Nothing glorious about ‘Basterds’ (.5/5)

Inglourious Basterds

Starring: Brad Pitt, Melanie Laurent, Christoph Waltz
Directed by: Quentin Tarantino
Rating: R for strong graphic violence, language and brief sexuality.
Running time: 2 hours, 23 minutes.

I’m usually known for liking more movies than any one person should.

I try to stay positive and watch movies with an angle of wanting to enjoy it, not wanting to criticize it.

But, I’ll tell you, “Inglourious Basterds” is a horrible, horrible movie.

I am not a Quentin Tarantino fan. I loathed “Kill Bill.” But I am a believer in second chances.

Maybe I shouldn’t be.

I went into “Inglourious Basterds” already a little miffed about the spelling (don’t even get me started on people who encourage bad grammar for no reason ...) but intrigued by what I thought was going to be the premise.

If you’re like me, you might have thought the movie was about a team of Jewish soldiers (the titled Basterds) attempting to kill Hitler.

Well, you’d be half right.

But as for the other half? It drags the interesting part about these soldiers so far down into a muddy hole that they would never be able to climb out.

Most of the torturous 2-and-a-half-hour runtime is spent with people sitting at tables and talking.

And talking.

And talking.

And then you find out that none of their talking really mattered anyway.

In between these excessively pointless and overstretched periods of conversation are sporadic gunfights, scalpings and even more talking.

Amazing, though, that with all this talking, you won’t remember any of the Basterds. You might remember a few key things after thinking about it, but they never get a chance to distinguish themselves. In 2 and a half hours. The only one you’re sure to remember is Brad Pitt as their leader, Lieutenant Aldo Raine, and that’s only because he’s Brad Pitt. Otherwise you would only remember him as that guy with the twang.

Raine and his crew of vengeful Jews seem more like footnotes than the main cast.

The other storyline? Barely worth mentioning even though it takes over half the film to unfold. The only good thing about that part is there are fewer characters to talk.

But the true main character of the movie is Tarantino himself. Rather than letting the movie grow and change organically, he forces it into the dreadfully prolonged exchanges that are there to make you think this paper-thin plot has any real depth.

It doesn’t.

From a director whose last decent work was in 1994 (“Pulp Fiction”), you’d think Tarantino would actually start to care about what he does.

But the fact that a majority of the characters were created for no other reason than to insert Tarantino’s pals makes me think that he doesn’t really care about the end result, he’s just having fun.
And that’s all well and good, but don’t subject us to it.

I am absolutely befuddled as to the high critical ratings. I don’t know what movie they were watching, but don’t be fooled, it wasn’t the same one I saw.

The ONLY reason to watch “Inglourious Basterds” is for the rare appearance of Brad Pitt, and, for fans of “The Office,” B.J. Novak. Otherwise, take this film off your Netflix list while you still have a chance.

.5 of 5 stars

‘Benjamin Button’ falls flat (3/5)

 The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Starring: Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Taraji Henson.
Directed by: David Fincher.
Rating: PG-13 for brief war violence, sexual content, language and smoking.
Running time: 2 hours, 46 minutes.

Director David Fincher (“Fight Club,” “Zodiac”) takes on an ambitious task in “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”: Capturing the alienation and perplexity surrounding a man who ages backward. Fincher and screenplay writer Eric Roth (“Munich”) put forth incredible efforts that, unfortunately, fall flat of their potential.

The movie — now out on DVD — is based on a short story of the same name by F. Scott Fitzgerald. “The Great Gatsby” author was allegedly influenced by Mark Twain’s quote, “Life would be infinitely happier if we could only be born at the age of 80 and gradually approach 18.” Fincher adapts a more plausible, tender scenario than Fitzgerald’s talking, bearded, 5 foot 8 inch “baby,” in part due to the sensitivity and introspection portrayed by Fincher’s Button, played by Hollywood superman Brad Pitt.

“Benjamin Button” tells the story of a child who is born with the ailments and appearance of an elderly man. When Button’s mother dies in childbirth, his father abandons him on the steps leading to a nursing home. There the infant is found by Queenie (Taraji P. Henson) and Tizzy (Mahershalalhashbaz Ali), a couple who works at the home. Unable to have children herself, Queenie takes the baby in against Tizzy’s wishes and raises him as her own.

Button has the same tendencies and personality as a person of his respective age but with an appearance resembling the opposite end of life’s spectrum.

When prepubescent, yet feeble-looking Button is introduced to a girl near his biological age, Daisy (Elle Fanning), they develop a fast friendship which draws reprimands toward Button from Daisy’s grandmother, who is unaware that Button is merely a few years older than her granddaughter. This encounter prompts Queenie to tell her adopted son that people just won’t understand him.

As Button ages, thus appearing gradually more youthful, he sets out to travel the world on a tugboat. Despite his journeys, he never forgets Daisy, who grows to become an accomplished ballerina. Their meetings at various points in time highlight the effects of Button’s aging on himself and those around him.

A main component missing from the story is the lack of questioning Button’s circumstance, which is at times mourned but seems simply accepted overall. In fact, many of the characters are unaware of Button’s condition. Here Fincher and Roth missed an opportunity to solidify the film’s themes beyond that of aging. Even Button’s father, Thomas (Jason Flemyng), who makes brief and unsatisfactory appearances, is a character who lacks believability.

Along with Button’s father, Daisy’s daughter Caroline (Julia Ormond) is flat and irritating, at times begging the question of what were they thinking? These are not the only characters to suffer from inaccurate casting. Cate Blanchett’s inherent composure makes her an unrelatable adult Daisy. The character’s connection with Button is lost as Blanchett and Pitt seem to compete against each other on the screen.

Despite the erroneous cast, Taraji Henson fully deserved her nominations for best supporting actress as the practical, faith-driven Queenie.

Although “Benjamin Button” won 14 various awards and was nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards, it seems that the critics were too busy caught up in the superficialities of the film (the stars, the director, the cinematography and makeup) to notice the dead and dreary substance. The film that sets out to examine and challenge preconceptions about life turns out itself to be rather lifeless.

But while the movie may not be deserving of the hype it received, its fresh plot and the admirable performances by Henson and Pitt make it a movie to consider watching. The themes are timeless and the serene cinematography noteworthy. It has an oddly hopeful quality that may be the source of its appeal.

3 of 5 stars