http://www.collider.com/entertainment/news/article.asp/aid/11734/tcid/1

"The big info is that Quentin Tarantino’s newest film “Inglourious Basterds” is 2 hours and 40 minutes! While some might think this is too long, I say fucking awesome! This is the film I’m most excited to see, and I love that it’s going to be an extended and wild ride."

Um, I'm not excited for that. Kill Bill, for all its plot and action, could have been whittled down to one movie. Death Proof could have been edited down to 90 minutes (and still would have felt like an eternity).

To the guy from the Collider: this won't be 160 minutes of action, gore, and mayhem. It'll be about 60 or so minutes of action, gore, and mayhem, and 100 minutes of the trademark "Tarantino dialogue." Let's hope Brad Pitt's performance isn't in quotation marks the way the trailer seems to indicate. Tarantino's shown he can stage action and mayhem beautifully... it's the other stuff that gets in his way.

I believe you absolutely can chop at least 20 minutes out of the second, 15 out of the first, and make at bare minimum a LOTR-length kung fu epic.

I think the final LOTR was longer than Kill Bill without your cuts anyway. It would have been a disastrous decision to try to make Kill Bill one film. Cutting 35 minutes out of it doesn't make it any better.

My central point remains the same.

the movies are really too different in tone to be one flick.

>the movies are really too different in tone to be one flick.

people complaining about the two movies having different tones would be complaining even louder about how one movie had two tones.

and the novelty probably STILL would have worn thin.

but yeah, most movies don't deserve more than 2:15.

I think it's stupid to put a time limit on how long a film should be. Yes some films could use some trimming but just b/c it's long doesn't mean it's bloated or too long. I mean according to you Goodfellas, Apocalypse Now (Nevermind the Redux), The Shining, Boogie Nights, Pulp Fiction, Terminator 2, Traffic, JFK, Forrest Gump, Dark Knight, Godfather 1&2 and much more were too long.

he clearly said most movies.

not all.

you named classics that are about as far away from most movies as possible.

sorry.

its a wrap for him

this was suppoed to be his "epic film"

now it seems like its more of the same....pulp fiction crumbs.

he still stuck in the past. still thinks its 1995.

2.5 hours?

smh

He always compared this to pulpy war films. People blew it up to be his epic film but it was always going to be, at best, a very good genre film.

Unfortunately, he's moreso the victim of his own ego; he needs to trim his shit down and realize that most people don't want tons of extraneous babbling. He needs to focus his dialogue and bring these shits in under 2 hours. If he wants to make b-movie homages then he needs to keep them at b-movie running times.

It also would be nice if he elevated his shit from just clever b-movies but I've pretty much given up hope on that ever happening.

>He always compared this to pulpy war films. People blew it up
>to be his epic film but it was always going to be, at best, a
>very good genre film.

Actually, he said this was going to be his epic film. He said this movie was the movie he needed to make to get further to where he wants to be as a director. A challenge.

its not the case here. its almost like he is punking out, and staying within his comfort zone.

i think he is afraid he'll be exposed if he tries to evolve or take risks. but he exposes himself when he stays within his comfort zone anyway.

>
>Unfortunately, he's moreso the victim of his own ego; he needs
>to trim his shit down and realize that most people don't want
>tons of extraneous babbling.

yep, he has no clue at all. totally oblivious. he is too much in love with himself and the geek pundits who love everything with his name on it.

> He needs to focus his dialogue
>and bring these shits in under 2 hours. If he wants to make
>b-movie homages then he needs to keep them at b-movie running
>times.

who is doing a disservice to the b-movie genre.

b-movies were b-movies for a reason. they had severe flaws, yet had some entertaining quality that gave them their appeal and cult-like following.

QT failed misereably in that respect with Death Proof. he was too busy jerking off, hearing his dialogue on screen than to just make a solid b-movie homage. he made an homage to his ego, instead of the genre.

>
>It also would be nice if he elevated his shit from just clever
>b-movies but I've pretty much given up hope on that ever
>happening.

thats all he is/was good for. thats all he can do. he can't make a straight-forward movie.

he somewhat tried that with jackie brown, and that was flat, and his core audience liked that the least of all of his movies.

>>He always compared this to pulpy war films. People blew it
>up
>>to be his epic film but it was always going to be, at best,
>a
>>very good genre film.
>
>Actually, he said this was going to be his epic film. He said
>this movie was the movie he needed to make to get further to
>where he wants to be as a director. A challenge.
>
>its not the case here. its almost like he is punking out, and
>staying within his comfort zone.
>
>i think he is afraid he'll be exposed if he tries to evolve or
>take risks. but he exposes himself when he stays within his
>comfort zone anyway.
>

He's the Jay-Z of this shit.

in this day and age I can no longer spend £7 on tickets for 80 minute movies.

Only options for me are lengthy films or the 'two movies for one deal'...

entire 160 minutes

In some cases, I'd pay more for something to end sooner.

http://thepasswordisswordfish.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/interminable-basterds-tarantinos-inglourious-inability-to-edit/

I thought best case scenario, it ends up like the Catch 22 of film

I'm ambivalent towards this news

I'm just mad they cast brad Pitt

Of course I could just read the leaked screenplay but where's the fun in that

O_E - making niggas so mad they make aliases


Goddamn I'm good

----------------------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAvv-7L3J-k




O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.


"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "Cosmic Slop"

the film to be over. You never know it might be 2 and half hours of edge of the seat stuff. If you can't spare 2 and half hours of your time wait for the DVD or stream it off youtube in 10 minute chunks

I honestly hate not liking movies. I want every movie I see to be good. It's a waste of my time when a movie sucks, and I hate wasting my time.

I liked it but a lot people i know say it was too long?

some can pull it off...but it's a longshot

.

yeah neither was perfect, but they had enough material to warrant two discs

it seems he's already edited it down quite a bit

So he wrote a movie that was far, far, far too long, and then trimmed it down to a time that was probably still too long. Should I give the guy a cookie? Would it kill him to bring a movie in at a 100 minute running time?

>Would it kill him to bring a movie in at a 100 minute running time?

When's the last time you saw ANY war movie that was 100 minutes long? Operation: Dumbo Drop? Shit, even THAT close to 110 minutes. So why should Tarantino get panned for not making a 90 minute war flick (especially one centered around WWII) when there probably isn't a single director in the history of American film-making that made one that way?

Imma quote Roger Ebert here: No good movie can be too long, no bad movie can be too short. Inglorious Bastards may end up sucking when it drops, but if it does, I really doubt it will have anything to do with its run-time.

b-movie tho....I'm sayin

My beef is, from my research, that he will fill it with the rambly dialogue we expect in a Tarantino film, but the problem is that's not really what I want (or, what I believe, the people in general want) from a war flick. Or for most types of flicks in general.

B/c I've read that he's got 5 stories in it, 1 with a girl fleeing Nazis, 1 with a group of Jewish soldiers getting retribution, 1 Propaganda-style film within a film, 1 that's a 25 minute long scene and that last one I don't know. But either way only the 25 minute scene story comes across as being dialogue-driven.

...if you don't dig his dialogue heavy-style, you don't dig Tarantino. Period.

Kill Bill 1 is his best film

At some point he has to actually direct good scenes
and tell a compelling story, and he's woefully incapable
of doing either.

Just an awful fimlmaker

----------------------------

http://www.dkmsamericas.org/register-today-and-help-save-natasha-and-others


O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.


"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "Cosmic Slop"

How hasn't Tarantino not directed good scenes? I mean every film he's done has at least one classic scene and mostly b/c of his directing. Reseviour Dogs had the torure scene, which is easily led by his great directing. Why? B/c almost everyone who watches that squirms yet everything happens off screen, which means that he did his job. Pulp fiction had the overdose revival scene, which is one of the greatest scenes in cinema of the last 20 or so years. Jackie Brown had the hand-off from every different perspective, which could have been annoying b/c of its repetitiveness but he made it interesting. Kill Bill had the huge sword fight in vol 1 and vol 2 had the coffin scene. Although not every liked Death Proof I thought the scene where we see how every girl dies was amazing.

As far as compelling stories? I think Tarantino is very much like Seinfeld where it's about the situations more than the plot or story-conventions. This to some ppl is his fault and to others its another one of his great traits.

...anything exceeding the 2 hour mark film wise better be GOAT-credentials worthy.

when he said he wanted to make the good, bad and the ugly of ww2 movies.

should it be? eh. is it surprising? no. he's been saying this for years.

yall can watch this

but those are great frigging movies, cmon.

The Doc isn't really into all that D&D-Hobbity-type shit
but he had the chance to watch the films (in Japanese dubovers even) some time ago, and they were really, really good.

Objectively, The Doc couldn't really hate. It was worth sitting through that time. (Woe be to anyone trying to watch that shit in a marathon though)

By KRISTIN HOHENADEL
Published: May 6, 2009

PARIS

“THIS ain’t your daddy’s World War II movie,” Quentin Tarantino said with a grin, standing on a street corner here that had been scrubbed of 21st-century signposts to become the set of “Inglourious Basterds,” his new film about a band of Jewish-American soldiers on a scalp-hunting revenge quest against the Nazis.

Although it was mostly shot at Studio Babelsberg in Potsdam, Germany, the movie’s subtitle is “Once Upon a Time in Nazi-Occupied France.” So on a three-day sojourn in Paris in December, Mr. Tarantino and his bi-continental moviemaking coalition commandeered a 1904 bistro with peeling paint, Art Deco stained glass and a wall of windows overlooking an intersection of identifiably Parisian streets in the 18th Arrondissement.

“We had to have a scene to sell the audience that we’re in France,” Mr. Tarantino said. “This is it.”

“Inglourious Basterds,” which is to have its premiere at the Cannes Film Festival on May 20, is Mr. Tarantino’s first movie since “Death Proof,” half of “Grindhouse,” a double feature and box-office flop that he directed with Robert Rodriguez, and his first solo feature since “Kill Bill Vol. 2” in 2004.

Mr. Tarantino calls “Inglourious Basterds” his “bunch of guys on a mission movie.” Judging by the script, it should have the crackling dialogue, irreverent humor and stylized violence that are hallmarks of his work.

“You’ve got to make a movie about something, and I’m a film guy, so I think in terms of genres,” he said. “So you get a good idea, and it just moves forward and then usually by the time you’re finished, it doesn’t resemble anything of what might have been the inspiration. It’s simply the spark that starts the fire.”

The spark that led to “Inglourious Basterds,” starring Brad Pitt, Diane Kruger, Mike Myers, Eli Roth and a large international cast, can be traced to Mr. Tarantino’s storied days as a video-store clerk in Manhattan Beach, Calif. (The inspiration for “Reservoir Dogs,” “Jackie Brown” and other Tarantino movies can also be traced to that time.)

“The guys at Video Archives were like, ‘Quentin, maybe one of these days you’ll make your ‘Inglorious Bastards,’ ” Mr. Tarantino said, referring to the (conventionally spelled) 1978 Enzo G. Castellari film. “But they hadn’t even seen the movie. All right, it was just a great title. I love the movie, don’t get me wrong, but it’s not a remake,” he said, of his version.

“It will be in the original category at the Oscars,” he added optimistically.

Lawrence Bender, who has produced all but one Tarantino movie, said he was surprised when Mr. Tarantino called last summer to announce he had finalized the long-gestating “Basterds” script and wanted to finish the movie in time for Cannes. Mr. Tarantino won the top prize there, the Palme d’Or, in 1994 for “Pulp Fiction.”

“He’s read me all kinds of stuff over the years,” Mr. Bender said, “but I always assumed it was something he was going to have and never do.” (Mr. Tarantino is known for taking plenty of detours on the way from one movie to the next. He has directed episodes of television shows, including “CSI,” acted in and produced other people’s movies, and has been a guest judge and “mentor” on “American Idol.”)

A six-month research period for “Basterds” several years ago “paralyzed my writing for a while,” Mr. Tarantino said. He thought of making a World War II documentary or teaching a college course and even plotted out a 12-hour mini-series. Then in January 2008 he said he decided to “take one more crack at seeing if I could make this a movie,” he said. “I wasn’t out to teach a history lesson. You can turn on the History Channel — which might as well be called the Hitler Channel. I just wanted to tell my story and have the same freedom I would have telling any story. I want the act of writing to be so fulfilling that I have to question do I want to even make the movie.”

Mr. Tarantino’s unedited script was circulating online within days after he completed it. “This was so personal to me, misspellings and all,” he said, mentioning that he had typed it with one finger on the same 1987 Smith Corona word processor that he used to produce “Reservoir Dogs” and “Pulp Fiction.” “I mean I’ll proofread it when we publish it.”

Not that he’ll change the title. “Basterds should be spelled with an e,” he said. “It sounds like it has an e.” He shouted, “Basterds! Basterds!” in what sounded like a Boston accent: more “BAS-tids” than “BAS-terds.” (As for the spelling of “Inglourious,” Mr. Tarantino said: “I can’t tell you stuff like that. It’s a movie thing.”)

A man with a walkie-talkie tugged on Mr. Tarantino’s arm. “Sorry, I’m getting the vaudeville hook,” he said, and went inside the bistro to shoot a scene in which Shosanna (the French actress Mélanie Laurent), a young Jewish woman in hiding and running a Paris cinema, sits across a café table from an unsuspecting Nazi soldier and matinee idol (the German actor Daniel Brühl) trying to win her affections. Mr. Tarantino watched the actors like a patron spying on a couple across the room, barely glancing at the nearby monitor.

“I’m looking through the viewfinder when I set up a shot,” he said between takes, “but I watch the performance and listen to it. Otherwise the monitor is directing the movie.”

Like 70 percent of “Inglourious Basterds” this scene was being performed in French and German, which is just one of the reasons this isn’t your daddy’s World War II movie. “When you see the Germans speaking English with a German accent or sounding like British thespians, it just seems very quaint,” Mr. Tarantino said. “That’s one thing I don’t want this film to have. If Spielberg hadn’t made ‘Schindler’s List’ yet, I joke, I like to think that after our movie he’d be shamed into doing it in German.”

(Executives at the Weinstein Company said the heavy use of subtitles did not give them pause. “Tarantino is a universal language,” said Tom Ortenberg, president of theatrical films.)

Mr. Brühl said it was the director’s non-sacred approach to Germany’s painful history that attracted him to the role.

“I’m curious to see how it’s going to be received in Germany,” Mr. Brühl, 30, said, placing the movie in the tradition of Ernst Lubitsch’s “To Be or Not To Be” (1942) and Charlie Chaplin’s “Great Dictator” (1940). “If a comedy is intelligent and has depth, it’s a very legitimate way to talk about Fascism in Nazi Germany, which was also a big show — and if you think about it, very ridiculous.”

The screenplay is loaded with movie references and jokes, and intrigues involving actors and film premieres. Hitler’s minister of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, is portrayed as a typical studio chief. (“People write about the horrible anti-Semitic films,” Mr. Tarantino said, “but most of the 800 movies he made were comedies and musicals.”) And it is safe to say, without spoiling the history-bending penultimate scene, that cinema saves the world.

The production designer David Wasco, who has worked on all but one of Mr. Tarantino’s films, said that while they had labored to reproduce the period using original photographs and documents, “pretty much 90 percent is based on movie references.”

“It’s a Quentin period world,” he added. “That’s what we’re helping him do here.”

Mr. Tarantino said: “All that movie stuff just kind of organically happens. It’s just what I am interested in.”

Late in the day bottles of Champagne appeared on the sidewalk, and Mr. Tarantino called for a toast to honor the 800th roll of film. He circulated, clinking plastic glasses as evening fell over the city, with a word and a smile for everyone.

The Basterds — the film’s Jewish soldiers, given their nickname by the Nazis — hadn’t made the trip to Paris, but their presence could be felt in the grown-out “basterd haircut” (short on the sides and in back, long on top) that Mr. Tarantino was sporting. “The Basterds don’t have the luxury of being soldiers,” he said. “They have the duty to be warriors, because they’re fighting an enemy that’s trying to wipe them off the face of the earth.”

Mr. Tarantino, who was born in Tennessee, said his childhood revenge fantasies centered more on the Ku Klux Klan. “But it’s all the same,” he said. “Once the Basterds get through with Europe, they could go to the South and do it to the Kluxers in the ’50s. That’s another story you could tell.”

Not to mention a shelved subplot about African-American soldiers stuck behind enemy lines. “I have a half-written prequel ready to go if this movie’s a smash,” he said.

C

"This brother is free; I'll be what I want to be."

I mean, QT's won a Palme D'Or, he's had several profitable films, several Oscar noms. . .dude's a winner. Stop hating.

shit, if we applied that shit to LIFE, there'd hardly be anyone in the public eye to hate on.

"Not to mention a shelved subplot about African-American soldiers stuck behind enemy lines. “I have a half-written prequel ready to go if this movie’s a smash,” he said."

... but I don't think you have to worry about this happening.

personally I prefer that, but basa is right, it's gonna bomb.

and LOL @ this:

>(Executives at the Weinstein Company said the heavy use of
>subtitles did not give them pause. “Tarantino is a universal
>language,” said Tom Ortenberg, president of theatrical
>films.)

But 160 minute long movie in three different languages is a formula for failure.

Um yes, I have to say I'm looking forward to this as well... his writing is hilarious, he sticks in big words unnecessarily but at least he's trying.

its an indulgence.

I don't give a fuck if he's an egotist.

At least he has the balls to take a chance.

I'll be there opening night.