Critiks are Basterds

Some critics might claim to need a code key to interpret what Tarantino means by this revisionist adventure film, but I'd say it's right under their up-turned noses:

There's a great little scene where Mike Meyers plays a British military man who anticipates attacking a Nazi film premiere so he brings in an a film critic as an adviser. This may or may not be necessary but it does allow for a dialog exchange like:

Meyers: What do you do?

Critic: I am a film critic.

Meyers: What are your accomplishments?

Even though the critic goes on to list some compilation books, it may as well be a rhetorical question.

Tarantino thumbs his nose at convention and that is part of the movie's appeal. His movies are often about movies as much as they are about the content at hand. Yet he still manages to sustain genuine tension. The opening Nazi interrogation of a French farmer and a later a tavern basement guessing game scene must have had whopping page counts but they play out as chapters and remain engrossing high stakes set pieces. In the same film he can introduce a character by throwing a title onto the screen as if this member of the "Basterds" was cool enough to have his own movie, or play a 1980's David Bowie song while a woman prepares to do battle in her own way while Nazi flags hang outside the window.

The movie takes place in an alternate universe that could either be a dream or the unreality of the grind-house era Tarantino has celebrated in Kill Bill and, well, Grindhouse. Anyone with a brain will get that. If that sounds good, see it. I notice now there are blurbs about "how Jewish critics feel" about the movie. Well, those who go to a movie with a deliberately misspelled title knowing it is a revisionist fantasy and can't bear to see the character of Hitler as the butt of the joke don't have an opinion worthy of note.

If you are an expert on NASA, your views on George Lucas' Star Wars movies are not necessarily of use to me. In fact it's a little galling that such a critic-proof designation as "Jewish critic" should be trotted out. They can say what they like about a sensitive document with the intentions of Schindler's List and God bless them. But if someone gets his boxers in a bunch over slapstick Nazis or clueless Hitler autographing the Grain Diary for Indiana Jones, then they just aren't going to be the right audience for Inglourious Basterds. In fact they shouldn't be watching fun movies at all. They should try staring at a blank wall and talking to themselves rather than type up their blather.

But it's not all fun. Sad things do happen and unfortunate events occur in this movie. The tension even in dialog does come from the danger of having a Nazi at the table or someone daring to ask him to leave. But when you get reviewers comparing the Basterds to Al Qaida I think we can excuse those critics from the table as well. Or call Eli Roth over to them and yell "Play ball!"

Raspberry to the Raspberries

The Golden Raspberry Awards made a couple of "decisions" this year that were asinine.

They named Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull as worst sequel, prequel or rip-off. So right away that kind of statement says they can't be watching very many movies.

They named The Love Guru as Worst movie of the year, when one of their other nominees was Disaster Movie - the hardest thing I've forced myself to sit through (and on-line, illegally, at that). The Love Guru isn't Austin Powers, but it is in no way what the headlines made it out to be.

I don't know how they decide their "nominees," but any member of their site can vote.

I went so far as to write an e-mail to John Wilson HeadRAZZberry@razzies.com to
point out their (admittedly obvious) core problem:

While anyone can vote, who exactly is a) paying to vote and b) dilligently sitting through the alleged worst movies of the year to determine in all fairness which they feel should be assessed as the worst of the worst?

And you know something, The Happening was a well made movie. It was dark and had something to say and presented disturbing ideas - but if like me you view the world's problems as mostly someone else' fault it has a welcome message.

This is not to say they are always wrong. But noting Ewe Boll as worst director is not something that requires a knack for that kind of observation. You read a blurb or a dozen polls that call him worst, see his movies tank, and there it is. But he doesn't exactly represent the Hollywood elite that the razzies claim to be making fun of.

If you do go to razzies.com, by the looks of some of the ads on their page I'd say make sure you have good spyware protection. It looks like their sponsors aren't exactly top drawer, nor the brilliant minds that frequent that site let alone pay to.

Consider the mentality of people who pay the following rates to participate in discussions at razzies.com and to vote:

Generic RAZZIE Member Rate – Just $25.00
• Annual RENEWAL Rate: JUST $20.00!!
F.O.G. (Friend of Golden RAZZberry) $50.00
• Put 4 Friends (or Yourself and 3 Friends!) on our RAZZIE Membership/Mailing List and SAVE 50% OFF Regular Rates (JUST $12.50 Per Person!)
RAZZberry Inner Sanctum – $75.00
• Acknowledgment in RAZZIE Program (if desired)
• Addition of Up to 6 Names to RAZZIE Membership/Mailing List
Berry Important Member – $100.00
• Acknowledgment in RAZZIE Program (or Guaranteed Anonymity, if desired)
• Addition of Up to 8 Names to RAZZIE Membership/Mailing List
Razzie Supporting Member – $250.00
• Add up to 25 NAMES of friends, co-workers, etc. to The RAZZIE Membership/Mailing List, PLUS: Acknowledgment in the RAZZIE Program (or Guaranteed Anonymity, if desired).
LIFETIME Membership – $500.00
• Add 55 NAMES of friends, co-workers, etc. to The RAZZIE Membership/Mailing List, Acknowledgment in the RAZZIE Program(or Guaranteed Anonymity, if desired)