took in this film. Each part of this film was separated into five chapters. Chapter One was entitled 'Once Upon a Time... in Nazi-occupied France', Chapter Two was, 'Inglourious Basterds', like the name of the film, Chapter Three was called, 'German Night in Paris', Chapter Four, 'Operation Kino', and Chapter Five was 'Revenge of the Giant Face'. This division of the parts of the story was a very unique but interesting approach to take and I'm glad Tarantino took it. I think it allowed the audience to experience the film as if they were reading a book, and was almost like a breather among all the action and exposition going on throughout the duration of the film. Moreover, the breaking up of the story allowed characters and plot points to be introduced in a fresh light, without the previous scene still influencing them. Another thing I absolutely adored about this film, and was rather amused by was how the plot of this story was influenced by cinema. As a film buff myself, I really appreciated this about the film and it made me feel more connected to the story. Films have the extraordinary ability to change so much with their influence on people and events, and that can be seen in real-life WWII with the real Joseph Goebbels spreading Nazi nationalism through propaganda such as films. I liked that Tarantino took this fascinating part of history and decided to make it the main focus of the film. Obviously, this speaks to how much of a film buff he is, but it's also a nice wink at the audience at how he is attempting to show history and the appropriate revenge many historical figures should've gotten from his own films. Lastly, and I said I'd get to this, I have to talk about Quentin Tarantino's own influence on this film and how it only elevated it even more. Even though, as I've mentioned before, I've only seen two of his films, I know that bloody and gory violence is his whole schtick, and though there are many people who don't like that about his films, I think it's what makes his films different and superior among others that are similar. The reason Django: Unchained stood out is because of how righteous its gory scenes were. It's a reminder of how all those slave owners deserved worse than they would've gotten in real life, and how someone like Django deserved a free life. Sure, it's incredibly bloody and violent, but real life was arguably bloodier. It's the same with Inglourious Basterds—this film's ability to kill off so many important characters like Lieutenant Archie Hicox (Michael Fassbender) in such shocking ways creates a sense of realism and makes the film feel more terrifying. It's what makes Tarantino films Tarantino films. Without him, you wouldn't have that special element that makes his films unique. So, to conclude my praise-filled review of Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds (2009), this should not be a surprise by any means, but I'm giving this film an incredibly well deserved five star rating. [In a very bad Italian accent] Arriverderci. 5/5 **16 August 2024 *chymp*