Movie of the Week – Inglourious Basterds

This week’s movie: Inglourious Basterds (2009).

What if the Allies had killed Hitler and ended WWII early? Quentin Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds plays a bit like a revenge fantasy. It is split into five vignettes taking place in Nazi Occupied France that all tie together by the end.

Tarantino is one of independent film’s most celebrated directors. His films are mostly considered classics. With Inglourious Basterds, however, he made his most expensive (costing around seventy million) and subsequently most successful film to date (in terms of gross box office). He has said that it is the first part of a new trilogy, with Django Unchained being the second in the series.

Cinematographer Robert Richardson and production designer David Wasco produce brilliant work on the film, which overall is aesthetically fantastic (and maybe Tarantino’s best in that regard). The visuals (and especially the score, taken from classic westerns, war films and David Bowie) reference genre films that Tarantino grew up with.

As good as Tarantino’s writing is (and it is very good), the performances are maybe even better. The cast is universally wonderful, making stars out of a few European actors who before did not have that much exposure in the states. The ensemble includes: Brad Pitt, Melanie Laurent, Christoph Waltz (who won an Oscar for his work), Eli Roth, Michael Fassbender, Diane Kruger, Daniel Bruhl, Til Schweiger, Jacky Ido, B.J. Novak, Gedeon Burkhard, Omar Doom, August Diehl, Denis Menochet, and Mike Myers, with voice work from Samuel L. Jackson and Harvey Keitel.

Inglourious Basterds was nominated for eight Oscars, including Best Picture, but only won one. It is my favorite of Tarantino’s films (and among my 25 favorite films from the last decade), and a must-see for fans of Tarantino’s work and war films. It is brilliant.

Trailer: Here

Available on: Blu-ray, DVD and Streaming

Django Unchained (2012) – Review

Review: Django Unchained is a highly entertaining action drama with some western aspects, full of references and throwbacks. The film is about a slave Django who is freed by a bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz who needs his help identifying a bounty he is looking for. Django and Schultz become friends and partners. Schultz decides to help Django rescue his wife from a Mississippi plantation Candyland, whose owner Calvin Candie is notoriously wicked – a dangerous mission to say the least going into the belly of the beast.

Django Unchained is the second in writer-director’s Quentin Tarantino revenge fantasy trilogy, following Inglourious Basterds. And like Inglourious Basterds (as well as most of his films), it is packed with references to many of Tarantino’s favorite films in the genre. Homage is most prevalently paid to the films of the spaghetti western director Sergio Corbucci (who directed Django), a filmmaker in the genre that Tarantino loves (even more than Segio Leone who gets most of the praise in today’s cinema criticism). Corbucci’s films often tackle harder issues like racism, slavery, and class warfare (which are themes that Tarantino also addresses with Django Unchained).

Tarantino also seems interested in addressing the grandeur of the southern plantation – tearing it down as a myth and exposing the sheer inhumane cruelty and abuse slaves endured on these plantations (even with simple things like remarking that none of the whites have ever seen a black man riding a horse). This is not necessarily new ground, as media has focused on this topic many times (as historical revisionism aimed at exposing many of the horror before shaded over in history has been a popular academic pursuit since the late twentieth century), but maybe with not so much style and panache as Tarantino who does not pull his targeted punches.  One these such punches seems to be directly aimed at Gone with the Wind (when Django and Schultz travel to Mississippi they are met with a title in big bold letters tracking across the screen from right to left that is very reminiscent to Gone with the Wind’s opening title), a film that very much propagates the South and its way of life (forwarding the myth of the grandeur and elegance of the southern plantations for worldwide audiences, skipping over the brutality suffered by the slaves).

The violence in the film, for which there is a lot, is purposely overdone and almost cartoony. This was maybe done as an attempt by Tarantino to keep the film from being NC-17 or to keep the film fun, as the tone is mostly light. However, the violence suffered by the slaves in the film feels different. While the gunfights in which Django blows away whites are exaggerated, scenes in which violence is done to black characters are presented in a much more realistic and even horrific manner. This is a clear choice by Tarantino to create a deeper feeling of sympathy for the black characters by making their pain real, while white characters being blown up, shot and otherwise massacred is all in good fun.

This choice also firmly puts the audience behind Django, as they actively care about him and want to see him rescue his wife, and more so reap vengeance upon those that deserve it. The film also profoundly creates a sense of revelation in the audience at the true stakes for Django’s mission. While lots of films have created an emotion and revelation in their audience regarding the true plight of the slaves, Django Unchained does it while still playing as a mostly light action western. Thus, the revelation in the audience might be more profound, as they were not expecting to feel something about the film and the characters. However, the light nature of the film might also allow the audience to excuse the deeper emotional impact and forget it as the credits roll focusing on the comedy and exciting action.

Tarantino brings his style of brash dialog to the film as well. However, here with this topic, the juxtaposition of the way characters talk also plays into the emotional feeling the audience experiences. The physical violence in the film is extreme, but the verbal violence the slaves are subjected to is maybe even more damaging, as it is a coat of insults that just seems to lay upon them wearing them down and dehumanize them. The language of the characters is striking as it really exposes the clear disregard, even above hate, that many of the white characters have for the black characters. They are nothing to them, at least nothing human.

Overall, Tarantino gets across his message of exposing what slavery really was – not so much in the hardships suffered by slaves, as that is only briefly addressed, but in the relationship between blacks and whites in the South.

Narratively, Django Unchained is much more a straightforward story than Tarantino usually employs in his films with a clear three-act structure. Though, it still has sort of an episodic feel differentiating between Django and Schultz’s work in Texas and Tennessee as opposed to their venture into Mississippi to rescue Django’s wife. The film can almost be viewed has having two parts – the prologue in which Django and Schultz become friends and partners pre-Mississippi (act one) and the main narrative in which they go to Mississippi (acts two and three). However, the prologue is really more as a lot of character work is done in that section, which later allows Tarantino to focus on other narrative areas (like creating a fantastic villain with Calvin Candie); and it also allows Django to play a different character in disguise for a large portion of the Mississippi episode because he is already established with the audience. Even though the three-act structure is apparent, pre-Mississippi and Mississippi do have a different feel, which Tarantino clearly intended. Pre-Mississippi feels like a western, while Mississippi is much more an action drama with the hero deep in enemy territory. Django cannot merely ride off and hide if he gets in trouble, like characters often do in westerns; he is either going to rescue his wife or die; he is completely committed, which is what makes the drama so compelling.

Tarantino also does a masterful job with the tone. This is a very fun and entertaining film, even given the intense nature of its subject material. It is often very funny, as well. Tarantino is able to get across the drama and have the audience experience something real, but leaves them feeling light, as they have chiefly been entertained. He does this by having most of the violence play bigger (like a cartoon) and having the film packed with intended comedy (which all works).

For the most part the film is free from major issues, but the narrative does not quite have the dramatic impact it could. This is the choice Tarantino made. The film could not be both light and fun while still also fully engaging the audience dramatically, because this would have left the tone and ultimately the film feeling very disjoined and nothing would have worked quite as well as it does. Tarantino chose to primarily entertain. Though, even with the film’s fun tone, with multiple viewings the intended impact resonating from the narrative choices (such as the juxtaposition between the violence on whiter characters versus black or the way these characters speak) will ingrain itself in the viewer, thus having the same lasting impact that a strong dramatic take on the material.

The narrative is also a little loose in the first act (and maybe overly long). It does not really get going until Django and Schultz get to Mississippi and the stakes are raised, which is again why the film feels episodic.

Another possible issue is that the graphic nature of the violence and langue will not appeal to all viewers, as in both cases it is extreme (but also in both cases completely serves the narrative).

Django Unchained is not a great western in the classic sense of the genre, as it is not really a western for most of the film. However, it is a great action drama with the purpose of again exposing the villainy of slavery and the people that subjugated others to be their slaves.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Auteur Quentin Tarantino started off making great crime dramas and is now making great genre films. While he brings a great nostalgic style to his films (as a massive cinephile – especially for ‘B’ films), his own ability as a filmmaker has matured. His writing is brilliant, but with Inglourious Basterds (my favorite of his films) and now Django Unchained he directing seems equal to his words. The level of performances he is garnering is phenomenal as well. I cannot wait to see the final piece of his revenge trilogy.

Robert Richardson’s cinematography accomplishes the look and feel of a western while also complimenting the style of Tarantino’s direction (as this is there fourth collaboration). J. Michael Riva’s production design is great as well, as it both fits the tone of the genre and has fun with it (especially the Cleopatra Club set).

Django Unchained is visually impressive and has a fantastic directorial flair, but the strongest aspect is its impressive performances. Kerry Washington and Walton Goggins are good in small supporting roles. Samuel L. Jackson is hilarious, biting, and dramatically interesting (a compelling combination) as Stephen. It is his best role and performance from him in a long time. Leonardo DiCaprio is an absolute riot. He is wildly insane and having a blast as Calvin Candie. Looking at him, the viewer really gets the sense that they are starring at the devil. Villains often get to be played big and they often are the juiciest character roles – this is a great one and DiCaprio takes full advantage commanding every scene he is in. Christoph Waltz is great as Dr. King Schultz, a bounty hunter with a moral conscience and abhorrence towards slavery. Waltz plays Schultz to be quite playful with his words and delivery, often bringing the most effective comedy to the film. Jamie Foxx is very good as Django. He brings a quiet strength and willful disobedience to the role, while still giving off a clear soulful humanity (which allows the audience to fully connect with his character). The performance is among his best work.

Summary & score: Django Unchained unapologetically and boldly attacks the malice and repugnance of the people that propagated slavery by owning slaves raining vengeance with merciless graphic violence and complete distain. And as a revenge fantasy should be, it is very satisfying and enjoyable. 8/10

Carnage (2011) – Review

Review: Carnage is a claustrophobic comedy. Based on the play Le Dieu du Carnage, the film is about two sets of parents that amicably meet to discuss an incident involving their sons – it degrades quickly. Director Roman Polanski affects the viewer with his choices in this film that essentially takes place completely in one room, creating a piece that frustrates, causes anxiety and even gets on the nerves of its viewer yet is at the same time hilarious. It is a dangerous game Polanski plays with his audience – one that is not going to work for everyone, as I can see someone hating this as easily as loving it. The main culprit is that Polanski has the Cowans almost leave a number of times, but they just keep getting dragged back in, seemingly worsening the conflict each time (why can’t they just get out of there?!?). Polanski has it boil over then dissipate only to froth up again. However, the characters are fantastic (and played very well). Those that will ultimately like this film will be the viewers that take the characters at face value and just enjoy them. Most comedies these days play off juvenile circumstances or characters, but this is different (at least initially). Polanski presents adult characters – only to be reduced to seemingly juveniles by cracking under the pressures of societal norms. In a way, Polanski is saying that we are all children at heart (or baser animals once society is stripped away) and the brilliance of this film is watching these characters, all very much rooted in adult society, crumble giving into their emotions and agendas. Issues with the film mainly arise from the way the film interacts with its viewer – not all audience members will want to be emotionally engaged to the extent that Polanski intends. The ending seems a bit abrupt as well – but it does work with the epilogue, however. Carnage is very funny, but is much more than just a comedy as it deconstructs modern society.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Roman Polanski has made many great films, but I cannot think of another comedy. He makes the argument that the best directors can make a great film in any genre, and Polanski is certainly one of the best. I do not remember much music during the meat of the film, but the prologue has a great piece written by Alexandre Desplat (who scored the film). Pawel Edelman (who shoots all Polanski’s films, recently) does fantastic work, especially working with Polanski to block and frame each scene. This is the best aesthetic aspect of the film. While the characters are mostly trapped in one room, Polanski still has them constantly moving, keeping a kinetic energy going which keeps it from feeling dull. The production design by Dean Tavoularis is also very good. The Longstreet apartment is very telling in many ways. Ultimately, however, this is a film that lives or dies with the performances of its actors (there being only four main characters), and they are all on their games. Jodie Foster is so on edge during the whole film; the audience is just waiting for her to explode. Kate Winslet has probably the most rage to cover with Nancy Cowan – and as always she is fantastic. The juxtaposition of her early in the film to later on is a lot of fun. Christoph Waltz plays Alan Cowan as if he is the only important thing in the world, commanding the room. John C. Reilly (probably the least acclaimed of the group) steals much of the film however, as this being a comedy it is right in his wheelhouse. His bursts into juvenility are particularly funny.

Summary & score: Carnage is one of the best comedies of 2011. The audience and characters are trapped in a room, and cannot seem to escape. 8/10

The Green Hornet (2011) – Review

The Green Hornet is an entertaining buddy action comedy that takes full advantage of its cast, script and subject matter. Michel Gondry (known for his unique style) directs maybe his most straight-forward film to date, however his style is not completely gone as he does place his camera interestingly creating some nice shot composition (not always common for big action or comedy movies). However, this feels much more like a film by writing team Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg than it does a Michel Gondry film. That is not a bad thing, as it is very funny and the dialog and overall silliness of the situations and characters allow to film to stand out and in many ways stand above most other recent buddy action comedies. However, liking this film is probably contingent (to some degree) on liking their other two produced screenplays: Superbad and Pineapple Express, as the comedy in this film is in much the same vein as those films. The relationship between Britt Reid (The Green Hornet) and Kato – their dialog, interactions, friendship and so on – is the best part and generates most of the entertainment in the film. Sure there are good action set pieces, funny scenes with the villain and other characters, but Reid and Kato’s relationship develops in such a manner that the audience enjoys watching (and to some extend being a part of it), thus caring about the characters and outcome – making the film successful overall. The villain Chudnofsky also brings humor to the film with the continuous joke that he is not very menacing or cool. It is fairly refreshing and works quite well (I thought, at least). The issue with the film though is that outside the relationship of Reid and Kato and the exploits of Chudnofsky there is not much else there. All the other characters fill specific story roles, but do not feel real or even necessary. Plus, the major factors in Reid wanting to be The Green Hornet stems from both a need to help people and his relationship with his father, neither is given enough emotional weight to make Reid’s actions feel real or have the audience care (however, I think while important and ultimately what stops this from being a better film, this is not as important by a long shot to the relationship between Reid and Kato, which the film does very well). Despite some narrative flaws in building full characters, The Green Hornet is a blast, filled with fun action and lots of laughs.

Technical and acting achievements: Michel Gondry tackles his most ambitious film here, having not really shot big action set pieces before and not to mention that this seems out of his comfort zone. The result does not really resemble a typical Gondry film, but his aesthetics and keen sense of composition still creep their way in; they are just not blatant (like his other films). James Newton Howard provides a good score for the film that while not overly memorable fits the visuals and tone well. Cinematographer John Schwartzman’s work also fits the tone of the film well – letting the actors play out their comedic roles while also presenting the action in an exciting manner. A lot of credit also goes to editor Michael Tronick who did great work on the film. Owen Paterson’s production design grounds the film in the real world, but also includes grand sets (like the newspaper building) and cool ‘home bases’ for the characters (I like Chudnofsky’s construction trailer office, for example). Tom Wilkinson, David Harbour, Edward James Olmos and especially Edward Furlong (who is hilarious in his small role) provide good supporting work. Cameron Diaz is really given little to do in the film and it is hard to believe that they cast her or anyone as famous as her for the part, and thus ends up merely being just a pretty face, and she has some funny moments too. James Franco has a fantastic cameo in the film. His scene with Christoph Waltz is maybe the best in the film (it is awesome). Waltz is wonderful as a crime lord with seemingly low self-esteem. He pretty much steals every scene he is in (but what else did you expect). Leads Rogen and Jay Chou make a great team and their performances are very funny and charismatic, carrying the film.

The Green Hornet is very funny, has good action and will entertain. 7/10