Fast & Furious 6
The Hangover Part III
Its biggest flaw, though, for those who care about such things, may be its moral attitude. That might seem a stodgy thing to bring up in the context of a Quentin Tarantino movie, but it takes such center stage that it needs to be examined.
You do realize that these men were Nazi's, do you not? I'm not here to defend Tarantino's film, and I'm certainly not posting on any sort of malicious grounds, but in reading your column I was faced with some interesting questions. IF the events in the movie did actually happen, which they did not... because its a movie and in turn, fictitious, the context is WWII, prior to U.S. involvement (pre-1944). By this time Nazi Death squads have already mauled and massacred tens of thousands of Jews, and concentration camps have been running for close to 10 years. Considering the absolute atrocious acts the Nazi party was already responsible for, do you not think that the acts portrayed in this film were justified? I realize that you may have written those words with good intentions, but you seem to dismiss certain truths with regards to the holocaust. Those men were monsters, and personally I enjoyed seeing Hitler get his. This came across as an "Us vs. them" because it was, there was no doubt that the context with which the movie was held was an Us vs. Them. We have not seen a more clearly defined villian in our time as Adolf Hitler and his army of anti-semetic genocidal maniacs. More so I think it lent to the "Jews v. Nazi" struggle and the Jewish sentimental desire. Interesting string of thought, but I can't really believe that you would somehow lose touch with these polarizing events.
Sep 11 - 07:58 AM
Anthony, the first sentence of your comment reads, "You do realize that these men were Nazi's." The apostrophe you added suggests, "Nazi is...", whereas you meant to write Nazis (more than one Nazi). More importnatly your argument is the same argument the Nazis used in the extermination of Jews, "You do realize that these men were Jews?" As if no one could possibly object to killing one without being considered a bad person. So, it appears you have applied the Nazi philosophy for jews and applied it to the Nazis. Therefore, you condone the philosophy (genocide), but disagree with which culture to eliminate. Ultimately, it's okay to slaughter a race of people as long as they are bad. Unfortunately, that leaves us with the question, "Who are the bad guys?" I imagine you might respond with an acusation that I don't think Nazis are bad or evil. That would be rediculous, of course they were. But, neither the movie, nor the posting was about Nazis. It is about morality and whether it exists anymore. So, I urge you to think more about the movie rather than trying to justify the murder of a group of people.
Dec 15 - 09:52 AM
Michael, the smugness of your comment has forced me to create an account and respond to you.
Your argument boils down to the question "Who are the bad guys?". But this is a question which need not be asked, isn't it? Innate morality, and yes there is such a thing, tells us that the Nazis are the bad guys, not the Jews. Just because it was a common belief among the Nazi party that these Jews deserved to be killed, does not make it right to do so. I know that you would agree with this. Therefore this argument that Anthony S. "condones the philosophy (genocide), but disagrees with which culture to eleminate" is not valid since each culture is killed on different grounds, one morally (Nazis who murdered) and the other immorally (Jews). Just because you condone the act of killing one group does not mean you have to condone the act of killing another.
By the way "rediculous" is actually spelled "ridiculous". Go ahead, find some spelling/grammatical errors in my response, I'm sure you can.
Jun 9 - 09:43 AM
Mar 20 - 10:29 AM
I don't normally comment, but I had to at this.Arguing the morality of a movie based on war is pretty much a waste of time; watch Letters from Iwo Jima, and then try to disagree with that.Yes, the Nazi Regime did bad things, and yes killing innocent people is bad, but war is war.And this film in no way should be judged on morality; if you want to do that, find a Scorsese film like Raging Bull and tear it apart.
Jul 2 - 03:37 PM
people who kill millions of people are, by definition, bad guys.
Mar 19 - 08:55 PM
Kimberly Faith Paredes
Yes. But what does that have to do with people thinking this movie is flawed?
Mar 21 - 07:13 AM
It's one thing to kill "Nazis", it's another to kill German soldiers.I think you're forgetting, Anthony S., that there was a big difference between a Nazi and a German soldier.These "Basterds" were killing "Nazis" but they were actually killing mostly German soldiers. The two are very different.I agree with the critic in that this movie has a real issue maintaining a moral high ground. Killing Nazis isn't what does it though, it's their willingness to kill women and other non-Nazis, simply because they belong to the German nation.SPOILER ---What of the end part where the Colonel surrenders himself? He had a deal, he even (pretty much) single handedly secured the death of Hitler and the rest of the High Command... and what does he (and his radio operator) get? Betrayed by the "good guys." So I think it's you, Anthony, who needs to really sit down and watch this film again.IMO there were no good guys in this film, they were all lying, cheating, treacherous bastards who all deserved to die, even the Jewish Americans and Pitt's character.
Sep 12 - 12:00 PM
If you ask me the German nation were the people who handed Hitler the power to begin with, besides that all the people in the theatre were either officers or related to officers of the SS. People get caught in the crossfire all the time, theres no time to ask questions and figure out if the person is lying or not....I appreciate that Tarantino is willing to cross these moral "barriers", the critic said it himself "That might seem a stodgy thing to bring up in the context of a Quentin Tarantino movie"...it all comes down to where your moral bounds lie, if your a prude or willing to face the facts.
Sep 13 - 01:39 PM
Hey Michael, if your statement is true, then all Chinese are bad because they handed power to Mao. All Russians are bad because they encouraged communism. All Italians are bad because they supported Mussolini. All Japanese are bad for supporting Konoe. All Americans are bad for handing power to Eissenhower, sending American soldiers to Vietnam where they raped/murdered 300,000 people. A ruler and his choices do not categorize an entire country. The German people suffered more in WWII than you seem to be aware of.If your viewpoint on war and the morality behind it is really that narrow, I suggest you do some good, long reading. :)
Nov 22 - 06:37 PM
Nov 22 - 06:40 PM
I think you're a nazi!
Sep 18 - 10:17 PM
Thank you. "IMO there were no good guys in this film, they were all lying, cheating, treacherous bastards who all deserved to die, even the Jewish Americans and Pitt's character." - Hence the title
Dec 12 - 11:07 PM
If you were a German soldier in Hitler's Army..which applied to every German soldier. You were part of the nazi regime...therefore making you a nazi
Dec 14 - 02:41 PM
They're not supposed to be good guys...if you're looking for good guys in a Tarantino film then you're wasting your time.
Dec 14 - 06:22 PM
So, does a movie have to have a good "moral attitude" to be a good movie?
Jan 27 - 06:55 AM
The point was to manupulate your feelings twords the characters. The messege is of the power of cinema, in both the plot, and the movie itself.
Sep 12 - 03:13 PM
That was not the movie's biggest flaw. It was, in fact, one of the main focal points of the movie. The attitude in the movie is everything. When portraying a sensitive time period, other filmmakers may choose to cast the movie in a certain light that downsizes the atrocities and unspeakable acts that occur. Tarantino, however, is not one of those film-makers. His movies are in-your-face, real, live (albeit sometimes exaggerated) truth. If you don't like that style of a movie, then Tarantino is not the film-maker for you, and perhaps you should see a different type of film.
Sep 12 - 04:23 PM
Nope. The moral attitude seems fine to me. This was war, these men were the worst of the worst and killing them should be considered an act of charity to the hundreds, maybe thousands that would in turn live. The Basterds showed no mercy, because that was how the Nazi's were themselves, and fighting them with any sort of compassion would give them even more of an unfair advantage.
Sep 13 - 06:50 PM
Moral attitude??? How about the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki that killed thousands and thousands of completely innocent people. Why don't you "examine" that instead of a fictional movie that in the context of history is practically irrelevant. If you wanted a movie with "moral attitude", did you really think it would it be a Tarantino flick? Plus, people don'tdevelop their sense of morality from watching Tarantino movies, because they know they're fake. They develop that as children, and I'm guessing no children will watch this movie. In the big picture, this movie will do no harm at all... It's just entertainment .Watch Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan again. They're more your taste old man.
Sep 14 - 04:04 PM
Oh, puh-leeze. To suggest that the common Japanese people weren't complicit in the prosecution of the war is like saying there were MANY good Nazis."I was just following orders" is as old as the hills.We bombed Japan into the Stone Age simply because we'd HAD ENOUGH of their wanton atrocities, perpetrated not just by the military, but the civilian population as well.And we were sick and tired of seeing Americans going into the meat grinder.Buy a real history book instead of relying on propaganda. Oh, wait -- the astronauts never landed on the moon -- it was all a Hollywood setup.
Jan 29 - 08:13 AM
Wow, aren't you a bigot?Let me guess: Republican?
May 11 - 09:23 PM
Hey Watcher- I'm not going to get into a political debate, but its pretty funny you say that considering the man who authorized the bombing of the two cities was a Democrat.
And Tripps- the guy may be wrong as far as "atrocities" committed by "Japanese Citizens" but he is right as far as "sending American soldiers into the meat grinder." Japan was given a multitude of warnings that they should surrender. They were fighting a losing battle, and were determined to do so until their last soldier. Millions of more people, soldiers AND civilians would have died had those bombs not been dropped.
Mar 3 - 04:58 PM
This might be easily the dumbest and most unaware post on the site my man. Seriously, you have zero understanding regarding the rational behind using the bomb against Japan. By your logic the terrorist attacks here and in other nations are perfectly justified, because the common people are just as guilty as the policy makers and military decision makers who earned their ire in the first place.
Jul 17 - 09:50 PM
Sep 14 - 04:08 PM
Ok wiseass, you want to know what I think? I think your biggest flaw, "for those who care about such things", is your lack of creative sentence structure within your review. Nobody wants to hear about how some old decaying fart thinks this movie was made in bad taste. I would truly like to see you make a movie, besides the home movies of you and your husband, that stands up half as tall as this one. Go to your local pawn shop and buy a real pair of nuts, then watch the movie again. You might get better results. If, at this point, you still don't like this movie, kill yourself. Throw your fat sagging *** of a bridge. Ill stand by with a video camera. Perhaps that movie will live up to your standards. I know it will live up to mine. P.S. - Anybody who uses the word "stodgy" is definitely gay.
Sep 14 - 06:38 PM
I can see what the critic is trying to say here.I personally loved this movie (in fact it is currently my favorite), but I was worried when I found myself rooting for more death and more blood. Do you people not see something wrong with that? The fact that it was Hitler and the Nazis doesn't justify the attitude.
Sep 15 - 09:31 PM
I believe that is the point of the film, to give viewers that exact observation, the parallels between the movie and the German propaganda film are great examples of this. (not a reply to that specific post anymore)I think it's funny that some people's criticisms seem so close to understanding, but don't quite make the connection that Tarantino is trying to get you to that there are no good guys for a reason.
Sep 27 - 10:35 PM
oopsget you to !see! that there
Sep 27 - 10:39 PM
Yes it does. I have no sympathy for Hitler or people committing those atrocities. In fact, I wish WWII had ended the way it does in IB. Hitler committing suicide kind of leaves me with a bittersweet feeling. He didn't get his comeuppance, he got away.
Feb 24 - 10:34 PM
I just figured it was made to look like an exploitation flick for Jews. So it was supposed to be shamelessly trying to appeal to Jews and victims of WWII. Which makes it kind of funny because its playing on a certain time period and the cultural mood towards it to shamelessly appeal to a large audience. Its almost like an American propaganda film. Which I thought was why there were obvious parallels between the actual movie and the propaganda film within the movie. But, that could just be my point of view I don't know if that's actually what Tarantino had intended. If I'm wrong please feel free to correct me.
Sep 16 - 06:03 AM
I think your analysis is spot on.
It's hard to believe how many people miss the correlation between "Inglorious Basterds" and the film "Nation's Pride" that the climax of the story centers around.
It has always seemed to me that Tarantino doesn't really approve of his character's actions and means to show how easily we can be influenced by aestheticized violence, but people tell me I give him too much credit. At any rate, I agree with you.
Oct 8 - 06:14 PM
With all due respect Mr Richards, your political persuasion is very transarent. When I saw the "advanced interrogation" scene with the 3 German soldiers, the first thing that went through my mind was how this would offend those who believe life can always be tidy and filled with your sense of justice. I freely admit that the "advanced interrogation" scene was way over the top, it really made the counter point to yours, didn't it? It actually took me 3 viewings to get to the point of really liking this movie. But I won't go into the artistic aspect of movies. Since you made your review based upon personal politics, I am responding in kind. I don't thing the Hollywood left was prepared for Aldo and the Bear Jew. But then again, that would require thoughtful consideration of others' views. I am still shocked that such a scene made it to a main-line Hollywood film.
Sep 16 - 03:58 PM
I agree that there is an "epitome of cool" aspect to all the Nazi-killin' in Tarantino's film. I think your job as a reviewer is to examine why. For example, the theater scene is an obvious comparison to us as an audience watching Tarantino's bloody movie and the Nazi audience watching Goebbel's latest ultra-violent propaganda film. I'd rather hear you examine the filmmaker's intent instead of grandstanding about what you perceive as his supposed lack of morality. I guess that's too much to ask for from a film critic huh, especially a self-admittedly stodgy one.
Sep 18 - 11:25 PM
You are all reading way too mich into this.... Was the movie entertaining and original? Did it have good acting and an interesting story? Was the dialog written well?...etc...the answer is YES to all of these... If you cannot follow this movie you, are probably the people who gave transformers a good review. EIther that or a big case of A.D.D.
Many ***** about tarentino's pacing, but I think it is a great break from most films hollywood produces. The characters are interesting, relatable and fun during the whole film. It is a great flick.
Sep 19 - 02:15 AM
Always willing to sacrifice your professionalism for a political jab. Sad Mr. Richards, sad.
Sep 23 - 09:52 PM
Tarantino did address the morality of the Jews bringing themselves down to the level of the Nazi Pigs. He showed that all Germans are not Nazi's, he showed that some of the Jews had a conscience (even though the Nazi Pig Killed her anyway). Revenge may be bitter but it sure is fun...http://bit.ly/ing-basterds
Sep 24 - 05:52 AM
Inglorious Basterds is a pathetic piece of gore porn., a snuff flick for anthropological throwbacks! What exactly is the entertainment value of a thug with a baseball bat smashing in the head of a brave and honorable man? And look at all of the bloodthirsty monkeys who enjoyed watching it! What a sad commentary on the human animal!
Sep 26 - 10:41 AM
Exactly. I also think many of the replies to this critic are incredibly ignorant.
Dec 30 - 11:07 PM
You are the anthropological throwback, indeed.
Jan 30 - 02:33 PM
the thing felt very, very borrowed....pitt was bad, myers was bad....everyone else was good or better....i am accustomed to mutilations of history in movies, but i did not mind the absurdly dishistorical ending, as it made no pretences of realism....still, i felt the plot lines never really coalesced as they did in pulp fiction....connections were too tenuous and ib had an extremely mosaical and already done feel for me....vengence movies seem to be accumulating and the presentation of it as a camp frolic is typical of q, but i agree it was inappropriately used in this superfaux storyline....ciao
Sep 26 - 04:54 PM
I like to think Tarantino made the Basterds morally ambiguous, since they can be viewed as either heroes or terrorists depending on which window you are looking through. It raises the question, "Are the Basterd's actions justifiable only because they are dealing with Nazis, or does it instead make them more comparable to the enemy? By the end of the film the line between them is blurred - they are all ruthless, immoral killers.
Oct 2 - 03:36 PM
I completely agree - the film was morally bankrupt. It was almost as if Tarantino wanted us to view the movie from the Nazi perspective. I'm 25 but insightful enough to have drawn conclusions from people that went to the second world war (both grandfathers and others). No-one in their right mind gets pleasure from being cruel before killing no matter what the enemy has done. It was tremendously disrespectful to veterans. I can't understand why people want to see this at the movies - theres enough violence in the real world. Aside from that the movie was far-fetched, clumsy and lacking character development. It had no redeeming features. I am dumber for watching it. But because some think a high level of violence means its "edgy" and "fast paced action" it seems to have good reviews. I guess they're the same sort of kids who go round in mobs and randomly beat people on a Friday or Saturday night.
Oct 4 - 06:05 AM
I think that's a little extreme. On the one hand, i agree that it's disrespectful, but that's only really if you read way deep down into it. And there really are people that take pleasure in killing. Sad to say, but true. In reality, both sides in WW2 had its members that were delighted with the bloodshed. More than anything, I don't believe this was really, truly meant to be disrespectful. I mean, it's not even historically accurate....at all. I think it was meant more like to show what could have happened.And by the way I agree with Lucy V.
Oct 7 - 09:08 PM
"both sides in WW2 had its members that were delighted with the bloodshed."Yes, those were the psychopaths. The average soldier was not a psychopath. He had a conscience.But this movie isn't about making an accurate representation of WWII. It's about making torture, cruelty and bloodshed cool. It's about *desensitization*, whether it was intentional or not. I, for one, believe it was intentional. You even have a carefully constructed play on people's emotions and perceptions: the way how the only decent and conscious guys in the movie were either German soldiers, or they were rapidly killed, and always in absurd ways. The 'subliminal' message here is: guys that commit atrocities are always the winners; being a conscious person is for wimps, and gets you nowhere; the good guys, the *heroes* (*our team*) are not conscious individuals.There's an entire generation of young kids that are growing up right now in complete moral relativism. What they're taught by tv dramas, video games, and films is not 50s morality, or 80s/90s sentimentality; it's hardcore 21st century nihilism.A few years down the road, this generation will be wearing cop uniforms and signing on to the military. Think about it.
Nov 6 - 08:22 AM
But that still doesn't make sense. Why would Tarantino want to intentionally promote violence and torture? What would he have to gain?Onto the second part, what does the youth singing onto the military and the police force have to do with it? If they can't tell the difference between fantasy violence and real-life violence, it's either their fault, or their parent's fault--not Tarantino's fault.
Sep 29 - 12:25 AM
Yes, definitely. My grandpa is a WWII vet. Some of his friends died in Europe, while fighting a war that nobody wanted to fight. Who in his right mind wants to go out to risk probable maiming and death, to kill other human beings? My grandpa also became friends with a lot of Germans in the post-war period, as happened with many other Allied veterans. At the end of the day, the large majority of Germans were decent people, who knew nothing about the camps, and had been thoroughly brainwashed by Nazi propaganda during 15 years.It made me sick to watch the movie, while thinking about what my grandpa would feel, if he watched it.This movie would never have been done 20, or even 10 years ago. The only reason this movie could only be done in the present day, is not because most of the generation that lived through WWII is now too old to even take an interest in watching it. Yes it's art, but it's tasteless art. Mere dehumanization and an insult to the memory of millions of *real* human beings (Jewish soldiers and concentration camp victims included).
Nov 6 - 08:37 AM
Umm, trust me, there were PLENTY of Germans who took sadistic pleasure in killing. Please read "Hitler's Willing Executioners"(ordinary Germans, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler's_Willing_Executioners) for the facts and stop spouting off about how "no one sets out to kill anyone" and they were "brainwashed."That's a bunch of revisionist crap.My father flew 25 missions bombing the Germans and I personally take pleasure in the thought of every twisted, charred corpse.Haven't seen the movie but I'd like nothing more than to watch Nazis being mercilessly murdered; fact or fiction.
Jan 29 - 08:39 AM
I'm sick and tired of people like you. Pointing fingers when you've never even fought in the war or had any idea what it was like. Want to really know the feeling of it? I guess I have to give you baby steps cause your so gosh-darn immature. Enlist in the military. Go into the war-zone and try to kill every enemy you see. I doubt you'll piss your pants even before you begin to pull the trigger. You see, in war there is no good and bad side. When you're in war, killing the last guy is all that matters, even if it means that guy is a family man with 4 kids and a loving wife. War also provides propaganda and makes them believe crazy things only because big brother tells them so. So you really think, out of all the Nazis, including the Arabs and Blacks of the Afrika Corps and German resistance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widerstand (see I can post Wikipedia links too :) ) that they all deserve to die. You should really get new history books or at least a new teacher...
Apr 8 - 08:29 PM
Was he a U.S vet? There's no reason he'd be offended--never does this film insult U.S. vets. The Basterds aren't U.S. military, they're vigilantes
Sep 29 - 02:37 AM
Call Me Chaz
Your insight from your relatives having gone to war is correct. No one in their right mind takes any joy from cruelty before killing. Sometimes such cruelty is deemed necessary to target psychological damage on the enemy in an effort to shorten a war and save lives -- theirs and ours. At such times men of good conscience must put themselves "out of their right minds". Humor, flippancy, hyper-aggression are all ways of removing oneself from the reality of what must be done. It is both a pre-cursor to the actions, as well as a symptom of the aftermath if one is to survive mentally. It is "whistling in the dark" until the darkness passes.
If you don't think terrorism works, look at how 9-11 divided our nation. Warriors know it most definitely works. Like it or not, these actions surely won some heats and minds in Germany, and shortened the war.
Do not confuse the Jews portrayed in the movie with the Nazi mentality. Nazis simply believed the non-German nationalities were inferior beings, and were to be extinguished. They had no intentions of getting back thier "right minds" after the war. Had they won (the unimaginable horror of horrors) you and I and ol' Jonathan would not be having this little chat.
Jan 31 - 08:09 AM
...see, maybe i am reading too much into things, but i think that "moral attitude" you're talking about was a statement in itself. as i was watching the scene of the climax i started to feel kind of conflicted - "is this really okay, this cycle of hate and hate, and are we, on this side, feeling triumphant at all the fire and death and violence any better than 'them'?" if it's intentional, it's played very subtle (and for good reason, i think). another thing was the german soldier, right before he was killed by the bear jew - the look in his eyes, and "bravery". and then, the basterds cheer as he is beaten to death! it's a nice contrast, no matter what it's meant to imply, if anything. i do like the way this movie touches on stuff like that - morals and what exactly is justified. in its own way, it acknowledges how complicated war is on the level of individual people. it is a character-driven story that makes you think about and appreciate all of the characters, i think, despite the overlying mentality of 'us' and 'them' - it shows that there are many more sides than two. mmh, but that's just the way i like to look at it
Oct 6 - 05:09 PM