Saturday, August 22, 2009

Reviews: Inglourious Basterds & 50 Dead Men Walking

Old Dirty Basterd

It now seems impossible for me to remember a time when I wasn't a fan of the work by Quentin Tarantino. In fact, his films have become so legendary that the very mention of his iconic name has been burned into every cinephile's lexicon of a director's work that is required to be admired. Even some of Tarantino's minor failures (e.g. the extended cut of Death Proof) still provide a more exciting time at the movies than some other mainstream films. I long thought that it would be impossible for him to deliver a bad film. Then there's this, which isn't to say that this film is bad. I think the best way to put it is how my favorite Chicago film critic, Michael Phillips, put it: "Some people say things are 'love it or hate it.' In this case, it's 'love it and hate it.'"

From the advertisements this film puts out, one would be under the suspicion that the film's main tale spins around Brad Pitt, as Lt. "Aldo The Apache" Raine. Speaking with a thick southern drawl, he blatantly mugs the screen and talks about the new mission at hand, in which he and eight Jewish soldiers have been dropped into Nazi occupied France, and have been given the name The Basterds. They're doing one thang, and one thang only: killin' Nazees. Sound good!?

Well, not entirely. The movie is just as much about a fugitive Jewish woman, Shosanna (Mélanie Laurent) and how her operation of a local movie theatre will lead to her own Nazi revenge that would result in burning the house down filled to the brim with high German rank, including the Füher himself. It's also a little bit about a famous German actress (Diane Kruger) working as a double agent with the Basterds. Not only that, but she, as well as everyone else, is deftly afraid of Col. Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz), the real bastard of this picture who is so good at his evil job the country nicknames him the "Jew Hunter."

In truth, this movie's as much as an action picture as Kill Bill: Vol. 2 was. Wait, isn't that a good thing? It should be, especially since I was one of the few that thought the second chapter was vastly superior. However, that film always knew to pace the excellent dialogue effectively enough so that the sparringly good action scenes would pack a punch. Here, Tarantino lets his movie drown in an incredibly uneven tone, and constantly has it switch from pulpy entertainment, to tense thriller, to satirical history lesson, to disturbing portrait of revenge. It's all interesting, but doesn't have a consistency. The dialogue, usually in high form in all of his films, seems a bit smug in pointing out the interesting ticks in every character and overindulgence on cinema knowledge only somebody like Tarantino could comprehend.

But still, Tarantino knows what a particular scene needs, and when he gets focused in some parts of the film he can really deliver. He is a man who can really let the tension rack up by using very little. Tarantino usually has a good sense of pace in moments when the action needs to be supplied, the tension wound up, and the laughter provided. There are some unusual touches here, particularly brief spots of narration by Samuel L. Jackson that seem really out of place. Also, one of the final shots in the film is in that burning theatre (the trailers give that away) and seeing such horror doesn't sit well. Just because it's now being done to the other side doesn't really make it justifiable, even though a beautiful shot of a projected head laughing devilishly against smoke tries its best to do so. It leaves a rather bitter aftertaste just as the film ends.

There's an interesting cast here, but to be honest, I don't think there are many people that are given enough to really shine. Pitt is talented, but his character seems so one-dimensional that he could have been played by a virtual unknown. He occasionally delivers a few sprouts of intriguing laughter, but nothing significant. Eli Roth, on the other hand, is just blatantly miscast and he's as good an actor as he is a filmmaker (that's an insult, by the way). I'd say the greatest fault of the character pieces is that there's too many, and just as we are starting to find interesting things about them, they are cut short. Til Schweiger plays a perfected Nazi killing machine recently freed from jail by the Basterds, but he's taken out just as his psychology would have provided interesting setups. Daniel Brühl is an war hero that takes a strong liking to Shosanna, but he's pretty much treated as just a plot point. B.J. Novak, from The Office, also pops up in the last act, but is only given a glimpse of what may have been a promising character to banter with Pitt.

The only exceptions here would be Laurent and Waltz. She carries most of the film's humanity, and her entirely sympathetic case would seem fit to draw us in the most. She's also got a lot of expression, and no matter how many ways she pulls her character, we remain invested through her entire ordeal. Waltz is especially terrific, and immediately causes tensions to rise whenever he enters the room. This isn't just the run-of-the-mill bad guy; he's smart, clever, and sophisticated, and coupled with his occupation, makes him a man that can be both respected and feared. Tarantino got a similar performance out of the unjustly overlooked David Carradine (RIP), and Waltz delivers. I'd somewhat carry the same courtesy to Kruger, but she's more stunning vixen than complex character.

Inglorious Basterds is certainly a mixed bag that will leave you feeling a bit uneasy when it's all over and done. It all looks good, but the wildly uneven tone will make you feel like you've been on a roller coaster that had a height limit you didn't reach. But Waltz and Laurent push the movie enough to be a recommendable one. I probably liked this movie a little more than Phillips, but I can understand his plight along with many others, Tarantino fans and non-Tarantino fans alike, that will find this film tedious. Maybe there's at least one thing we can agree on: the best part of this film was the teaser for Christopher Nolan's upcoming film Inception slated for a summer 2010 release. There's another guy who can slip sometimes, but always finds a small patch to land upright. *** / ****; GRADE: B



Dead to Rights

I suppose I have to thank Michael Phillips for this review (that's twice in one week I've mentioned him in my reviews). I've talked about a lot this year about seeing films on pay-per-view that I didn't have the chance to see during their theatrical run, particularly the smaller films. But I finally got out to see this film in the actual theatre, and I really have Phillips to thank for that. On Friday, I read his mildly positive, but nowhere near glowingly, review for this film. Two days later, I took the hour and a half drive to Warrenville to see this movie at the AMC Cantera. Once again, I am really glad to acknowledge another small film that is begging to be recognized.


The film, which is loosely based on a factual book, centers around Martin McGartland (Jim Sturgess), a poor Irish guy in the late 1980s who's stuck in Ireland during the most violent parts of the British occupation and when the Irish Republican Army retaliated back with a brutal force. Slowly, Martin gets inducted into the higher ranks within the IRA. Throughout this, he's also working as an informant (which is given the slang term as a "tout") for Special Branch and reports back to the agent nicknamed Fergus, played by Ben Kingsley in another one of his roles that fulfills his need to take on every known accent in the world.


Sturgess has been an actor that has slowly gotten American audiences to get familiar with him, after noticeable turns in Across the Universe, 21, and Crossing Over. Of those three, I'd say Crossing Over, in which he showed great promise. This is the film I've been waiting for from him. His commitment to this character is really magnificent, and he pours a good amount of passion and energy into it. He keeps Martin a complex character, never allowing him to fall into caricature or simplistic stereotype. No matter what accent Sturgess is trying, he continues to show his ability as an actor. This is not just another pretty face in the movies; he can carry a dramatic lead to its fullest extent.


The rest of the cast is also on an admirable level, mainly due to the fact that they also never let their characters become cardboard cut-outs. The always excellent Kingsley can always deliver an interesting performance, and never lets Fergus become a de facto father to Martin, despite many temptations. He allows him to be kind and understanding, but still lets off the persona that he is here to do a job that is dirty and must get done. Other good additions are familiar faces Kevin Zegers as Martin's sadistic buddy in the IRA and Rose McGowen as a cunning IRA vixen. Both provide well rounded characters that can rely on one familiar trait these characters would rely on but at the same time shows another side that makes them real. The only exception to the cast would be Martin's extended family, as his mother and pregnant girlfriend seem like only fillers for the obligatory "concerned family member warning him about his life choices."


Director and co-writer Kari Skogland has a difficult time starting off the film, as the pacing of the film is a little uneven in trying to transition often times to somber, intimate moments between limited characters to racked up tension in dizzying chase scenes. Then she settles the frame, and allows the events to unfold in a natural way the constantly pokes at the audience. The film tends to fall a bit out of place at the end, especially when you can start to feel the wild embellishments taking place. However, even then, the characters, in particular Sturgess and Kingsley, make these scenes still watchable in order to find out where they will be next.


Fifty Dead Men Walking is not a perfect film, as it has some faults in the execution and the storytelling gets a tad winded in some parts. However, the fantastic acting from the whole ensemble, particularly from Sturgess, really makes this one of the year's best little gems. Once again, I am indebted to Michael Phillips for his fine wisdom, which I only hope will continue once he is on At the Movies starting in September. ***1/2 / ****; GRADE: B+

No comments: