Critic Review - Newark Star-Ledger

It's these fine sequences that can make you truly regret Tarantino's snarky, in-joke impulses, not to mention his arrogant -- perhaps even dangerous -- lack of concern with the story's moral dimensions.

August 21, 2009 Full Review Source: Newark Star-Ledger | Comments (38)
Newark Star-Ledger
Top Critic IconTop Critic


Alek T.

Alek Taargus

I read your whole review, and your only gripe was that it's a Tarantino movie. The soundtrack, the action, the story, the morals, everything you didn't like about this movie were the pieces of a Tarantino movie. I'll take this as a positive review and good day sir.

Aug 21 - 09:03 PM

Myster Blonde

Myster Blonde

Difficult to discern if this review is positive or negative. Way to sit on the fence Stephen. "Lack of concern with the story's moral dimensions?" Uh Stephen...Have you seen any Tarantino movies before? Should QT have included a 30 minute scene about the horrors of the holocaust to remind the world what happened to 6 million Jews? Cause we've NEVER seen that before......

Aug 21 - 10:43 PM

will r.

will rucker

Stephen my man. Your review was very immature, in my opinion. I think you completely missed the point of this movie.

I just really didn't think anything Tarantino did with this film reflected any sense of an arrogant personality. We're dealing with Hitler's ****ed up existence in this film. The reign of Hitler is by far the most angry anything in world history has ever made me feel. In 8th grade, I caught a glimpse of how evil Hitler was. I had to watch videos on the Holocaust when I went on a field trip to D.C. I had to watch holocaust victims being chemically torched alive. I'm 21 for the past decade I've been waiting for something strong enough and passionate enough to stand up to this sort of lurking history...and I feel like this film did just that. It was so strong and made me feel like there is another chemical in humanity that can stand up to something as strongly dark as Hitler.

Sorry, I'll stop talking.

Aug 22 - 01:51 AM


Nicky Marianna

You missed this movie by a mile. And by the way your review read, you didn't deserve to be at bat.

Aug 22 - 09:50 AM

Mark P.

Mark Polakow

Ooh.. another critict/moralist how fun..
Do your job loser. This was an awesome, exceptionally entertaining, original, brilliantly acted and directed movie. It is destined to be a classic imo. And thank god there are some movie makers out there who have the creativity to make a different kind of movie other then the usual Hollywood rotten feces usually served the public.

Aug 22 - 10:08 AM

Balls McHammer

kolya Fist

What's offensive to me are crappy films by the likes of Steven Speilberg like saving private ryan, with gratuitous, heavy handed schmaltz like the old man falling down pissing himself in the graveyard.

Aug 22 - 10:32 AM

thomas r.

thomas robinson

"Moral dimensions"? My good sir, if shooting up Nazis and watching how the war SHOULD have ended is not in good taste to you then wow... something is wrong with you. Are you even American?

Aug 22 - 10:57 AM

Moulin R.

Moulin Roux

hell yeah

Sep 23 - 09:15 AM

Greg B.

Greg Brooks

"not to mention his arrogant -- perhaps even dangerous -- lack of concern with the story's moral dimensions."

OH MY GOD, It's a DANGEROUS piece of fiction!? OH NO, this fictional movie is offending me! GO F YOURSELF! It's a movie, moron! It's not a f-ing history book. I hope Quentin's next project is a reimagining of the bible so you sensitive critics can really lose your minds.

Aug 22 - 11:36 AM

William L.

William Layman

"Arrogant -- perhaps even dangerous -- lack of concern with the story's moral dimensions". Stephen it's Tarantino's STORY! It sounds like you have a problem with Tarantino why do you even bother watching his movies if you can't get over your disliking of him?

Aug 22 - 11:55 AM


First Last

The reason you think Tarantino is arrogant is because you are jealous of him. You project this arrogance upon him in an attempt to disguise your own. Someone who worships cinema and its masters such as Tarantino is far from arrogant.

Aug 22 - 12:25 PM

Mary T.

Mary Thompson

The movie is superficial!

Aug 22 - 02:15 PM

John P.

John Pride

Blah blah blah....dangerous moral dimensions? Does this guy have the slightest clue he was seeing a Tarantino movie? Leave the PC out of subjective art, buddy, it should be left to the political arena!

Aug 22 - 04:00 PM

John P.

John Pride

Blah blah blah....dangerous moral dimensions? Does this guy have the slightest clue he was seeing a Tarantino movie? Leave the PC out of subjective art, buddy, it should be left to the political arena!

Aug 22 - 04:01 PM

Aljosa K.

Aljosa Kljujic

Jesus Christ, another douchebag who doesn't understand the movie. Your review was almost as bad as Armond White's. Congrats.

Aug 22 - 04:19 PM

Stacey M.

Stacey Madden

Very well said "will r." your opinion is a valid one and you shouldn't shut up about it.
Stephen, if you're looking for morality in a film, why the he** would you pick a Tarantino. Do you even know a thing about him?? He never claimed that this was supposed to be a WWII movie. In fact, I'm quite sure he said it was supposed to be his interpretation of how it could have been if the Jewish people had won. He's not a documentary film maker. Hiding behind his supposed lack of morality is cowardly; if this movie was based on historical accuracy (as you apparently believe it should be), how would that be considered moral? How is it that the extermination of millions of people is moral but Tarantino's vision is not? I don't like every movie that Tarantino's ever done; I felt that Death Proof was not nearly one of his best but you clearly have a problem with the man in general. What makes someone a good critic is their ability to look at things from an unbiased point of view. If you're incapable of this, perhaps you should seek new employment. Otherwise you come off looking childish and a little desperate for an audience.

Aug 22 - 06:03 PM

Joseph K.

Joseph K

Whether he claimed IB to be a WWII or not, QT did in fact say that some of his inspiration for this movie came from the Wolfenstein series of video games. I don't know if you've ever played them but they are about a US Army Ranger trying to escape a Nazi castle while having to do battle with Nazi super soldiers, mutants and monsters... NOT historically accurate. I completely agree with you.

Aug 22 - 08:40 PM

david j.

david johnson

i think your being a little ***** about the blood and violence this is an amazing motion picture and tells a great story

Aug 22 - 06:57 PM

Balls McHammer

kolya Fist

No, no, no.

Aug 22 - 10:27 PM


Chris Wilson

Nice review Stephen and one of the best I've seen on the film, if not on Tarantino in general. Fanboys (and girls) will hate you for stating such truths. Tarantino's talent is breathtaking. There is no argument there. His subject matter, however, rarely rises above the level of comic book mentality (which is very popular in our culture these days). Tarantino, and "Inglourious Basterds" has done nothing to change this, will never be mentioned in the same breath as Scorsese, Spielberg, or even Linklater or Anderson, because of his immature subject matter. The closest he's come to tackling an emotional truth was "Jackie Brown." He has the talent, just not the emotional maturity. His films may be exciting, but they lack a soul.

Aug 23 - 05:54 AM

Steven S.

Steven Sluder

"His subject matter, however, rarely rises above the level of comic book mentality"

No. Your understanding of the subject matter rarely rises above a shallow level. We can see this in your simultaneous dismissal of the comic genre, which has produced some truly great, deep, enriching and challenging artwork. Not that you would get it, apparently.

I've noticed that the people who often reject Tarantino's films, labeling them as empty and immature, simply lack the ability to grasp film beyond the barest visual plane. A film must mean exactly what it is showing you, these people believe. You will find, if you dig deeper, that great films have deeper meanings presented in nuanced ways. This is what you are missing. You are not along, some critics at the time said the same thing of Hitchcock, dismissing him as just a showy suspense director, or of Welles, pompous and grandiose but lacking substance. Some people just need to be hit over the head with the meaning of a film by having the director insult the audience and explain it all near the end.

Aug 23 - 09:33 AM

sam f.

sam fellig

I fully agree with review. Although inglorious basterds isn't boring, it%u2019s appallingly insensitive. It goes way beyond black humor. The "basterds" looked like a bunch of mad serial killers. When the "bear jew" (who thought of these nicknames btw?)bashes the nazis head in with a baseball bat and starts laughing as if he's in fenway park... When he has that crazy look in his eye as he's shooting down at old men and woman that are on fire, that was retarded. The glee with which they torture germans dehumanizes Tarantino's heroes. My grandparents are holocaust survivors. Too soon Tarintino, too soon.

Aug 23 - 11:51 AM

Greg B.

Greg Brooks

"too soon tarantino"

It's only been sixty some years, dude. Don't you think if every jew in the holocaust was given a baseball bat, they wouldn't of taken their revenge? Uhhhh, the good guys win, you very sensitive puss. Here's a clue for all you sensitive's movie magic; it's not real.

Aug 24 - 04:34 AM


perry perry

hell, i was hoping that the nazi's would win in the end, but i left after the first hour.

Aug 23 - 05:55 PM

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile