Quentin Tarantino

brad_pitt_inglorious_basterds_movie_poster

Read Inglorious Basterds script last night. First impressions – wow, that’s hefty. 176 pages in the version I devoured. Not only does that take some reading surely it must make for a very complicated shoot?

But before I launch into a few criticisms I’d like to emphasise that despite the length, this was a fun read. Some magnificent framing of scenes – incredible how QT can do that with just a few words. Some nice fragments of story. A couple of clever plot switches that I didn’t spot – and I’m pretty sure the ones I did anticipate were dropped in deliberately to do just that.

Very few stand out QT speeches. And the ones that do stand out do so because they’re a tad wooden. Almost like watching QT wind up a doll and then let it go.

Which gets to the nub. ‘Inglorious Basterds’ is a slight story. A mash-up of spag-bol Western with “World War 2 iconography” to quote the man himself. A fantasy which rewrites history in an entertaining, but frankly silly, way.

So why does everything have to be so long? Because QT seems to think this is his masterpiece? I don’t know!!

Will any of this stop me paying to go see ‘Inglorious Basterds’? Nope. Not a bit. Tarantino is great fun to watch. A true story-teller. But perhaps, one still in search of a story to tell.

Advertisements

About microfilums

Writer & director.
This entry was posted in Blah Blah Blah, Stuff I like and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s