inglourious basterds

Even though I considered the film to be pretty decent, I don't think it was Tarantino's best. After some discussion, Dan and I expected it to be more, what he termed, "hyper-realistic," as this is what chapter 1 and 2 implied. From then on, the remainder of the film was more of a comedy than a dark, emotionally driven drama--even Brad Pitt's character Lt. Aldo Raine seemed like it came straight out of a comic book. Even though I still praise Tarantino as a brilliant, witty writer who has a way making of his audience laugh at 'serious' subject matter, he most certainly pushed the boundary of a typical war film by creating his own ending to WW2. I'm torn--I respect Tarantino for taking the idea of a typical war movie in his own hands and completely altering it into a revenge-sought, comedy-driven film revolving around the events of WW2, but I also can't help but drop my jaw and not feel some sort of emotional obligation to how he turned this horrendous, traumatic historical event into a spectacle. There are other tedious things about the movie I could point out, such as the music (spanish fender guitar during a 1940's German and French war film?) and the filming (this is me probably being too critical of Tarantino's obsession with incorporating old spaghetti western-type, as well as pop-culture referenced scenes and behavior in his films, which I've never criticized, and have instead praised, up until this film). Alas, this is what Tarantino does best: brings casualty and macabre humor to his depiction of violence, even if it involves rewriting history.