[martyo]

I believe this is the best discussion I've seen in AC. Thanks Tom and Kevin and Mr Clark and droht and aj and whomever I missed. Our hobby can be and often is so self indulgent and gratutious and so many discussions really reflect this. Not so this time, thanks you guys. 

[Niteshade]

On a scale of 1 to 10 I gave it a zero.  This, "I want to go see a hanging" mentality has been around for hundreds of years. These films satisfies that kind of hunger.

I thought I explained the violence - it sells tickets. Fresh and clean wholesome films generally don't do well in our market. Americans crave sensationalistic crap. Desperate housewives and people being fired get our motors running. Goofy gays and clowning blacks keep our condescension on track. We worship the wealthy and like to fantasize about being them. We dig brutal hits in football and crashes in NASCAR. We're avid about hospital dramas and police sanctification murder investigations. Does anybody else think it unlikely that cops take a personal interest in every victim and discuss them on a first name basis? We are nutso as a society. I think, given what idiots we are, that QT shows great restraint and, if anything, treats us with more respect than we earn. Roll it.

[ajzepp]

I believe this is the best discussion I've seen in AC. Thanks Tom and Kevin and Mr Clark and droht and aj and whomever I missed. Our hobby can be and often is so self indulgent and gratutious and so many discussions really reflect this. Not so this time, thanks you guys. 

Definitely agree! Aside from the times when I wish the cinema forum were a bit more active, this has become one of my favorite spots on the web (audio or otherwise) to interact with others. There are a lot of really interesting, engaging, mature people on this site 

[thunderbrick]

Interesting and Mature???  What about the rest of the AC members????   

We all owe JohnR a huge debt for this place!  I agree that AC is a fascinating place, and the volunteers that help run it are GREAT!!
Kudos, JohnR!!!!   

[Bigfish]

re:The movie in question - The Germans' most high profile character in the film was as cold and sadistic as Hannibal Lector. The Brad Pitt character was a heartless basterd. Both were calculating and evil to the core. Pitt, however, had the benefit of playing for the good guys.
One was spit and polish military precision. The other was a renegade loose cannon. The other less visible faction was the French Resistance. They, of course, would be viewed as terrorists or insurgents by the Germans. What is the difference between a soldier and a terrorist? Methods? Uniforms? Funding? Government sanction? Righteous cause?
Do you seriously view a movie such as Inglorious Basterds as propaganda? Do you see the violence in this film as somehow worse than that which you might encounter in a murder mystery or a slasher flick?

I enjoyed it tremendously for the fact that it encourages thoughtful discussion. I'm glad you are here to disagree. We were getting way too many Amen!!s and too few WTFs.

I think this movie showed us war up close and personal.  War is not all about battleships shooting off huge shells or jets dropping bombs.  I think we would like to chose to believe that "Bastards" like Brad Pitt's character or the German Leader do not or did not exist.  If you have read anything about World War II you know the Germans committed many of the acts portrayed in this movie and I am confident we had our share of Pitt characters. 

This movie does an excellent job of clearly identifying the characters at the beginning and carried-out the theme until the very end.  You may not like the blood and violence but in my opinion this movie does an excellent job of portraying the brutality of war by concentrating on the actions of a few.

Ken

[Bigfish]

Definitely agree! Aside from the times when I wish the cinema forum were a bit more active

The answer is to start more posts!

Ken

[macrojack]

Ken - The remedy is not to be found in quantity. It's the quality of this thread that is drawing the applause. We had some people taking chances and speaking from the heart. The tone and temper is attributable to who wasn't involved as much as who was involved.

Americans have a lot of difficulty in recognizing and accepting the actual. We like to see things as we want them to be rather than how they really are. The current depression will not be acknowledged until it can no longer be denied. We have a media dominated by an Australian billionaire which dictates what a large number of Americans think. Many others find out what opinions to hold on Sunday morning. A dangerously large percentage of us are unable to discriminate between what we actually know and what we have been instructed to believe. Our values are tailored for us by hucksterbee politicians and stand-up comedians. We are terribly vulnerable to slogans and buzzwords. We hear them and begin to recite them like a second grader dashing off The Pledgelegions. We are not trained to think but we think we are thinking because we have never experienced the real thing. We are a mess and most of us are currently despairing of the fact.
Then along comes a thread discussing a film that was seen by a very large number of people.
It is disturbing to some and enlightening, perhaps reassuring, to others. A discussion starts as they normally do on A.C. but then something happens. The discussion leaves the realm of black and white, good and bad, and starts to gravitate toward analysis, evaluation, symbolic references, critical content, personal reflection, individuals values, fears, and hopes. There is a bonding where competition and dick measurements normally reign supreme. There is a recognition that we may share something more than specifications or dealer loyalty. We find each other and, in that, find something about ourselves we rather like. We grew a little.

[budyog]

The fact that a Tarantino movie can engender this level of intellectual debate and discussion is very interesting...

Whether you like the movie or not, wouldn't you agree this is what "good" movie making is all about! To me, when something draws attention like this, this is what the intention was.
I said this earlier, QT is getting better at his art and his art is to draw attention, more attention. Didn't he win an award for this movie?
It certainly showed me another part of war that I have not seen before in a war movie/epic!
Deal making, everything is done with deal making.

I bet some people on AC who have not seen the movie will be seeing it this weekend or sooner because of this thread!

[martyo]

The discussion leaves the realm of black and white, good and bad, and starts to gravitate toward analysis, evaluation, symbolic references, critical content, personal reflection, individuals values, fears, and hopes. There is a bonding where competition and dick measurements normally reign supreme. There is a recognition that we may share something more than specifications or dealer loyalty. We find each other and, in that, find something about ourselves we rather like. We grew a little.

That's how relationships are built.

[Kevin Haskins]

Obviously, Mr. Haskins is a man of superior breeding and sensitivity, a man of carefully weighed thought and excellent intellect. 

Ha!   Mr. Clark, my family tree looks like a telephone pole.   I'm a hillbilly with an education.   You can paint a skunk and make him look like a cat but he still stinks. 

Thanks for the compliment though.   

This comes down to a philisophical argument about the definition of art and freedom of expression.    You can call anything art.   You could call murder art, rape or any other atrocity artistic.    How much do you value that expression though and at what point do say that the value of artistic freedom is out of balance with other values?     

I could go on a killing spree and if it was artistic enough someone would admire it and it would trigger thoughtful debate.   So what?   It wouldn't outweigh the acts that I committed.   It wouldn't change the harm that I had done.   You might make an argument that it lead more people to think thoughtfully upon their lives.   So does war. 

I make the same argument about the movie.   It my be artistic in terms of expression of thoughts.   Any artistic value it holds though is overshadowed by the fact that it crosses the line of decency.    Its primary function is to allow the viewer to vicariously enjoy the act of murder and torture.     

[srb]

I make the same argument about the movie.   It my be artistic in terms of expression of thoughts.   Any artistic value it holds though is overshadowed by the fact that it crosses the line of decency.    Its primary function is to allow the viewer to vicariously enjoy the act of murder and torture.   

Pure nonsense.  Thankfully you're not the U.S. Censor General.
 
Steve

[acresm22]

We also watch "Paranormal Activity" the other day and we both thought, how stupid! What a dumb movie and not scary either!

Now this comment may be the most offensive of this thread. How could you not be scared by PA??

[rajacat]

Pure nonsense.  Thankfully you're not the U.S. Censor General.
 
Steve

As Huey Newton said, "Violence is as American as apple pie."
We have the highest murder rate of first world countries and our prisons are overflowing.
QT is simply tapping into this ready made market and making mega bucks doing it. Perhaps this trivialization of violence is an offshoot of the computer gaming culture where violence is just part of the game. Hey, we love it. The great hit that the football safety puts on a receiver that almost takes his head off is applauded by millions although few think of the toll that multiple hits have on the human brain.

Maybe QT is of the culture that thinks violence is cool and very entertaining. Also its a good way to prepare our youth for the video wars of the future where the warriors will wreak their havoc from their comfortable computer terminals in bomb proof structures and sending drones out to slaughter civilians in tit for tat terrorism. Hey that's an idea for a movie $$$$$


-Roy

[Kevin Haskins]

Pure nonsense.  Thankfully you're not the U.S. Censor General.
 
Steve

I'm not interested in censoring it in terms of a law.   I'm interested in individuals exercising the common sense not to consume it.   

[Kevin Haskins]

As Huey Newton said, "Violence is as American as apple pie."
We have the highest murder rate of first world countries and our prisons are overflowing.
QT is simply tapping into this ready made market and making mega bucks doing it. Perhaps this trivialization of violence is an offshoot of the computer gaming culture where violence is just part of the game. Hey, we love it. The great hit that the football safety puts on a receiver that almost takes his head off is applauded by millions although few think of the toll that multiple hits have on the human brain.

Maybe QT is of the culture that thinks violence is cool and very entertaining. Also its a good way to prepare our youth for the video wars of the future where the warriors will wreak their havoc from their comfortable computer terminals in bomb proof structures and sending drones out to slaughter civilians in tit for tat terrorism. Hey that's an idea for a movie $$$$$
-Roy

I would extend it beyond an American value.   It is a human value.    It pervades all cultures in one way shape or form.    My oldest boy is Ethiopian and we got him as a teen.   Scary as it may seem many of the movies we produce are consumed en-mass in 3rd world countries.    The perceptions in the 3rd world of Americans is primarily delivered via the movies they watch.   They have no contact with the average American citizen and they have very little to no exposure to real news.   The majority of them also have no context in which to evaluate news.   What we consider issues are something that may as well be occurring on another planet.   They do have TVs and VCRs though.   I was amazed on a trip to Guatemala to visit a family.   They lived in a complex with their extended family all in about three rooms.    They didn't have much but they had a TV, a VCR and some sort of game system.   Lucas my 2nd in age was about 7 years old at the time and was tickled.   They had a better game system than he had at home!   

In Ethiopia only a few people have the resources to have a TV but all of these kids have seen tons of movies.    They share the resource and all of them consume a lot of screen time.   They have all seen Rambo, Alien and Star Wars.   They gravitate to the simple violent movies because that has universal cross-cultural draw and they don't understand the nuances of complex plots or themes.   

Think on this for awhile.     Most of the world views us through the lens of our most popular form of media and they don't have a traditional education which challenges anything but what is seen.    They form opinions of us from what they watch.   Like it or not, our ambassadors to other cultures is our movies and the consequences of them are much deeper than 2 hours of entertainment.     Quentin Tarantino is our American representative showing most of the world what we value.    I'm not 100% comfortable with that thought.   

[macrojack]

Kevin - You're blaming the messenger. Art mirrors life. Artists are our playback system. They show us what we look and sound like. We are what we are. Either we own up and change or live with the image we created. You are advocating showing the world a sanitized, P.C. version of who we are.

Speaking of movies, maybe "Bowling For Columbine" should be the next one we take on. It addresses your concerns in a way that is roundly rejected by every red-blooded John Wayne wannabe in America. Does might make right - or not? Does our military presence in foreign countries help or hurt our image? Does it support or contradict the impressions you feel our films implant?

Bob Marley sang about One World because he was wise enough to see that we all share the same planet and that political boundaries were a vane and dishonest construct intended to benefit the few at the expense of the many.
Under this belief, patriotism can be argued to be counterproductive.

Declaration of War comes as rationalized imperative by the aggressor and a matter of survival for the defender. When have our boundaries ever been genuinely threatened? It was a long time ago and when it ceased to be a problem, we fought a war among ourselves.

Like I said earlier, we are nuckin futs. We just can't be peaceful.

My wish is to live my life as neither predator nor prey. As human beings we should be able to rise to that level, but we are too easily led to battle and hatred by social dividers. We can't seem to get it through our heads that average schmuck in Iraq or Mexico or Afghanistan or China just wants what we want - a peaceful world of safety for his family and a full rice bowl.

[Kevin Haskins]

Kevin - You're blaming the messenger. Art mirrors life. Artists are our playback system. They show us what we look and sound like. We are what we are. Either we own up and change or live with the image we created. You are advocating showing the world a sanitized, P.C. version of who we are.

Speaking of movies, maybe "Bowling For Columbine" should be the next one we take on. It addresses your concerns in a way that is roundly rejected by every red-blooded John Wayne wannabe in America. Does might make right - or not? Does our military presence in foreign countries help or hurt our image? Does it support or contradict the impressions you feel our films implant?

Bob Marley sang about One World because he was wise enough to see that we all share the same planet and that political boundaries were a vane and dishonest construct intended to benefit the few at the expense of the many.
Under this belief, patriotism can be argued to be counterproductive.

Declaration of War comes as rationalized imperative by the aggressor and a matter of survival for the defender. When have our boundaries ever been genuinely threatened? It was a long time ago and when it ceased to be a problem, we fought a war among ourselves.

Like I said earlier, we are nuckin futs. We just can't be peaceful.

My wish is to live my life as neither predator nor prey. As human beings we should be able to rise to that level, but we are too easily led to battle and hatred by social dividers. We can't seem to get it through our heads that average schmuck in Iraq or Mexico or Afghanistan or China just wants what we want - a peaceful world of safety for his family and a full rice bowl.

I'm not blaming QT simply because talking about art mirroring the culture or causing it is a "chicken-egg" argument.     I'm pointing the finger at us for supporting the trash.   

[droht]

This thread motivated me to re-watch Kill Bill 2 last night, which has been sitting on the DVR for a while.  Great flick.  Not for you though Kevin.   

[srb]

This thread motivated me to re-watch Kill Bill 2 last night, which has been sitting on the DVR for a while.  Great flick.  Not for you though Kevin.   

Inglorious Basterds, although a fictional story, may be too deeply rooted in human reality for some, while the Kill Bill movies are more fantasy based.
 
Steve

[jimdgoulding]

Likewise, have enjoyed this discussion immensely.  Hollywood is a livelihood for a lot of people.  You gotta keep the money comin in first and foremost.  So, you have to make movies with mass appeal- formula movies, things that work- and then you can think about new artistic directions (Trainspotting made millions).  Miramax is a studio that comes to mind.  I would say that half of Tarantino’s flicks fall into the formula category and half into the artistic category.

Some formulas are lasting.  Heroes vs. Villains, of course.  This new Mel Gibson movie not out yet looks like another version of Taken from the commercials.  And that Denzel Washington flick made in Mexico where he gets the bad guys real good.  And how nasty can we make the bad guys and how cool can we kill em (I think they really do have rotten to the core bad guys in Mexico that need killing, cool or otherwise, BTW)?.  One trend that didn’t have a long life is car chase scenes.  Bullitt was the first followed by The French Connection and then the mother of them all, To Live and Die in L.A. (soundtrack by Wang Chung).  What do you do after that (space ships, of course)?  That one I saw just tonite, again, on the telly and it gave me the thought.   

Which brings us to violence.  I think this has mass appeal because most people are frustrated to some degree.  That make sense?  As that includes so many of us people, it’s here to stay.  It is germane to some stories.  Other times it is gratuitous.  Movie violence let’s us get our ya-ya’s out, maybe.  God forbid it gives somebody an idea (but then He gave us free will, didn't He).  And today, nobody’s wearing a white hat.  No more Roy Rogers, he’s not like us.  We gotta be able to relate to the character somehow.  Hence, the modern anti-hero with an attitude.  No man shall be exploited before his time.

Oh yeah, violence is more than incidental in Tarantino’s movies.  And the more mindless and violent of his movies have given him his highest grosses (confirming my point?).  But his creative thinking AND writing is original and brilliant, IMO. The dialog in the scene with Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper in True Romance, a modern day love story Tarantino style.  Or, Christopher Walken in Pulp Fiction telling the young Bruce Willis character about his dad’s watch.  Priceless.  And the way he edits to create layers of time in Pulp and Reservoir Dogs.  Basterds is a bit of a departure from his other movies.  Once again, he shows his talent for writing dialog in the tavern scene. 

He’s brilliant.  Not as brilliant as the Coen Bros, but, hey, there are two of them (said someone earlier)!  Thanks for reading this.